Superior Alliance for Independent Living

What the center reported

574Consumers served131 carried over, 443 new
1,633Information and referral contacts
$2,099,802Total income
$25,371Part B
$167,104Part C
422Goals achievedof 713 set
1Moved out of institutionsrelocation goals achieved
8Years reportedof 8 since 2016

Funding sources

Income by source, report year 2023Dollars received, as reported. The report does not show expenditure.
Source	Amount
Title VII Part B (through the state)	$25,371
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$167,104
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$130,263
State government funds	$937,076
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$839,988
Total income	$2,099,802

Eight years of reports

Superior Alliance for Independent Living by report yearA blank row means no report was found for that year.
Report year	Consumers served	Total income	Part B	Part C	Moved out of institutions
2016	415	$1,282,882	$15,257	$130,862	7
2017	466	$1,570,780	$18,926	$129,928	7
2018	575	$1,716,571	$17,378	$146,009	16
2019	515	$1,221,264	$0	$149,815	11
2020	587	$1,582,474	$0	$149,815	12
2021	499	$1,722,950	$0	$149,549	15
2022	639	$1,879,491	$24,852	$151,317	8
2023	574	$2,099,802	$25,371	$167,104	1

Consumers served, by year

2016415
2017466
2018575
2019515
2020587
2021499
2022639
2023574

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 3 of 4 by total income). 100 is the most favourable position. How each measure is built and what it cannot tell you.

Relative measures, report year 2023
Measure	Value	National percentile	Size-peer percentile	What it is
Income per consumer	$3,658	43th	36th	Total income divided by consumers served. Lower ranks higher. It is intensity, not efficiency: a center doing nursing-home transitions costs more per person than one doing mostly information.
Income per goal achieved	$4,976	53th	50th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	59.2%	61th	59th	Goals achieved as a share of goals set. A rate near 100% can mean goals are recorded only when already met.
Records closed with all goals met	80.3%	68th	61th	Share of closed consumer records closed as "completed all goals set". Recorded at exit, so a stronger signal than goal counts.
Transitions per 100 consumers	0.17	27th	31th	Relocation-from-institution goals achieved per 100 consumers. Zero is common at small centers; the percentile shows how common.
Transitions per $100,000 of Part C	0.60	37th	35th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	100.0%	76th	74th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	80.0%	67th	67th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 8 of 10 members.
Staff with disabilities	72.0%	40th	49th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 17.8 of 24.8 FTE.
Equity index	19.6	56th	48th	Index of dissimilarity between the race and ethnicity of consumers and of the state's disability population, 0 to 100. Lower ranks higher. Compared with the state, not the center's actual service area.
Income volatility	16.6%	62th	65th	Coefficient of variation of total income across the years reported. Lower ranks higher.
Data-quality flags	0	54th	56th	Failed arithmetic checks in this year's report. Fewer ranks higher. Listed below.

Title VII funds (Parts B and C and Chapter 2) were 9.2% of income; Part B varied by 81.5% (coefficient of variation) across the years reported.

Services requested and received

Consumers requesting and receiving each service, report year 2023Information and referral is counted as contacts (1,633) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Vocational services	277	277	100.0%
Other services	258	258	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	112	112	100.0%
IL skills training	85	85	100.0%
Assistive technology	72	72	100.0%
Youth transition	23	23	100.0%
Recreational services	18	18	100.0%
Transportation	18	18	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	16	16	100.0%
Peer counseling	15	15	100.0%
Counseling and related services	8	8	100.0%
Communication services	2	2	100.0%
Personal assistance	2	2	100.0%
Preventive services	2	2	100.0%
Children's services	1	1	100.0%
Family services	1	1	100.0%
Mobility training	1	1	100.0%
All services	911	911	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

Services with ten or more requests, ordered by the share that went unfilled.

Advocacy and legal services: 16 of 16 requests filled (100.0%).
Assistive technology: 72 of 72 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 112 of 112 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 85 of 85 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 15 of 15 requests filled (100.0%).
Recreational services: 18 of 18 requests filled (100.0%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	24	11	13
Communication	4	1	3
Mobility and transportation	31	16	15
Community-based living	76	26	50
Educational	15	1	14
Vocational	265	248	17
Self-care	60	20	40
Information access and technology	42	20	22
Personal resource management	149	54	95
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	6	1	5
Community and social participation	13	6	7
Other	28	18	10

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	1
5 to 19	186
20 to 24	70
25 to 59	241
60 and older	76
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	286
Mental or emotional	78
Physical	151
Hearing	9
Vision	15
Multiple disabilities	33
Other	2

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Michigan residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 34 consumers of unknown race. State shares are from ACS B18101A to B18101I. A ratio above 1 means the group is a larger share of consumers than of the state's disability population.
Group	Consumers	Share of consumers	Share of state disability population	Ratio
White	468	86.7%	73.0%	1.19
Black or African American	8	1.5%	15.6%	0.09
American Indian or Alaska Native	35	6.5%	0.6%	10.22
Asian	2	0.4%	1.4%	0.26
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Two or more races	24	4.4%	5.2%	0.85
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	3	0.6%	4.1%	0.14

Hispanic or Latino is an ethnicity reported alongside race in the PPR, so shares can sum to more than 100%. The comparison is with the whole state, which overstates any mismatch for a center that serves one part of it.

Data quality

Eight arithmetic checks run over every center's report. They test whether the tables agree with each other, nothing more. How often each check fails nationally.

None of the arithmetic checks failed for this report. That means the tables add up, not that the counts are verified.

What this cannot tell you

The report is unaudited self-report. Nobody verifies the consumer counts.
It reports income, not expenditure. A cost measure here is a stand-in until checked against the center's audited financial statements.
Part B and Part C outcomes are not separable. The center reports total activity.
There is no county, city or island detail in the public file.
Percentiles compare centers whose definitions of "consumer" and "goal" may differ. The data-quality row is the only signal of that in the public data.
Relative position is not impact. Nothing here supports a causal claim about what the center changed in anyone's life.

Source: Administration for Community Living, Centers for Independent Living Program Performance Report public datafiles, report years 2016 to 2023. Generated 2026-10-25.