National Older Adult Housing Survey 2002 - Survey of Findings/media/Files/... · • Residents of assisted living facilities; • Adults with parents in assisted living facilities;

NATIONAL OLDER ADULTHOUSING SURVEY

2002

NAHB RESEARCH CENTERin collaboration with

The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University

400 Prince George’s BoulevardUpper Marlboro, Maryland 20774

Telephone: (800) 638-8556Fax: (301)430-6180

www.nahbrc.org

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

About the National Center for Seniors’ Housing Research:The National Center for Seniors’ Housing Research (NCSHR) is a cooperative effort between the NAHB Research Center andthe U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration on Aging. The NCSHR’s goal is to offer the home buildingindustry the most current information on older adult housing issues and options so that all Americans can live comfortably,safely, and independently in their homes as they age.

For inquiries on the National Older Adult Housing Survey (NOAHS) database, contact [email protected].

About the NAHB Research Center:The NAHB Research Center, located in Upper Marlboro, Md., is known as America’s Housing Technology and InformationResource. In its nearly 40 years of service to the home building industry, the Research Center has provided product research andbuilding process improvements that have been widely adopted by home builders in the United States. Through testing andcertification services, the Research Center seal is recognized throughout the world as a mark of product quality and an assuranceof product performance.

NOTE ON STYLE USAGE: In order to identify this company and its work correctly, first reference should be “NAHB ResearchCenter.” In subsequent mentions, “Research Center” is the only acceptable and accurate alternative reference.

About the Joint Center for Housing Studies:The Joint Center for Housing Studies is Harvard University’s center for information and research on housing in the UnitedStates. The Joint Center analyzes the dynamic relationships between housing markets and economic, demographic, and socialtrends, providing leaders in government, business, and the non-profit sector with the knowledge needed to develop effectivepolicies and strategies.

NoticeNo part of this publication may be reproduced or used in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical,including photocopying or scanning, or by any information storage and retrival system without written permissionfrom the NAHB Research Center and the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University.

NAHB Research Center400 Prince George’s BoulevardUpper Marlboro, MD 20774-8731(800) 638-8556www.nahbrc.org

Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University1033 Massachusetts Avenue, Fifth FloorCambridge, MA 02143(617) 495-7908www.jchs.harvard.edu

AcknowledgementsThis National Older Adult Housing Survey(NOAHS) report was prepared by the NationalCenter for Seniors’ Housing Research, a cooperativeeffort between the NAHB Research Center and theU.S. Department of Health and Human Services’Administration on Aging. The NOAHS projectmanager was Lisa Wiederlight Gibson. Ed Hudsonand Chris Steuble provided data analysis, andCharlotte Wade provided content review. EricBelsky, executive director of the Joint Center forHousing Studies of Harvard University, and MichaelCollins of the Neighborhood ReinvestmentCorporation provided policy direction and dataanalysis. Special thanks to Donna Woodhurst andEdy Crane for graphic design.

We gratefully acknowledge the NOAHS externalreview committee members, who provided feedbackon the survey design and content. They are: EricBelsky; Paul Emrath, senior economist at theNational Association of Home Builders; AndyKochera, policy analyst at AARP’s Public PolicyInstitute; Larry Murr, president of Lawrence MurrRemodeling; Barry Rosengarten, president ofRosengarten Companies; David Schless, president ofthe American Seniors’ Housing Association; HarveySinger, research director at the National InvestmentCenter for the Seniors’ Housing and CareIndustries; and Ken Simons, president of PulteCommunities NJ Limited Partnership.

DisclaimerWhile the information in this document is believedto be accurate, neither the authors, nor reviewers,nor the U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices of the U.S. Government, nor the NAHBResearch Center, nor the Joint Center for HousingStudies of Harvard University, nor any of theiremployees or representatives makes any warranty,guarantee, or representation, expressed or implied,with respect to the accuracy, effectiveness, orusefulness of any information, method, or materialin this document, nor assumes any liability for theuse of any information, methods, or materialsdisclosed herein, or for damages arising fromsuch use.

The contents of this report are the views of thecontractor and do not necessarily reflect the views orpolicies of the U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, the U.S. Government, orHarvard University.

