Placer Independent Resource Services

What the center reported

564Consumers served420 carried over, 144 new
751Information and referral contacts
$976,313Total income
$0Part B
$413,313Part C
214Goals achievedof 291 set
45Moved 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)	$413,313
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$50,000
State government funds	$463,308
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$49,692
Total income	$976,313

Eight years of reports

Placer Independent Resource Services 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	430	$523,063	$0	$314,505	80
2017	474	$697,289	$1,835	$324,741	0
2018	484	$836,189	$15,131	$365,705	4
2019	369	$851,799	$43,801	$376,689	0
2020	321	$876,542	$15,236	$376,689	3
2021	439	$1,460,597	$0	$376,020	85
2022	393	$903,660	$0	$380,465	75
2023	564	$976,313	$0	$413,313	45

Consumers served, by year

2016430
2017474
2018484
2019369
2020321
2021439
2022393
2023564

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	$1,731	77th	74th	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	$4,562	58th	53th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	73.5%	80th	85th	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	57.1%	42th	42th	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	7.98	88th	88th	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	10.89	83th	87th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	94.4%	33th	31th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	100.0%	93th	95th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 5 of 5 members.
Staff with disabilities	100.0%	90th	89th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 8.1 of 8.1 FTE.
Equity index	45.8	12th	15th	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	28.3%	30th	21th	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 42.3% of income; Part B varied by 151.7% (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 (751) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Housing and home modifications	191	191	100.0%
Personal assistance	116	116	100.0%
IL skills training	64	54	84.4%
Family services	62	51	82.3%
Assistive technology	34	33	97.1%
Peer counseling	26	22	84.6%
Advocacy and legal services	24	22	91.7%
Other services	20	18	90.0%
Communication services	4	4	100.0%
Transportation	4	3	75.0%
Counseling and related services	2	2	100.0%
Youth transition	1	1	100.0%
Vocational services	1	1	100.0%
All services	549	518	94.4%

Largest unmet demand

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

Family services: 51 of 62 requests filled (82.3%).
IL skills training: 54 of 64 requests filled (84.4%).
Peer counseling: 22 of 26 requests filled (84.6%).
Other services: 18 of 20 requests filled (90.0%).
Advocacy and legal services: 22 of 24 requests filled (91.7%).
Assistive technology: 33 of 34 requests filled (97.1%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	5	1	4
Mobility and transportation	4	2	2
Community-based living	212	164	48
Educational	2	0	2
Vocational	4	0	4
Self-care	6	1	5
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	57	45	12
Community and social participation	1	1	0

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	2
5 to 19	1
20 to 24	0
25 to 59	66
60 and older	484
Age unavailable	11

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	26
Mental or emotional	20
Physical	260
Hearing	6
Vision	11
Multiple disabilities	196
Other	45

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with California residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 28 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	461	86.0%	42.3%	2.03
Black or African American	9	1.7%	6.4%	0.26
American Indian or Alaska Native	18	3.4%	1.2%	2.79
Asian	18	3.4%	10.2%	0.33
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	1	0.2%	0.4%	0.52
Two or more races	0	0.0%	11.9%	0.00
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	29	5.4%	27.6%	0.20

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.