I’ll never forget the day my aunt found my grandmother eating a handful of pills while watching her favorite show on television. She had thought they were M&Ms—the first sign that my grandma was living with dementia. My aunt knew then her move to an assisted living community was imminent. There was simply no way for her to go it alone.
Unfortunately, like so many Baby Boomers, my grandmother did not have a lot of savings. My aunt eventually sold her childhood home to help cover the costs of her care. It’s a story happening every day, all around the country. And it’s a crisis that is only going to increase as we approach the largest demographic shift in history; by 2035, 1 in 3 households will be headed by someone 65+, and the 80+ population will double to 24 million. In the past, many have focused on the overall lack of senior housing to be the major crisis facing our nation. But I’d argue the crisis isn’t just a lack of senior housing; it’s a lack of housing that people can actually afford.
According to A Place for Mom, the average cost nationally for a private assisted living facility is nearly $4,000/month. That cost rises to more than $6,000/month for private nursing home care. Compare those costs with the fact that almost half of adults ages 65+ make just enough to afford basic expenses. According to a study by the Joint Center for Housing Studies and Harvard University, nearly 40 percent of aging homeowners have less than $50,000 in savings, not including the value of their homes. At that rate, paying for a home health aide or assisted living care would exhaust their non-housing their savings within a year. Even more alarming: the typical older renter would exhaust their assets within just two months.
Earlier this year, the New York Times published a story noting quality housing opportunities are plentiful for older people at the highest end of the economic spectrum. But for both the middle class and lower class, it’s a whole different ballgame. Not surprisingly, developers and operators are more focused on high-value communities. The new trend is toward spa-like facilities that offer everything from on-site massage and pet therapy to personal beach access. Jimmy Buffett’s new Margaritaville community in Florida, for instance, comes at an investment price-tag of $1 billion. Unfortunately, this is not where most of our aging family members will be calling home.
Still, public housing is not a likely solution either. In Chicago, the waiting list for public senior housing is more than two years in some areas. In New York, it is more than four. In Philadelphia, the list capped with a waiting list of 104,000. At that rate, many prospective residents will pass away before their name makes it to the top of the waiting list.
So, what can we do? We need to demand better. As the New York Times article noted, we need a new paradigm for caring for our older generations. That means speaking up and demanding more of the following:
Lobby for More Affordable Housing
No new funding has been approved for housing unit construction under HUD Section 202 (support housing for the elderly) since 2011. The organization Leading Age is campaigning to increase Section 202, and to promise affordable housing to every older adult who needs it. Join their fight while also encouraging your local governments to create more tax credits for private investors willing and able to build low-income housing for our aging.
Make Affordable Housing Part of Your Investment Portfolio
Not surprisingly, most facility operators and developers are focusing on building high-end private-pay facilities because that is where the money is. We need to pressure these companies to add affordable housing to their project lists. How? If you have money invested in a REIT or private equity fund focused on senior housing, talk to your fund manager about making affordable housing a part of the portfolio. We need to send a message that investing in senior housing is not just about making money—it’s about making housing accessible for those we love.
Bring Housing to More Livable Markets
According to A Place for Mom, the average cost of a one-bedroom unit in an urban assisted living facility is 15 percent+ more than non-urban areas. Yet developers and operators often focus on primary markets, which are more expensive to rent than secondary and tertiary ones. Dan Brewer, chief fund manager at Senior Living Fund, says these smaller markets tend to perform as well or better than primary markets in terms of investment potential because it’s harder for these communities to find financing. Therefore, there is still tremendous need—and opportunity for operators and developers—to create quality, low-cost housing in these more livable areas.
Get Creative in Your Community
Studies show one of the most important parts of preserving longevity to keep our social lives healthy. One of the best ways to do that is to find creative ways to link our lives with others, such as allowing older homeowners to house local college students, create their own mini-retirement village with friends, or offer their available living space to single parents or other families in need.
Focus on Accessibility
Aging 2.0 has brought a new era of tech awareness to the growing longevity economy. But we need to do even more. We need to invest in creating apps with larger type and louder notifications so our aging family members can call for help or assistance more easily. We also need more apps that will help those with disabilities get the services they need—from meal delivery to compassionate listening services to a simple breath of fresh air. The longevity economy holds tremendous potential—our venture capitalists and angel investors need to take advantage of it.
The crisis in affordable housing is not one that can be fixed by new construction alone. To truly help reduce housing insecurity, we need to focus on building housing that is affordable, accessible, and available when people need it. We need to look past potential profits to see the full end-game. After all, we are all the aging population. We need to treat our older community members exactly as we would want to treat ourselves.
Like Michele I too think that many seniors can gain peace of mind, housing affordability, companionship, help with tasks and comfort if they would simply realize that they don’t have to live alone and that they can be happy and comfortable with a home-mate (my word for unrelated adults living together.) We have a site for individuals looking into this option https://www.sharinghousing.com and have just formed a nonprofit to work with organizations to bring this solution to the millions that could benefit.
I have been involved in the senior housing industry for 20 years in Portland Oregon. I have been seeing the problem as a looming crisis for years; seniors falling through the cracks unable to afford the high cost of the long term care communities I represent. With so many millions of boomers on the way to retirement without sufficient savings, it was clear something needed to happen.
So, in 2009 I founded Let’s Share Housing to help senior homeowners find compatible housemates. Through the years we have expanded the age range to include everyone from age 18-80. That way people can choose intergenerational living if they prefer.