Digital Imagery © copyright 2001 PhotoDisc, Inc.

National Older Adult Housing Survey2002

Summary of Findings

Prepared byNAHB Research Center

in collaboration withThe Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University

December 2002

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. iv

Summary of Findings ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Details on the National Older Adult Housing Survey ......................................................................................................... 2

Older Adults’ Housing Preferences ................................................................................................................................... 2

Differences in Community Amenities and Housing Features That Older Adults Currently Have ........................................... 5

Attractive Features and Amenities By Community Type ..................................................................................................... 7

Features and Amenities That Older Adults Have Added to Their Homes and Those That They Say They Will Add ................ 10

Features That Facilitate Aging in Place .......................................................................................................................... 12

Why Older Adults Select a Specific Community Type ....................................................................................................... 12

Changes in Homeowners’ Preferences as They Age ........................................................................................................ 14

Community Amenities Ranked as Beneficial by Homeowners ......................................................................................... 16

Comparison of Beneficial Amenities Among Various Age Groups in Mixed-Age Communities .......................................... 18

Health-Related Differences Between Homeowners in Mixed-Age and Age-Restricted Communities ................................ 20

Health-Related Home Modifications .............................................................................................................................. 21

Attitudes and Practices Regarding Second Homes ......................................................................................................... 22

Preferences and Profiles of Assisted Living Residents .................................................................................................... 24

Why Older Adults Move to Assisted Living Facilities ........................................................................................................ 24

Services That Attracted Adult Children Looking for Assisted Living for Their Parents ........................................................ 24

Benefits and Availability of Features in Assisted Living Centers ...................................................................................... 25

Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................................................... 27

Sources ................................................................................................................................................................................. 29

Appendices .......................................................................................................................................................................... A-1

Con

tents

Con

tents

iii

LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1Distribution of NOAHS Responses Mixed-AgeCommunity Homeowners .................................. 4Figure 2Distribution of NOAHS Responses Age-RestrictedCommunity Homeowners .................................. 4

LIST OF TABLESTable 1Average Age of Housing by Community Type ...... 5Table 2Percent of Respondents from Each CommunityType with Community Safety and SecurityAmenities Present ............................................ 6Table 3Percentage of Homes in Mixed-Age andAge-Restricted Communities with SpecificHousing Features ............................................. 6Table 4Top 10 Amenities That Attracted Homeowners inMixed-Age Communities to Their CurrentResidence ........................................................ 8Table 5Top 10 Amenities that Attracted Homeowners inAge-Restricted Communities to Their CurrentResidence ........................................................ 9Table 6Rankings of the Attractiveness of Proximity-Related Amenities by Community Type ............ 10Table 7Top 10 Additions to Homes in Mixed-AgeCommunities .................................................. 11Table 8Top 10 Additions to Homes in Age-RestrictedCommunities .................................................. 11Table 9Top 10 Features That Help Older Adults Age 65and Over Live Comfortably, Safely, andIndependently in Their Homes ......................... 12Table 10Top 10 Reasons for Choosing to Live in anAge-Restricted Community ............................. 13Table 11Top 10 Features That Homeowners Age 45 Yearsand Over Selected as Important in Choosing TheirCurrent Community ........................................ 14Table 12Top 10 Features That Homeowners Age 65 Yearsand Over Selected as Important in Choosing TheirCurrent Community ........................................ 14Table 13Top Factors Increasing in Importance asHomeowners in Mixed-AgeCommunities Age ........................................... 15Table 14Top Factors Decreasing in Importance asHomeowners in Mixed-AgeCommunities Age ........................................... 15

