Crockett Resource Center for Independent Living

What the center reported

126Consumers served90 carried over, 36 new
69Information and referral contacts
$1,186,244Total income
$815,340Part B
$283,641Part C
569Goals achievedof 616 set
49Moved 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)	$815,340
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$283,641
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$87,263
State government funds	$0
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$0
Total income	$1,186,244

Eight years of reports

Crockett Resource 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	106	$738,101	$260,436	$205,665	86
2017	102	$728,578	$248,767	$207,811	91
2018	91	$918,480	$409,739	$236,741	103
2019	91	$1,492,866	$930,432	$245,924	52
2020	103	$1,151,869	$707,471	$246,398	52
2021	101	$864,126	$616,276	$247,850	36
2022	111	$1,109,866	$815,340	$256,466	51
2023	126	$1,186,244	$815,340	$283,641	49

Consumers served, by year

2016106
2017102
201891
201991
2020103
2021101
2022111
2023126

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	$9,415	12th	4th	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	$2,085	78th	75th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	92.4%	95th	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	0.0%	3th	2th	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	38.89	99th	99th	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	17.28	89th	85th	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	75.0%	57th	58th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 3 of 4 members.
Staff with disabilities	89.0%	72th	87th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 8.0 of 9.0 FTE.
Equity index	37.2	21th	17th	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	23.8%	38th	41th	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 92.6% of income; Part B varied by 41.2% (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 (69) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Peer counseling	68	68	100.0%
Transportation	61	61	100.0%
Youth transition	54	54	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	53	53	100.0%
Communication services	49	49	100.0%
IL skills training	49	49	100.0%
Preventive services	41	41	100.0%
Recreational services	25	25	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	20	20	100.0%
Assistive technology	18	18	100.0%
Vocational services	10	10	100.0%
Children's services	4	4	100.0%
All services	452	452	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

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

Advocacy and legal services: 53 of 53 requests filled (100.0%).
Assistive technology: 18 of 18 requests filled (100.0%).
Communication services: 49 of 49 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 20 of 20 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 49 of 49 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 68 of 68 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	126	126	0
Communication	49	49	0
Mobility and transportation	5	5	0
Community-based living	54	54	0
Educational	49	49	0
Vocational	10	10	0
Self-care	126	126	0
Information access and technology	18	18	0
Personal resource management	49	49	0
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	96	49	47
Community and social participation	25	25	0
Other	9	9	0

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	1
5 to 19	8
20 to 24	2
25 to 59	20
60 and older	95
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	9
Mental or emotional	7
Physical	80
Hearing	2
Vision	13
Multiple disabilities	5
Other	10

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Texas residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 0 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	73	57.9%	45.8%	1.27
Black or African American	36	28.6%	10.8%	2.63
American Indian or Alaska Native	10	7.9%	0.6%	13.46
Asian	0	0.0%	2.3%	0.00
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.1%	0.00
Two or more races	6	4.8%	13.7%	0.35
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	1	0.8%	26.7%	0.03

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.