The Memphis Center for Independent Living

What the center reported

686Consumers served589 carried over, 97 new
28Information and referral contacts
$490,906Total income
$41,281Part B
$351,406Part C
35Goals achievedof 992 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)	$41,281
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$351,406
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$66,090
State government funds	$0
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$32,129
Total income	$490,906

Eight years of reports

The Memphis Center 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	68	$590,096	$31,439	$261,416	5
2017	254	$332,316	$16,053	$261,883	1
2018	265	$341,510	$22,362	$296,394	2
2019	373	$451,836	$0	$306,035	6
2020	387	$433,860	$23,442	$306,035	9
2021	470	$407,713	$12,775	$306,152	0
2022	608	$458,378	$0	$315,499	3
2023	686	$490,906	$41,281	$351,406	1

Consumers served, by year

201668
2017254
2018265
2019373
2020387
2021470
2022608
2023686

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 1 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	$716	96th	93th	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	$14,026	25th	13th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	3.5%	2th	3th	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	12.5%	11th	9th	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	0.15	25th	28th	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	0.28	25th	29th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	100.0%	76th	77th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	67.0%	37th	24th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 4 of 6 members.
Staff with disabilities	79.0%	52th	24th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 5.5 of 7.0 FTE.
Equity index	66.1	2th	7th	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	17.7%	59th	54th	Coefficient of variation of total income across the years reported. Lower ranks higher.
Data-quality flags	0	54th	53th	Failed arithmetic checks in this year's report. Fewer ranks higher. Listed below.

Title VII funds (Parts B and C and Chapter 2) were 80.0% of income; Part B varied by 73.1% (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 (28) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Advocacy and legal services	152	152	100.0%
Youth transition	143	143	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	142	142	100.0%
Peer counseling	57	57	100.0%
Mobility training	29	29	100.0%
Recreational services	27	27	100.0%
Assistive technology	25	25	100.0%
IL skills training	22	22	100.0%
Vocational services	21	21	100.0%
Family services	11	11	100.0%
Communication services	3	3	100.0%
All services	632	632	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

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

Advocacy and legal services: 152 of 152 requests filled (100.0%).
Assistive technology: 25 of 25 requests filled (100.0%).
Family services: 11 of 11 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 142 of 142 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 22 of 22 requests filled (100.0%).
Mobility training: 29 of 29 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	103	5	98
Communication	46	2	44
Mobility and transportation	121	3	118
Community-based living	221	7	214
Educational	40	0	40
Vocational	76	1	75
Self-care	168	5	163
Information access and technology	35	4	31
Personal resource management	75	7	68
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	34	1	33
Community and social participation	69	0	69
Other	4	0	4

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	2
5 to 19	16
20 to 24	33
25 to 59	314
60 and older	321
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	100
Mental or emotional	54
Physical	348
Hearing	15
Vision	135
Multiple disabilities	34
Other	0

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Tennessee residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 10 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	118	17.5%	76.0%	0.23
Black or African American	544	80.5%	14.5%	5.55
American Indian or Alaska Native	1	0.1%	0.3%	0.50
Asian	6	0.9%	0.9%	0.94
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	1	0.1%	0.0%	3.45
Two or more races	3	0.4%	4.7%	0.10
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	3	0.4%	3.6%	0.12

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.