Table 15Top 10 Most Highly-Beneficial Mixed-AgeCommunity Amenities ................................... 17Table 16Top 10 Least Highly-Beneficial Mixed-AgeCommunity Amenities ................................... 17Table 17Top 10 Most Highly-Beneficial Age-RestrictedCommunity Amenities ................................... 17Table 18Top 10 Least Highly-Beneficial Age-RestrictedCommunity Amenities ................................... 18Table 19Changes in the Community Amenities’ Degreeof Benefit as Mixed-Age CommunityHomeowners Age ........................................... 20Table 20Percentage of Homeowners Age 65 Years andOver in Each Community Type Reporting HealthConditions .................................................... 21Table 21Top 10 Health-Related Home ModificationsMade in Mixed-Age Communities .................. 22Table 22Top 10 Health-Related Home ModificationsMade in Age-Restricted Communities ............ 22Table 23Top 10 Reasons for Choosing the Location of aSecond Home ................................................ 24Table 24Top 10 Primary Reasons That Older Adults Moveto Assisted Living Facilities ............................ 24Table 25Primary Services Attracting Occupants toAssisted Living Facilities ................................ 25Table 26Comparisons of Degree of Benefit andAvailability for Assisted Living Features andServices ........................................................ 26

Table 3AFeatures That Homeowners Age 45 Years andOver Selected as Very or Extremely Important inChoosing Their Current Community ............... A-3Table 3BFeatures That Homeowners Age 65 Years andOver Selected as Very or Extremely Important inChoosing Their Current Community ............... A-4Table 3CChanges in the Degree of Perceived Benefit ofCommunity Amenities as Homeowners inMixed-Age Communities Age ........................ A-5

The 2002 National Older Adult Housing Survey(NOAHS) examines the choices that older adulthomeowners make with respect to communityamenities, home features, and living arrangements.It may be used as a reference for builders,remodelers, developers, manufacturers, marketingprofessionals, and members of the aging professionwho are interested in providing more focused andtargeted products and services to older adultconsumers.

The NAHB Research Center received over 2,300mailed surveys from respondents who representedone of five housing options:

• Homeowners in mixed-age residentialcommunities;

• Homeowners in age-restricted or active adultcommunities;

• Residents of assisted living facilities;

• Adults with parents in assisted living facilities;and

• Parents who live in the homes of their adultchildren.

EXECUTIVE

This report analyzes responses of those living inmixed-age residential and age-restricted or activeadult communities, and adult children withparents in assisted living facilities.

NOAHS queried respondents on their preferencefor community type. Generally, homeowners inmixed-age and age-restricted communities aresatisfied with the community in which they live,choosing to age in place. The largest percentage ofhomeowners with no preference of communitytype came from mixed-age communities. The mainfactors influencing preferences include marital,employment, and health/mobility status. However,as homeowners age and the main factors change,housing preferences also change. Specifically, thedata imply that people move to age-restrictedcommunities when they reach retirement age.

SummarySummary

A comparison of available housing features showsthat age-restricted communities have far moreamenities and features than mixed-agecommunities. This may occur because homes inage-restricted communities are intentionallydesigned to address the housing wants and needsof older adults. As they age, however, homeownersin mixed-age communities are adding many of thefeatures that are built into age-restricted homes.

Community amenities are more prevalent in age-restricted communities than in mixed-agecommunities, and tend to be recreational innature, such as planned social activities and artsand crafts. Other amenities, such as communityand home safety features, are also more prevalentin age-restricted communities.

The degree of benefit assigned to specific mixed-age community amenities shows changes inimportance across age groups. For example,fishing, planned social activities, and planned tripsincrease in importance from the youngest (45 to54) to the oldest (75 and over) age groups. Havingindoor pools, access to fitness centers, and walkingtrails decreases in importance across age groups.

Respondents were also asked what features initiallyattracted them to their current living situation.Features contributing to comfort and convenience,such as bedrooms on the first floor and single-story living, top the list in both community types.Homeowners in age-restricted communities foundrecreational and social amenities to be initiallyattractive, whereas their counterparts in mixed-agecommunities were partial to features that help toaccommodate their busy schedules, regardless oftheir age.

NOAHS asked respondents to list the features thatthey have added to their homes. Perhaps nothingbetter indicates what homeowners really want thanwhat they are willing to pay for by adding to theirhomes. Homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities are more likely to add features thatrelate to decreased mobility, such as grab bars inshowers. Homeowners in mixed-age communitieshave added features that relate to energy efficiencyand occupant comfort, such as ceiling fans, andenergy-efficient appliances and windows.

When asked which features they thought wouldkeep them comfortable, safe, and independent intheir homes, respondents in both communitytypes unanimously cited first floor bedrooms,central heating and air conditioning, andminimal/low-step entries. The other features listedrelated to comfort and convenience.

