Advocates for Access

What the center reported

147Consumers served69 carried over, 78 new
2,544Information and referral contacts
$651,001Total income
$31,620Part B
$27,270Part C
58Goals achievedof 149 set
4Moved 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)	$31,620
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$27,270
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$184,952
State government funds	$378,551
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$28,608
Total income	$651,001

Eight years of reports

Advocates for Access 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	195	$641,882	$0	$33,955	8
2017	187	$593,092	$0	$21,796	7
2018	168	$608,188	$0	$24,368	8
2019	218	$614,702	$0	$24,920	7
2020	240	$614,702	$0	$24,920	10
2021	151	$653,046	$0	$24,876	8
2022	149	$652,267	$0	$25,170	7
2023	147	$651,001	$31,620	$27,270	4

Consumers served, by year

2016195
2017187
2018168
2019218
2020240
2021151
2022149
2023147

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	$4,429	31th	20th	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	$11,224	29th	25th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	38.9%	36th	40th	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	63.0%	47th	48th	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	2.72	74th	72th	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	14.67	86th	90th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	98.2%	43th	44th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	63.0%	27th	28th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 5 of 8 members.
Staff with disabilities	86.0%	68th	63th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 6.0 of 7.0 FTE.
Equity index	22.2	51th	56th	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	3.5%	100th	99th	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 9.0% of income; Part B varied by 264.6% (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 (2,544) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Advocacy and legal services	117	117	100.0%
Peer counseling	61	61	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	31	27	87.1%
IL skills training	12	12	100.0%
Youth transition	4	4	100.0%
All services	225	221	98.2%

Largest unmet demand

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

Housing and home modifications: 27 of 31 requests filled (87.1%).
Advocacy and legal services: 117 of 117 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 12 of 12 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 61 of 61 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	9	0	9
Communication	8	1	7
Mobility and transportation	23	21	2
Community-based living	55	31	24
Educational	24	0	24
Vocational	2	0	2
Self-care	10	1	9
Information access and technology	1	0	1
Personal resource management	6	0	6
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	7	4	3
Community and social participation	1	0	1
Other	3	0	3

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	0
5 to 19	25
20 to 24	4
25 to 59	39
60 and older	79
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	27
Mental or emotional	4
Physical	39
Hearing	36
Vision	1
Multiple disabilities	20
Other	20

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Illinois 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	120	81.6%	61.7%	1.32
Black or African American	16	10.9%	16.5%	0.66
American Indian or Alaska Native	4	2.7%	0.5%	5.98
Asian	0	0.0%	3.4%	0.00
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Two or more races	4	2.7%	6.4%	0.42
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	3	2.0%	11.6%	0.18

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.