Disability Network West Michigan

What the center reported

562Consumers served308 carried over, 254 new
982Information and referral contacts
$1,166,667Total income
$4,352Part B
$177,988Part C
168Goals achievedof 382 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)	$4,352
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$177,988
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$304,617
State government funds	$450,992
Local government funds	$20,491
Private and other	$208,227
Total income	$1,166,667

Eight years of reports

Disability Network West Michigan 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	635	$1,059,206	$10,273	$139,384	25
2017	697	$992,943	$10,273	$138,390	21
2018	657	$1,087,520	$0	$155,519	14
2019	511	$836,793	$0	$159,573	14
2020	263	$1,336,060	$0	$159,573	4
2021	175	$1,342,420	$0	$149,549	0
2022	304	$1,051,600	$4,374	$161,172	0
2023	562	$1,166,667	$4,352	$177,988	1

Consumers served, by year

2016635
2017697
2018657
2019511
2020263
2021175
2022304
2023562

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 2 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	$2,076	67th	65th	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	$6,944	43th	42th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	44.0%	42th	48th	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	72.6%	57th	58th	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	0.18	28th	24th	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	0.56	35th	36th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	99.1%	47th	48th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	100.0%	93th	95th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 8 of 8 members.
Staff with disabilities	92.0%	76th	75th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 10.8 of 11.8 FTE.
Equity index	15.9	70th	77th	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	14.4%	72th	68th	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 15.6% of income; Part B varied by 115.2% (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 (982) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
IL skills training	330	330	100.0%
Transportation	284	284	100.0%
Other services	197	197	100.0%
Vocational services	117	117	100.0%
Communication services	40	40	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	37	37	100.0%
Peer counseling	31	21	67.7%
Family services	24	24	100.0%
Youth transition	22	22	100.0%
Mobility training	11	11	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	10	10	100.0%
Assistive technology	9	9	100.0%
Personal assistance	4	4	100.0%
Counseling and related services	2	2	100.0%
Therapeutic treatment	1	1	100.0%
All services	1,119	1,109	99.1%

Largest unmet demand

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

Peer counseling: 21 of 31 requests filled (67.7%).
Advocacy and legal services: 37 of 37 requests filled (100.0%).
Communication services: 40 of 40 requests filled (100.0%).
Family services: 24 of 24 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 10 of 10 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 330 of 330 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	25	16	9
Communication	1	1	0
Mobility and transportation	137	13	124
Community-based living	27	9	18
Educational	10	6	4
Vocational	135	104	31
Self-care	6	2	4
Information access and technology	4	2	2
Personal resource management	20	9	11
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	6	1	5
Community and social participation	5	2	3
Other	6	3	3

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	4
5 to 19	54
20 to 24	49
25 to 59	224
60 and older	231
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	145
Mental or emotional	120
Physical	221
Hearing	14
Vision	31
Multiple disabilities	7
Other	24

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Michigan residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 11 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	481	87.3%	73.0%	1.20
Black or African American	39	7.1%	15.6%	0.45
American Indian or Alaska Native	12	2.2%	0.6%	3.43
Asian	1	0.2%	1.4%	0.13
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Two or more races	8	1.5%	5.2%	0.28
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	10	1.8%	4.1%	0.44

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.