Homeowners in age-restricted communities aremore likely to add health-related features thantheir mixed-age counterparts, which is consistentwith data that show that homeowners in mixed-agecommunities experience fewer age-related healthproblems than homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities. The home modifications cited mostoften in age-restricted communities, particularlyfor those age 65 and over, address reducedmobility and focus on enhanced accessibilityand convenience.

The most common health-related homemodifications in mixed-age communities,regardless of homeowner’s age, is the installationof a new heating and air conditioning system. Theother common improvements for this categoryaddress reduced mobility and increasedoccupant comfort.

NOAHS data on adult children with parents inassisted living found that approximately 39 percentof children prefer this housing option for theirparents. Twenty-six percent had no preference ofcommunity type, which indicates that assistedliving facilities are doing a good job of providingfor the needs of their residents. Moreover, medicalreasons and the inability to perform activities ofdaily living are the primary reasons given formoving to assisted living.

Without question, the NOAHS findings suggestthat there are opportunities in the building andremodeling industries to meet the special needs ofolder adults living in both mixed-age and age-restricted communities.

v

NOAHS found that preferences for community type werelargely determined by where respondents lived and theirage groups.

1 Appendix 2 details of the survey’s design and implementation.

Introduction

In 2002, the National Center for Seniors’Housing Research (NCSHR), in collaborationwith the Joint Center for Housing Studies ofHarvard University, implemented the firstNational Older Adult Housing Survey (NOAHS)1

to gain insight into the housing needs andpreferences of older adult homeowners,defined as those age 45 and older. The studyexamines the choices that older adulthouseholds make with respect to communityamenities, home features, and livingarrangements. Its intended audience includesbuilders, developers, remodelers, productmanufacturers, marketing professionals, andmembers of the aging profession.

The survey considered the four followinghousing options: mixed-age communities, age-restricted communities, assisted livingfacilities, and parents living in the homes oftheir adult children. Information on thoseresiding in assisted living communities wascollected from the adult children of parentsin assisted living centers.

NOAHS defines mixed-age communitiesas traditional neighborhoods with norestrictions on occupants’ age and no specialservices offered that cater to a specific agegroup or people with a specific health status.Age-restricted communities are defined asdevelopments that require residents to meetminimum age requirements (either age 55

and over or age 62 and over). Assisted livingfacilities are defined as those offering in-house services for people with physical and/or mental impairments who need assistancewith one or more activities of daily living.

NOAHS found that the preferences forcommunity type varied substantially and werelargely determined by where respondentscurrently live and by their age group. Mostpreferred mixed-age communities, but olderrespondents showed a greater preference forassisted living facilities than did youngerrespondents. Marital, employment, andhealth/mobility status also played a role inrespondents’ choices.

1

Summary of FindingsSummary of Findings

While NOAHS used a nationally-representative sample, the results areconsistent with other weighted surveys. Of theapproximately 2,300 responses to NOAHS, 82percent represented mixed-age communities,8 percent represented mixed-agecommunities, and 7 percent representedassisted living communities. The sample sizeof parents living with their children wassignificantly less than that of other samples,therefore it was decided to omit an analysis ofresponses from this group. Appendix 1provides more information on how theNOAHS findings compare with those ofother studies.

Details on the National OlderAdult Housing Survey

NAHB Research Center staff led thedevelopment of the NOAHS questionnaire,with important input from its external reviewcommittee. Five populations were selected tostudy the four housing options noted above.The populations were as follows:

• Homeowners in mixed-age residentialcommunities

• Homeowners in age-restricted or activeadult communities

• Residents of assisted living facilities

• Adults with parents in assisted livingfacilities

• Parents who live in the homes of theiradult children

For a detailed description of the surveymethodology, see Appendix 2.

Older Adults’ HousingPreferences

NOAHS questioned older adults about thetype of housing community in which theywould prefer to live. Preference forcommunity type varied substantially.Generally, NOAHS respondents weresatisfied with the type of community in whichthey already reside, but a substantial share ofhomeowners in mixed-age communitiesindicated no preference.