We also have a Meetup group that gets together twice per month so folks who want to meet people face to face can have that option too. You can find us at http://www.meetup.com/lets-share-housing. While we are located predominantly in the Portland metro area right now, we’ve designed the website so that it can be can be activated region by region across the nation.
It’s time to start thinking outside the box to find creative ways to thrive together. My vision is that shared housing be a way to create community as a new model in aging. Please see our recent article in the August 26th edition of the Oregonian.
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2017/08/older_portlanders_try_speed-da.html#incart_river_in
So sorry! I did not get our website address in the response. It’s http://www.letssharehousing.com. Can that be added? Thanks!
Thank you for this info, Michele!
Great article. The need is NOW. Especially in Memory Care. New places opening are boasting ice cream parlors and indoor movie theaters without increasing the direct care staff ratios that are CRITICAL to assisting seniors with dementia to use such facilities.
Persons in memory care thrive, first and foremost when their emotional needs are met, they are treated and respected as valuable purposeful human beings.
Putting more money into much higher staff ratios, ongoing training and support, rather than more building amenities, raising job status, better pay, for this population is the only answer.
Hi, Judy. Would you mind if I used part of your comment as a quote in an upcoming article?
As an LVN who’s been working with seniors for 8+ years I totally agree that staffing ratios need to be improved!
Ice cream parlors, movie theaters, mini gyms, etc. are just like putting lipstick on a pig. Especially if the staffing ratios down to improve or even at times get worse!
With better staffing ratios there’s less “burn out” among the staff. With better staffing ratios the staff is better able to do their job and feel valued which ultimately leads to better care for our seniors.
I apologize for the double post! Also I noticed a typo that is due to auto correct! Instead of where my comment says “down to quote it should’ve been “don’t” improve!
As an LVN who’s been working with seniors for 8+ years I totally agree that staffing ratios need to be improved!
Ice cream parlors, movie theaters, mini gyms, etc. are just like putting lipstick on a pig. Especially if the staffing ratios down to improve or even at times get worse!
With better staffing ratios there’s less “burn out” among the staff. With better staffing ratios the staff is better able to do their job and feel valued which ultimately leads to better care for our seniors.
There are other choices and options using existing housing stock. The idea that government or investors should ‘fix the problem’ is only a slice of a bigger pie. I worked with a local shared housing company for several years.
The concept used existing housing stock and encouraged homeowners to fill their vacant rooms with VETTED individuals.
It prevented homeowners from being isolated, provided housing in REAL TIME that was safe & affordable.
Homeowners to remain in their homes longer, improved socialization, health, diet and increased emotional support, decreased depression.
It kept costs low for all individuals by using existing housing stock.
Homeowners were able to afford to maintain their homes as costs increased, offered GREEN solution for living and decreased urban sprawl.
Participants had a built in support system and could reduce costs if they shared resources: transportation, shopping, scheduling errands in blocks.
There were more benefits than detriments.
Society has become isolated and the idea of support isn’t solved by the ‘American Dream.
I am hoping to start a shared housing program in my new community and look forward to
sharing the benefits and rewards of shared housing that produce happier, healthier households AND communities.
This might work for those who like to be around people all the time. For those of us who prefer to have our “own” space, this wouldn’t work.
Why is it that those of us who have worked all of our lives but never had enough to save or invest in our future have to suffer so much? Why can’t there be senior living apartments (larger than 300 s.f.) where we can pay a percentage of our net income?
For example, my gross income prevents me from getting rental help from HUD. Yet my NET income is below the poverty level. Something is badly wrong here!!!!!!! Where can I live? It’s my medical expenses that bring the gross down to a poverty level, yet HUD won’t consider it.
What’s to become of us?????
This is great info, Zoe – thank you for sharing.
Dale, I feel your pain, and I am working hard to bring light to this issue! Do you mind if I use part of your comment in a quote for a future article? Thank you!
Bravo Jessica … A year ago, in Reno, NV, a private developer took over a couple of city blocks near the university to build luxury student housing for foreign students. Unfortunately, this development dislocated renters living in dilapidated low-rent housing, including many older folks. They were dumped into an environment of scarce and unaffordable rents and home sale prices that had skyrocketed. The rental vacancy rate in Reno is under two percent and there are long waits for subsidized (though not cheap) senior housing. Neither the city, university, nor the developer gave any consideration to the people who were displaced. Meanwhile, I know a retired woman who sold her house in Reno and down-sized into a nice apartment complex. Her rent increased by a couple of hundred dollars a month after the first year and she realized she could not afford to live there. Many older people who are middle class or poor are facing a terrible housing crisis that is being ignored by local, state and federal governments. Our country, among the most prosperous in the world, should not be such a mean, unforgiving place to the people who made it so.
I agree! It is breaking my heart, Patricia. Thank you for your comments!
I work in marketing for Retirement communities…I am so familiar with this issue because daily I get calls from many who cannot afford my product. I always try to refer them to another community that takes Medicaid for help. At the same time my husband works in Affordable Housing which is section 42 of the Internal revenue code. They raise equity for building from large corporations that need the tax credits. They build energy efficient, nice housing completely affordable even on SS alone. They build units for seniors, disabled and working poor. The perfect marriage would be Senior affordable homes with HCBS or Health Care at affordable rates. There needs to be a model for this. Your point is right on! We need cooperation between housing, Medicaid programs, other care providers and volunteers.
This is great info, thank you, Connie!