ARCIL, Inc

What the center reported

312Consumers served174 carried over, 138 new
2,179Information and referral contacts
$4,300,863Total income
$66,988Part B
$575,000Part C
196Goals achievedof 623 set
32Moved 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)	$66,988
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$575,000
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$398,965
State government funds	$2,149,462
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$1,110,448
Total income	$4,300,863

Eight years of reports

ARCIL, Inc 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	381	$1,739,954	$74,559	$416,928	37
2017	337	$2,484,994	$74,559	$421,279	51
2018	467	$2,633,749	$74,559	$479,926	36
2019	343	$4,433,653	$74,660	$498,542	33
2020	416	$4,462,114	$74,660	$499,502	50
2021	392	$4,090,897	$74,660	$502,445	32
2022	295	$4,301,987	$74,660	$519,911	12
2023	312	$4,300,863	$66,988	$575,000	32

Consumers served, by year

2016381
2017337
2018467
2019343
2020416
2021392
2022295
2023312

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 4 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	$13,785	9th	28th	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	$21,943	15th	31th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	31.5%	27th	29th	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	57.4%	43th	50th	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	10.26	91th	95th	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	5.57	73th	62th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	63.9%	6th	6th	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	97th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 7 of 7 members.
Staff with disabilities	95.0%	79th	97th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 5.6 of 5.9 FTE.
Equity index	17.1	66th	59th	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	28.6%	29th	38th	Coefficient of variation of total income across the years reported. Lower ranks higher.
Data-quality flags	0	54th	54th	Failed arithmetic checks in this year's report. Fewer ranks higher. Listed below.

Title VII funds (Parts B and C and Chapter 2) were 14.9% of income; Part B varied by 3.4% (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 (2,179) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Assistive technology	111	30	27.0%
Advocacy and legal services	101	58	57.4%
Housing and home modifications	88	12	13.6%
IL skills training	51	50	98.0%
Communication services	47	42	89.4%
Vocational services	44	36	81.8%
Peer counseling	41	40	97.6%
Preventive services	36	35	97.2%
Recreational services	35	35	100.0%
Transportation	33	31	93.9%
Youth transition	23	22	95.7%
Children's services	5	5	100.0%
Prostheses and orthotics	3	0	0.0%
Mobility training	2	1	50.0%
Other services	2	1	50.0%
Rehabilitation technology	1	0	0.0%
All services	623	398	63.9%

Largest unmet demand

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

Housing and home modifications: 12 of 88 requests filled (13.6%).
Assistive technology: 30 of 111 requests filled (27.0%).
Advocacy and legal services: 58 of 101 requests filled (57.4%).
Vocational services: 36 of 44 requests filled (81.8%).
Communication services: 42 of 47 requests filled (89.4%).
Transportation: 31 of 33 requests filled (93.9%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	116	46	65
Communication	63	20	41
Mobility and transportation	54	7	41
Community-based living	8	1	6
Educational	44	12	30
Vocational	44	11	31
Self-care	123	49	70
Information access and technology	10	0	10
Personal resource management	48	15	30
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	96	32	50
Community and social participation	15	2	12
Other	2	1	1

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	3
5 to 19	26
20 to 24	16
25 to 59	112
60 and older	155
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	41
Mental or emotional	15
Physical	126
Hearing	23
Vision	5
Multiple disabilities	38
Other	64

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Texas residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 14 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	125	41.9%	45.8%	0.92
Black or African American	63	21.1%	10.8%	1.95
American Indian or Alaska Native	1	0.3%	0.6%	0.57
Asian	12	4.0%	2.3%	1.74
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	1	0.3%	0.1%	3.41
Two or more races	2	0.7%	13.7%	0.05
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	94	31.5%	26.7%	1.18

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.