Approximately 70 percent of therespondents residing in age-restrictedcommunities reported a preference for livingthere, while only 12 percent of the samegroup preferred mixed-age communities. Incontrast, only 43 percent of respondents frommixed-age communities preferred living there,and 11 percent preferred age-restrictedcommunities. Remarkably, among thoseliving in mixed-age communities,approximately 44 percent noted nopreference for community type as comparedwith the 13 percent of homeowners in age-restricted communities who reported nopreferred housing community choice. Thedata point to a significant opportunity forshaping opinions and preferences for varioushousing choices among older adults,especially among homeowners in mixed-agecommunities.

One key major finding is that the agedistribution of homeowners age 45 and oldervaries substantially between community types.NOAHS data show that homeowners in age-restricted communities tended to representolder age groups, while homeowners inmixed-age communities primarily consisted ofthose in the youngest age groups. The results

2

The data point toa significantopportunity forshaping opinionsand preferences forvarious housingchoices among olderadults, especiallyamong homeownersin mixed-agecommunties.

are not surprising in that age-restrictedcommunities require residents to be age 55and over, or, in some cases, at least 62 years ofage. Specifically, approximately 74 percent ofhomeowners in age-restricted communities inthe sample are of typical retirement age, 65and older, while about 35 percent ofhomeowners in mixed-age communities are of

the same age group, as shown in Figures 1and 2.

NOAHS data show that as homeownersin mixed-age communities age, theirpreference for housing options changes. Thepreference for living in a mixed-agecommunity steadily declined from 46 percentamong those age 45 to 54 years, to 38 percentamong those age 75 years and over. Only 2percent of mixed-age respondents age 45 to54 preferred to reside in assisted livingcommunities, while about 10 percent of thoseage 75 and older preferred to dwell in assistedliving communities.

The data also imply that people move toage-restricted communities when they reachretirement age, as indicated by the waningdesire of homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities to locate close to work. The dataalso indicate that residents of age-restrictedcommunities are remaining in their homesthroughout retirement.

4

People tend to move to age-restricted communitieswhen they reach retirement age and remain in thosehomes throughout retirement.

Figure 1 Figure 2

DISTRIBUTION OF NOAHS RESPONSESAGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITY HOMEOWNERS

DISTRIBUTION OF NOAHS RESPONSESMIXED-AGE COMMUNITY HOMEOWNERS

To minimize the effect of age differencesin comparisons between homeowners inmixed-age and age-restricted communities,this report restricts cross-community analysisto occupants who are age 65 and over, unlessotherwise indicated.

Differences in CommunityAmenities and Housing FeaturesThat Older Adults Currently Have

The survey instrument asked older adults aseries of questions about their homes’features and amenities. An examination ofthe frequency with which features andamenities are found in respondents’ homesprovides insight into how mixed-age housingdiffers from age-restricted housing, as well ashow the presence of certain home andcommunity features and amenities vary withage. It is important, however, to keep in mindthat, for the most part, age-restricteddevelopments have been built in the last 25years. In contrast, the average age of housingin 81 percent of mixed-age communities is 16years or more. NOAHS data shown in Table 1illustrate this fact.

Community Amenities

Some amenities, particularly those related torecreation, are clearly more prevalent in age-restricted communities than in mixed-agecommunities. For example, communitycenters or clubhouses, planned socialactivities, organized trips, arts and craftsactivities, indoor and outdoor recreationaland fitness facilities, and externalmaintenance are available to about 70 percentof residents in age-restricted communities.Moreover, age-restricted communities arenearly three times more likely than mixed-agecommunities to offer planned social activities;more than four times more likely to offerorganized trips; more than twice as likely tohave fitness centers; and about six times morelikely to feature arts and crafts activities.

Age-restricted communities are also bettersited, on average, with respect to communityservices, such as public transportation,shopping, restaurants, the workplace, and off-site medical services. As compared withmixed-age communities, age-restrictedcommunities were more likely to be locatedwithin 10 miles of all the community servicesmentioned in the survey except universitiesand places of worship.

Security arrangements are far morecommon in age-restricted communities andhomes than in mixed-age communities andresidences. Age-restricted communities weremore likely to have all of the listed securityfeatures on the NOAHS questionnaire.

