Independent Living Center of Southern California

What the center reported

313Consumers served13 carried over, 300 new
565Information and referral contacts
$2,090,894Total income
$0Part B
$268,989Part C
2,296Goals achievedof 2,418 set
97Moved 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)	$268,989
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$174,708
State government funds	$1,502,909
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$144,288
Total income	$2,090,894

Eight years of reports

Independent Living Center of Southern California 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	1,857	$2,546,458	$0	$211,273	2
2017	850	$1,147,100	$0	$211,346	0
2018	679	$1,373,434	$0	$238,006	0
2019	1,183	$294,461	$0	$245,154	3
2020	897	$1,445,223	$0	$245,154	0
2021	576	$753,496	$0	$244,718	4
2022	441	$452,872	$0	$247,611	0
2023	313	$2,090,894	$0	$268,989	97

Consumers served, by year

20161,857
2017850
2018679
20191,183
2020897
2021576
2022441
2023313

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	$6,680	19th	13th	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	$911	92th	89th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	95.0%	96th	91th	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	100.0%	99th	99th	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	30.99	99th	98th	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	36.06	96th	95th	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	62.0%	24th	30th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 8 of 13 members.
Staff with disabilities	35.0%	3th	2th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 9.0 of 26.0 FTE.
Equity index	23.8	47th	41th	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	57.7%	7th	8th	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 12.9% of income.

Services requested and received

Consumers requesting and receiving each service, report year 2023Information and referral is counted as contacts (565) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Peer counseling	827	827	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	468	468	100.0%
Personal assistance	359	359	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	326	326	100.0%
IL skills training	185	185	100.0%
Vocational services	184	184	100.0%
Youth transition	67	67	100.0%
Transportation	8	8	100.0%
Assistive technology	5	5	100.0%
All services	2,429	2,429	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

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

Advocacy and legal services: 326 of 326 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 468 of 468 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 185 of 185 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 827 of 827 requests filled (100.0%).
Personal assistance: 359 of 359 requests filled (100.0%).
Youth transition: 67 of 67 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	1,122	1,099	23
Communication	93	87	6
Mobility and transportation	84	80	4
Community-based living	187	187	0
Educational	84	78	6
Vocational	122	120	2
Self-care	120	96	24
Information access and technology	109	105	4
Personal resource management	128	82	46
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	97	97	0
Community and social participation	272	265	7

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	0
5 to 19	70
20 to 24	12
25 to 59	18
60 and older	201
Age unavailable	12

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	59
Mental or emotional	55
Physical	111
Hearing	53
Vision	22
Multiple disabilities	13
Other	0

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with California 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	64	20.4%	42.3%	0.48
Black or African American	14	4.5%	6.4%	0.70
American Indian or Alaska Native	19	6.1%	1.2%	5.04
Asian	48	15.3%	10.2%	1.51
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	17	5.4%	0.4%	15.27
Two or more races	53	16.9%	11.9%	1.42
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	98	31.3%	27.6%	1.13

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.