Disability Connections

What the center reported

1,005Consumers served388 carried over, 617 new
2,479Information and referral contacts
$1,015,946Total income
$6,110Part B
$177,988Part C
868Goals achievedof 1,059 set
61Moved 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)	$6,110
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$177,988
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$19,096
State government funds	$511,578
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$301,174
Total income	$1,015,946

Eight years of reports

Disability Connections 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	2,202	$1,221,928	$10,273	$134,454	45
2017	1,400	$927,166	$10,273	$138,390	55
2018	1,334	$973,660	$0	$155,294	42
2019	836	$824,116	$0	$159,573	36
2020	597	$968,119	$0	$159,573	45
2021	694	$1,210,390	$33,165	$159,289	39
2022	788	$871,909	$9,910	$161,172	51
2023	1,005	$1,015,946	$6,110	$177,988	61

Consumers served, by year

20162,202
20171,400
20181,334
2019836
2020597
2021694
2022788
20231,005

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	$1,011	90th	94th	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	$1,170	89th	93th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	82.0%	88th	89th	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	91.3%	86th	87th	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	6.07	85th	83th	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	34.27	96th	98th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	100.0%	76th	76th	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	39th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 6 of 9 members.
Staff with disabilities	62.0%	23th	20th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 8.0 of 13.0 FTE.
Equity index	11.4	83th	90th	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	13.6%	75th	73th	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 18.1% of income; Part B varied by 117.5% (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 (2,479) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Assistive technology	598	598	100.0%
Counseling and related services	96	96	100.0%
Peer counseling	96	96	100.0%
Youth transition	73	73	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	57	57	100.0%
Vocational services	54	54	100.0%
Other services	52	52	100.0%
IL skills training	38	38	100.0%
Transportation	29	29	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	20	20	100.0%
Family services	12	12	100.0%
Mobility training	4	4	100.0%
Communication services	2	2	100.0%
Recreational services	2	2	100.0%
Children's services	1	1	100.0%
All services	1,134	1,134	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

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

Advocacy and legal services: 20 of 20 requests filled (100.0%).
Assistive technology: 598 of 598 requests filled (100.0%).
Counseling and related services: 96 of 96 requests filled (100.0%).
Family services: 12 of 12 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 57 of 57 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 38 of 38 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	29	10	19
Communication	12	5	7
Mobility and transportation	253	213	40
Community-based living	119	85	34
Educational	14	2	12
Vocational	47	19	28
Self-care	477	454	23
Information access and technology	4	1	3
Personal resource management	16	5	11
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	63	61	2
Community and social participation	21	10	11
Other	4	3	1

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	0
5 to 19	62
20 to 24	30
25 to 59	270
60 and older	643
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	122
Mental or emotional	28
Physical	754
Hearing	7
Vision	16
Multiple disabilities	25
Other	53

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Michigan residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 38 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	816	84.4%	73.0%	1.16
Black or African American	117	12.1%	15.6%	0.77
American Indian or Alaska Native	1	0.1%	0.6%	0.16
Asian	2	0.2%	1.4%	0.14
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Two or more races	12	1.2%	5.2%	0.24
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	19	2.0%	4.1%	0.48

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.