Dear DSU Director and SILC Chair:

The purpose of this letter is to clarify certain requirements contained in Title VII, Chapter 1 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (the Act) concerning the content of your State Plan for Independent Living (SPIL) for Fiscal Years (FY) 2011-2013. This letter focuses on two issues: (1) the composition of the statewide network of centers; and (2) the statutory priority for establishing new Part C centers as part of the state’s design for its network of centers.

As the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) reviewed SPILs in order to make determinations on the distribution of the IL Part C funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) in each State, we learned that Designated State Units (DSUs) and Statewide Independent Living Councils (SILCs) from state to state do not have a common understanding of what is required in section 3.1 of the SPIL – the description of the statewide network of centers -- and section 3.2 of the SPIL – the identification of unserved and underserved areas and the order of priority for serving those areas. We thought it would be helpful to explain further the statutory and regulatory basis for these sections, and the information you should include in your FY 2011-2013 SPIL to address these sections.

Section 3.1 of the SPIL – Existing Network

Section 704(g) of the Act requires each SPIL to set forth a design for the establishment of a statewide network of centers for independent living that comply with the standards and assurances set forth in section 725(b) and (c) of the Act and subparts F and G of 34 C.F.R. Part 366. This statutory requirement is implemented through section 364.25(a) of the Independent Living regulations, 34 C.F.R. §364.25(a), and is reflected in section 3.1 of the SPIL.

To satisfy the requirements of section 3.1 of the SPIL, you need to provide a description of the existing network of centers, identifying each center and the geographic areas and populations currently served by each center. It is important to identify in this section all the centers in your State that meet the standards and assurances in section 725(b) and (c) of the Act. If a center receives more than one Part C grant from RSA -- a second grant awarded to that center to establish a separate and complete center in a different geographical area (commonly referred to as a satellite center)[[1]], the two centers should be listed separately with a description of their different geographical service areas, even though they may share a governing board.See 34 C.F.R. 366.2(b)(2). All of the centers included in your statewide network of centers should be listed in section 3.1, regardless of their funding source.[[2]] You should also indicate in the description of the existing centers, which centers are funded by Part C and which centers are funded with Part B, State, or other funds in order for RSA to get a full picture of how the existing network of centers is funded.

It is also important that the description of the geographic areas and populations that each center serves be accurate. It is not sufficient to list only a center’s place of business. You must list the counties that each center serves. A Part C center should be serving with Part C funds only those counties that were listed as its service area in its original Part C application that was approved by RSA. If a Part C center serves counties in addition to those approved in its application for federal funding, the State must explain in section 3.1 of its SPIL the funding source the center uses to serve those extra counties, and ensure that the center has the appropriate accounting mechanisms in place to track both its Part C and non-Part C funding. The State should also describe the particular populations that the center serves, especially populations that are traditionally underserved, such as minority groups, certain disability groups, and urban and rural populations.

Section 3.2 of the SPIL – Expansion of the Network

Section 722(e) of the Act provides an order of priority for funding Part C centers. Section 722(e) requires that the Commissioner of RSA (or the Director of the DSU in section 723(e) of the Act), first provide existing centers that comply with the standards and assurances in section 725(b) and (c) of the Act with funds equal to their prior year’s award and a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA). Then, the Commissioner of RSA must use any remaining funds to establish new Part C centers under section 722(d), if there is no center for independent living serving a region of the State or a region is underserved, and the increase in the allotment of the State is sufficient to support an additional center for independent living in the State consistent with the State’s design for its network of centers for independent living contained in its SPIL. Only if the Commissioner determines there is insufficient funding to create a new center may RSA use the excess funds in the State to assist existing centers, consistent with the State plan, or re-allot these funds to other States in accordance with section 721(d) of the Act. These statutory requirements are implemented through sections 364.25(b), 366.22 and 366.24 of the IL regulations, and are reflected in section 3.2 of the SPIL.

In order to provide RSA with the information required by sections 722(d) and 722(e)(3) of the Act so that it can determine when and where a competition for a new Part C center may be held in your State, section 3.2 of the SPIL asks you to describe your plans for expanding the network of centers. Your response must include a description of the geographic areas of your state unserved by any center for independent living in the network and any underserved areas or populations within the service areas of the centers in your network (funded by Part C, Part B, State or other funds). Consistent with RSA’s policy directive, RSA-PD-03-06, regarding the definition of a “center,” we view “center for independent living” in section 722(d) as any center for independent living in the state’s network that meets the standards and assurances of section 725 of the Act, regardless of funding source. Therefore, if a region of the state is served by a Part B or state funded center, that region would not be considered “unserved.” In addition, the state needs to identify the underserved areas or populations in the service areas of all centers, regardless of funding.

After describing your unserved and underserved areas, section 3.2 requires you to describe your order of priority for serving these unserved and underserved areas. The first priority for any State with areas unserved by a center or areas underserved by a non-Part C center must be to create a new center in one of those areas when the amount of Part C funding the State identifies as sufficient becomes available. Your response to section 3.2 regarding a priority for the creation of a new center or centers in accordance with the statutory priority depends on the composition of your existing network of centers, as described in the following examples.

