Disability Network Southwest Michigan

What the center reported

509Consumers served263 carried over, 246 new
2,340Information and referral contacts
$1,843,549Total income
$22,412Part B
$159,378Part C
141Goals achievedof 404 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)	$22,412
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$159,378
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$235,760
State government funds	$926,793
Local government funds	$5,088
Private and other	$494,117
Total income	$1,843,549

Eight years of reports

Disability Network Southwest 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	941	$2,144,720	$25,036	$124,811	44
2017	1,062	$2,245,247	$25,036	$123,920	54
2018	934	$2,181,377	$0	$139,258	53
2019	672	$1,736,884	$0	$142,889	20
2020	389	$2,034,980	$0	$142,889	12
2021	460	$3,364,590	$62,822	$142,635	0
2022	472	$1,865,271	$22,609	$144,321	0
2023	509	$1,843,549	$22,412	$159,378	1

Consumers served, by year

2016941
20171,062
2018934
2019672
2020389
2021460
2022472
2023509

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	$3,622	44th	37th	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	$13,075	26th	19th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	34.9%	31th	25th	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	67.6%	52th	45th	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	0.20	28th	32th	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	0.63	39th	36th	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	67.0%	37th	40th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 4 of 6 members.
Staff with disabilities	85.0%	66th	78th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 16.4 of 19.4 FTE.
Equity index	3.3	99th	98th	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	22.0%	42th	46th	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 9.9% of income; Part B varied by 99.7% (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 (2,340) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Peer counseling	121	121	100.0%
Other services	120	120	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	77	77	100.0%
IL skills training	75	75	100.0%
Vocational services	56	56	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	25	25	100.0%
Recreational services	15	15	100.0%
Transportation	5	5	100.0%
Youth transition	5	5	100.0%
Assistive technology	4	4	100.0%
Communication services	3	3	100.0%
Personal assistance	2	2	100.0%
Children's services	1	1	100.0%
Counseling and related services	1	1	100.0%
Family services	1	1	100.0%
Mobility training	1	1	100.0%
Preventive services	1	1	100.0%
All services	513	513	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

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

Advocacy and legal services: 25 of 25 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 77 of 77 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 75 of 75 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 121 of 121 requests filled (100.0%).
Recreational services: 15 of 15 requests filled (100.0%).
Vocational services: 56 of 56 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	38	10	28
Communication	2	2	0
Mobility and transportation	16	6	10
Community-based living	46	27	19
Educational	12	5	7
Vocational	68	44	24
Self-care	4	0	4
Information access and technology	1	0	1
Personal resource management	24	7	17
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	2	1	1
Community and social participation	44	6	38
Other	147	33	114

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	0
5 to 19	13
20 to 24	37
25 to 59	292
60 and older	167
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	87
Mental or emotional	85
Physical	196
Hearing	2
Vision	38
Multiple disabilities	81
Other	20

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Michigan residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 26 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	357	73.9%	73.0%	1.01
Black or African American	87	18.0%	15.6%	1.15
American Indian or Alaska Native	2	0.4%	0.6%	0.65
Asian	5	1.0%	1.4%	0.72
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Two or more races	15	3.1%	5.2%	0.60
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	17	3.5%	4.1%	0.86

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.