Data Snapshot

Here are some quick stats on IDR's impact in Quarter 3.

Here are some quick stats on IDR's Education and Outreach efforts in Quarter 3.

Stories of IDR's Impact

Nearly a Thousand Doors Opened

IDR's intake team received 964 requests for help between April and June, roughly 15 every working day for 13 straight weeks. By the close of the quarter, 947 of them, or 98.2%, had been resolved and closed, with a median response time measured in hours rather than weeks. More than 60% of requests were closed the same day they arrived.

Those requests came from 77 of Indiana's 92 counties, and the split between the northern and southern halves of the state was almost exactly even: 481 north, 483 south. For an agency headquartered in Indianapolis, that balance is worth pausing on. It means the family in Crawford County and the family in Lake County are finding the same door.

A two-person intake team carried this entire load, triaging each request, resolving most of them outright, and routing the rest to the right practice team. The telephone remains the way most people reach us, accounting for 82% of all contacts, which matters enormously for people in institutions, people without reliable internet, and people in crisis who need to talk to a human being.

Perhaps the most telling number in the entire quarter is this one: 546 requests involved matters outside IDR's jurisdiction or resources. IDR did not turn those callers away. Staff provided technical assistance, strategy, or general information in 419 of those instances and made referrals in another 127. More than 500 Hoosiers who were not eligible for our representation still hung up the phone with something they could use. That is a deliberate choice, and it is what a no wrong door agency looks like in practice.

Of the requests that did fall within our purview, 248 moved forward into direct service, including 122 new client cases and one new systemic matter. Every one of IDR's 9 federal programs produced documented service during the quarter, from PAIMI and PAIR at the high end to PATBI and PABSS at the smaller scale. No grant stream sat idle.

What Happened Next

The teams took it from there, and the results ran across the full breadth of the protection and advocacy mandate.

Investigators filed 10 licensing reports with state oversight agencies following investigations of abuse, neglect, and rights violations in facilities. Monitoring staff conducted 31 visits at 10 facilities and delivered technical assistance 73 times along the way, 2 to 3 times per visit, educating patients and staff alike. That vigilance paid off in a concrete way at one state psychiatric hospital, where IDR noticed that patient authorizations for release of information to us had dropped from nearly 100% to below 50%, traced the cause to a reporting error, and got it corrected. To protect recipients of Social Security benefits, this quarter, IDR conducted 34 new reviews of Representative Payees, had 26 cases in progress and closed 43 cases. Staff also conducted 209 appointments with payees, beneficiaries, legal guardians, and third parties.

The quarter also brought news of an older investment paying dividends. IDR's 5-year Private Secure Facility Project, which examined conditions for youth ages 6 to 21 with mental health conditions, has left a durable mark: DCS recently reported that 16 annual contract audits produced only 2 corrective action plans and 2 noncompliance findings, a dramatic improvement over the project years when a single audit routinely generated multiple findings. Providers now describe DCS as more collaborative. And acting on IDR's finding that youth often sabotage their own treatment when they lack family or community connection, DCS has begun recruiting churches and community organizations to mentor and visit youth in care. That is systemic change that outlives the project that produced it.

On the education side, IDR won an overturned Manifestation Determination Review for a student who had been suspended after being bullied, with his services and accommodations amended and no further issues since. In employment, an advocate helped a worker secure job coaching his employer had refused, and his supervisor reported no performance concerns once the accommodation was in place. In self-determination, 2 adults had guardianships terminated and their legal rights restored—one of them after IDR negotiated away thousands of dollars in disputed guardian fees.

Reaching Beyond the Caseload

IDR delivered eleven presentations to 358 people this quarter, 2 of them national trainings. In partnership with NDRN, IDR trained 109 participants from 57 disability rights organizations across the country on developing plain language resources, and several of those organizations have since produced voting rights guides of their own. Disability Rights Arizona published theirs. An advocate from the U.S. Virgin Islands wrote back simply that she had needed the inspiration.

Closer to home, a voting awareness social media campaign drew more than 12,000 views ahead of the primary. IDR trained Election Defenders alongside Count Us Indiana, staffed information tables at NAMI Walks and the Special Olympics State Summer Games, where more than 2,000 athletes competed, and distributed hundreds of print resources including large print and Braille. Special Olympics has asked to grow the partnership. NAMI Indiana featured IDR's inpatient rights resource on the front page of its spring newsletter, and Uniquely You Indy profiled the agency's work in June. Read this article by visiting the Uniquely You webpage, and selecting the June 2026 edition. The story begins on page 21.

When a voting advocate in Allen County needed printed booklets that were no longer in circulation, an IDR advocate drove them over personally.

Standing Up for Community Living

The quarter also called for IDR to speak publicly. On June 18, the United States Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion concerning the right of people with disabilities to live in the community rather than be confined in institutions, recasting Olmstead v. L.C. as a far narrower holding and concluding that the longstanding integration mandate regulations exceed statutory authority. Six days later, IDR published a statement rejecting that reasoning and explaining plainly what the opinion does, what it does not do, and why it does not control here: Olmstead remains binding Supreme Court precedent, the opinion binds no federal court, and the Seventh Circuit, whose decisions govern Indiana, continues to treat the integration mandate as enforceable. IDR paired that legal clarity with a commitment, pledging to keep representing Hoosiers facing unnecessary institutionalization and to work with protection and advocacy systems nationally to defend the integration mandate.

The statement was very well received, both across Indiana and nationally, and was republished several times. At a moment when many organizations were still deciding how to respond, IDR gave the disability community a clear, accurate answer within a week. Read IDR's Response to the DOJ Opinion.

Additional Impact Notes

Here are more stories of impact from the IDR team. 

IDR Identifies and Resolves Reporting Issue

IDR staff conducted 31 monitoring visits at 10 facilities this quarter. IDR noticed a sharp drop in the percentage of Logansport State Hospital patients authorizing the release of information to IDR—from nearly 100% to below 50%. IDR worked with hospital staff to identify the cause as a reporting error, which was corrected.

Advocates Offer Support During Facility Visits

During 31 monitoring visits, IDR advocates provided technical assistance 73 times, educating staff and patients about the rights people have while in facilities. IDR staff answered questions and concerns and addressed the barriers that exist that prevent people from getting the type of care they deserve.