Section 3: Design for the Statewide Network of Centers

3.1 Existing Network – 34 CFR 364.25

3.1A Provide an overview of the existing network of centers, including non-Part C-funded centers that comply with the standards and assurances in section 725 (b) and (c) of the Act, and the geographic areas and populations currently served by the centers.

3.2 Expansion of Network – 34 CFR 364.25

3.2A Describe the design for the further expansion of the network, including identification of the unserved and underserved areas in the State and the order of priority for serving these areas as additional funding becomes available (beyond the required cost-of-living increase).

A special ad hoc task force comprised of representatives from the SILC, the DSUs, and CILs worked together to identify a strategy for completing the network of CILs in the state. The consensus of the group was that twenty-two additional centers are needed to complete the network and to assure that all unserved or underserved areas are adequately covered by a center. Attachment 2 defines the designated target areas for the overall expansion, as well as, the priority areas for the term of the 2008/2010 SPIL.

Efforts to expand the network of CILs will include working closely with state and federal entities toward the allocation of additional funding for the establishment and operation of CILs. In addition to adding CILs to the network, the SILC is committed to pursuing increased funding that will allow for financial support to bring existing CILs up to a baseline level of $250,000 for the provision of core IL services.

The State Independent Living Council, in collaboration with the DSUs, has designated the following targeted areas as immediate priorities for the establishment of a center for independent living, should new state or federal funds become available for this purpose during the term of the 2008/2010 State Plan:

• Abilene to serve Taylor, Callahan, Eastland, Jones, Shackelford, and Stephens Counties -- Estimated disability population 35,835
• Laredo to serve Webb, Dimmit, La Salle, Maverick, and Zavala Counties – Estimated disability population 49,797
• Plano to serve Colin County – Estimated disability population51,910
• San Angelo to serve Tom Green, Coke, Concho, Irion, Menard, Runnels, Schleicher, and Sterling Counties – Estimated disability population 25,055
• Sherman to serve Grayson, Cooke, and Fannin Counties – Estimated disability population 35,476

The remaining priority areas to be prioritized at future dates are:

-- Archer, Baylor, Clay, Foard, Hardeman, Haskell, Jack, Knox, Montague, Throckmorton, Wichita, Wilbarger, Young. Population: 43,980
-- Bowie, Cass, Morris, Red River. Population: 32,001
-- Delta, Franklin, Hopkins, Hunt, Titus. Population: 31,964
-- Hood, Parker, Somervell, Wise. Population: 31,651
-- Brown, Coleman, Comanche, Erath, Mills, Palo Pinto. Population: 25,812
-- Tarrant. Population: 231,504
-- Ellis, Johnson, Kaufman, Rockwall. Population: 59,552
-- Falls, Freestone, Limestone, Navarro. Population: 22,554
-- Brewster, Culberson, Jeff Davis, Pecos, Reeves, Terrell. Population: 9,343
-- Edwards, Kinney, Real, Uvalde, Val Verde. Population: 15,480
-- Aransas, Bee, Live Oak, McMullen, Refugio, San Patricio.
Population: 27,234
-- Brooks, Duval, Jim Wells, Kenedy, Kleberg. Population: 18,742
-- Calhoun, Dewitt, Goliad, Gonzalez Jackson, Lavaca, Victoria. Population: 35,544
-- Chambers, Galveston. Population: 46,791
-- Grimes, Montgomery, San Jacinto, Walker. Population: 65,329
-- Brazos, Burleson, Madison, Robertson, Washington. Population: 32,824
-- Jasper, Newton, Sabine, San Augustine Tyler. Population: 20,849

Using newly appropriated funds allocated in the 80th Legislative session, two new CILs will be developed during the state fiscal year 2008. A competitive process will be conducted, which will define criteria for selection. Priority will be given to applicants with a cross-disability board in place that have filed for incorporation and obtained or are in the process of obtaining 501(c)(3) tax exempt status. Such applicants will be in a position to initiate programming more readily.

3.3 Section 723 States Only – 34 CFR 364.39

3.3A If the State follows an order of priorities for allocating funds among centers within a State that is different from what is outlined in 34 CFR 366.22, describe the alternate order of priority that the DSU director and the SILC chair have agreed upon. Indicate N/A if not applicable.

N/A

3.3B Describe how the State policies, practices and procedures governing the awarding of grants to centers and the oversight of these centers are consistent with 34 CFR 366.37 and 366.38.

N/A

Next, Section 4: Designated State Unit (DSU)