Brazos Valley Center for Independent Living

What the center reported

172Consumers served87 carried over, 85 new
1,736Information and referral contacts
$656,254Total income
$0Part B
$408,985Part C
348Goals achievedof 588 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)	$0
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$408,985
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$0
State government funds	$0
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$247,269
Total income	$656,254

Eight years of reports

Brazos Valley 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	283	$930,133	$156,204	$296,552	1
2017	302	$908,980	$129,409	$299,647	0
2018	289	$869,021	$12,034	$341,600	0
2019	210	$713,414	$0	$354,602	3
2020	252	$1,138,735	$0	$355,286	4
2021	217	$1,016,488	$0	$357,379	4
2022	232	$1,184,024	$0	$369,802	5
2023	172	$656,254	$0	$408,985	1

Consumers served, by year

2016283
2017302
2018289
2019210
2020252
2021217
2022232
2023172

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	$3,815	40th	32th	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	$1,886	81th	82th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	59.2%	61th	69th	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	82.7%	70th	70th	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	0.58	43th	38th	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	0.24	23th	21th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	86.4%	21th	20th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	71.0%	48th	51th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 5 of 7 members.
Staff with disabilities	55.0%	10th	9th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 5.1 of 9.2 FTE.
Equity index	24.3	44th	47th	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	18.7%	55th	47th	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 62.3% of income; Part B varied by 165.2% (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 (1,736) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Transportation	127	92	72.4%
Youth transition	73	67	91.8%
Vocational services	70	60	85.7%
IL skills training	65	64	98.5%
Preventive services	51	51	100.0%
Communication services	44	44	100.0%
Peer counseling	42	29	69.0%
Advocacy and legal services	22	19	86.4%
Assistive technology	21	19	90.5%
Other services	13	12	92.3%
Housing and home modifications	9	8	88.9%
Mobility training	8	4	50.0%
Recreational services	8	8	100.0%
Family services	4	4	100.0%
All services	557	481	86.4%

Largest unmet demand

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

Peer counseling: 29 of 42 requests filled (69.0%).
Transportation: 92 of 127 requests filled (72.4%).
Vocational services: 60 of 70 requests filled (85.7%).
Advocacy and legal services: 19 of 22 requests filled (86.4%).
Assistive technology: 19 of 21 requests filled (90.5%).
Youth transition: 67 of 73 requests filled (91.8%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	65	45	19
Communication	54	34	19
Mobility and transportation	118	63	53
Community-based living	37	29	4
Educational	63	26	35
Vocational	61	36	22
Self-care	66	39	26
Personal resource management	67	37	28
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	1	1	0
Community and social participation	56	38	16

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	2
5 to 19	25
20 to 24	63
25 to 59	30
60 and older	52
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	37
Mental or emotional	49
Physical	38
Hearing	1
Vision	8
Multiple disabilities	37
Other	2

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Texas 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	88	60.3%	45.8%	1.32
Black or African American	30	20.5%	10.8%	1.89
American Indian or Alaska Native	1	0.7%	0.6%	1.16
Asian	2	1.4%	2.3%	0.59
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.1%	0.00
Two or more races	0	0.0%	13.7%	0.00
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	25	17.1%	26.7%	0.64

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.