  1. States with all counties served by Part C centers

If all of the counties in your State are within the service area of a Part C center, you would identify in your SPIL any underserved areas or populations within the service areas of your Part C centers, explain how you would prioritize any increase in services and funding to the underserved areas and populations, and describe how you would distribute the excess funding (that funding beyond a COLA) to your existing Part C centers, e.g., equally across centers, in the same proportion to centers’ annual Part C award, based on population and geographic area, more funding to the lowest funded center, etc. Although Part C centers may have underserved areas within their approved service area, RSA would not anticipate creating new centers within the service areas of an existing Part C center due to, among other things, the potential for overlapping responsibilities and duplication of services. Therefore, because your entire State is served by Part C centers, you would not need to establish a priority for the creation of a new center, but would use this section of the SPIL to address how any additional Part C funding would be distributed among your existing Part C centers. For example, if your State wanted to provide more of the excess Part C funding to a particular center to start a branch office to address an underserved area or population within the center’s own service area, you would have to describe that proposed funding distribution in section 3.2 of your SPIL under your order of priorities.

  1. States with counties unserved by any center, regardless of funding

If your State includes areas that are unserved by any centers for independent living (Part C, Part B, State or other funding), you would need to identify those unserved counties in section 3.2 and provide an order of priority for creating new centers in these areas as sufficient funding becomes available. You would need to identify the minimum amount of regular annual funding that you believe is sufficient to establish a new center in your unserved regions. Please indicate the sources of funding that make up the minimum funding level for a new center, for example, Part C only or a combination of Part C, Part B, State and other sources. Also, be prepared to justify the amount chosen by verifiable data. You may also identify any other circumstances that you believe must be present to create a new center in an unserved area, such as consumer statements of interest or interest generated by focus groups or town meetings. Remember that, under section 366.2(b)(2), an existing center that serves a different geographical area can apply to establish a new separate and complete center in an unserved area of the State, and still share the same governing board. Your first priority in a State with areas unserved by any center for independent living must be to create a new center if you have sufficient funding to do so. After addressing the creation of new centers in unserved, and any underserved, counties, the next priority for your State would be to describe the method by which it would distribute the excess funds over COLA to its existing Part C centers in situations where there is insufficient funding to create a new center, or if a competition held by RSA reveals there are no qualified applicants for a new center.

  1. States with counties served by both Part C and non-Part C centers

If your statewide network includes both Part C centers and non-Part C centers, and you identify the areas served by your non-Part C centers as underserved, you will need to identify those underserved areas in section 3.2 and provide an order of priority for establishing a new Part C center in those areas as sufficient funding becomes available. As noted above, you will need to identify the minimum amount of regular annual funding that you believe is sufficient to establish a new center in your underserved regions, and be prepared to justify the amount chosen by verifiable data. It is also important to indicate the sources of funding that make up the minimum funding level for a new center, for example, Part C only or a combination of Part C, Part B, State and other sources. You may also identify any other circumstances that you believe must be present to create a new center in an underserved area, such as consumer statements of interest or interest generated by focus groups or town meetings. As you know, under section 722(d)(3), a Part B center is eligible to apply for and may receive a grant as a new Part C center if it submits a satisfactory application. Your first priority in a State with areas underserved by a non-Part C center must be to create a new Part C center in those underserved areas if you have sufficient funding to do so. After addressing the creation of new centers in underserved counties, the next priority for your State would be to describe the method by which it would distribute the excess funds over COLA to its existing Part C centers in situations where there is insufficient funding to create a new center, or if a competition held by RSA reveals there are no qualified applicants for a new center.

We understand that your State may not anticipate establishing a new center either in an unserved or underserved area based on the typical amount of excess regular fiscal year funding you normally receive. However, as explained above, sections 722(e)(3) and 722(d) of the Act establish an order of priority for distributing Part C funds that includes the creation of new centers if certain criteria – the existence of unserved or underserved areas and sufficient funding – are met. The purpose of section 3.2 of the SPIL is to create a plan of action for the distribution of additional Part C funds should those criteria exist. Although in some fiscal years, the amount of excess regular Part C funds is so small that it would be insufficient for RSA to implement a State’s first priority to create a new Part C center and the funding would go to existing centers, section 3.2 of the SPIL requires the State to consider thoughtfully how it would expand its network of centers if sufficient funds did become available. Sufficient funding to create a new Part C center provides that center with a relatively steady source of income because the center is entitled to receive Part C funding in subsequent fiscal years if it meets the standards and assurances in section 725(b) and (c) of the Act. Using Part C funds to create a new center may also free up Part B or state funds being used in that area to provide services for other authorized activities, thereby expanding the network of centers and the availability of independent living services to consumers.

We will conduct a webinar on Friday, April 23, 2010, 1:00 p.m. (ET), to go over the guidance and respond to questions. Information necessary for participation in the webinar is available at: (A separate notice on webinar details will follow.)

We hope that this information assists you in developing your SPIL for FYs 2011-2013. RSA appreciates your ongoing efforts to improve and expand the provision of IL services to individuals with significant disabilities in your State. If we can be of further assistance, please contact Sue Rankin-White by telephone at 202-245-7312 or electronically at .

Sue Rankin-White, Acting Chief

Independent Living Unit

[[1]]RSA discussed satellite centers and their establishment through the competitive discretionary grant process in a policy directive dated July 3, 2002, entitled “Satellite Centers for Independent Living." (PD-02-03) at

[[2]]RSA also addressed the composition of a statewide network of centers in a policy directive, dated August 8, 2003, entitled “Whether Centers that do not Receive Title VII, Part C Grants are Included as Centers for Independent Living Under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended and the Implications for SILC Composition, Network of Centers, and Part B and Part C Funding,” (RSA-PD-03-06) at