Specifically, respondents from age-restricted communities were 13 times morelikely to have guarded gates, and about six

5

AVERAGE AGE OF HOUSING BY COMMUNITY TYPE

Table 1

Age of House Mixed-Age Age-Community RestrictedResidents Community

Residents0 to 3 years 3% 16%4 to 10 years 10% 14%11 to 15 years 6% 14%16 to 24 years 13% 25%25 or more years 68% 32%

times more likely to have on-site medicalservices. Table 2 further illustrates thedifferences.

Housing Features

In general, age-restricted communities had farmore community amenities and homefeatures than mixed-age communities,although mixed-age residents have beenadding many of these features to their homesas they age. One possible explanation for thedifference in amenities and features is thatage-restricted communities are relatively new.Further, age-restricted communities andhomes are typically designed with amenitiesand features that are intended to address thewants and needs of older adults as they age,whereas housing in mixed-age communitiesis not.

Builders and developers of both mixed-age and age-restricted communities could,however, more effectively meet the wants and

needs of older adults by adding low-costfeatures to their homes (see Table 3),including non-slip treads on stairs and non-slip floors, levered door handles, and rocker-type light switches.

Wheelchair accommodations and otherfeatures that increase bathroom safety are alsorelatively rare, even in age-restrictedcommunities. Wide hallways and doors arefeatured in about 66 percent of age-restrictedhomes, while bathrooms with large turningradii for wheelchairs are found in about 20percent of age-restricted residences. Seats inshowers are found in only 25 percent of age-restricted homes, wheelchair accessibleshowers in 10 percent of age-restricted homes,and grab bars in the shower in 50 percent ofage-restricted homes. Shares of these featuresare much lower in homes in mixed-agecommunities.

Homes in age-restricted communities aremore likely to come equipped with featuresthat enhance safety and comfort, yet

6

PERCENT OF RESPONDENTS FROM EACH COMMUNITY TYPE WITHCOMMUNITY SAFETY AND SECURITY AMENITIES PRESENT

Table 2

Mixed-Age Age-Community RestrictedResidents Community

ResidentsAutomated Gates 3 27Guarded Gates 2 26Home Security Systems 32 34Neighborhood Watch 48 56One Entrance/Exit 19 61On-Site Medical Services 4 26Security Patrol 17 52Sidewalks 57 67Street Lights 80 91Vehicle ID/Permits 10 45

PERCENTAGE OF HOMES IN MIXED-AGE AND AGE-RESTRICTEDCOMMUNITIES WITH SPECIFIC HOUSING FEATURES

Table 3

Mixed-Age Age-Community RestrictedHomes Community

ResidentsAdequate Storage 58 69Covered Porches 45 64Crank-Operated Windows 16 21Levered Door Handles 9 34Non-Slip Flooring 11 27Non-Slip Treads on Stairs 8 21No-Step/Low-Step 54 79Front EntrancesRocker Light Switches 10 27

homeowners in mixed-age communities aremore likely to add such features after initialmove-in. This holds true for all home featuresmentioned in the questionnaire except grabbars, wheelchair accessibility, toilets withhigher seats, raised dishwashers, and showerswith seats—features typically added whenoccupants develop moderate to severemobility problems.

First floor bedrooms are a popular featurefor older adults, regardless of communitytype. However, homes in age-restrictedcommunities are more likely than those inmixed-age communities to offer this feature.Specifically, 92 percent of homeowners in age-restricted communities have bedrooms on thefirst floor, as compared with 77 percent inmixed-age communities.

Though energy efficiency is important tothe majority of NOAHS respondents, thosewho live in age-restricted communities aremore likely to have energy-efficient housingfeatures than their counterparts in mixed-agecommunities. Much of the difference,however, is probably attributable to the fact

that a large share of the homes in age-restricted communities are relatively new.Seventy-three percent of homeowners in age-restricted communities reported havingenergy-efficient heating and cooling systems,compared with 57 percent of those in mixed-age communities. Programmable thermostatswere found in 60 percent of homes in age-restricted communities, compared with 45percent in mixed-age communities.

Attractive Features andAmenities By Community Type

Communities and residences are typicallydesigned with specific features and amenitiesthat will attract targeted buyers, includingolder adults. To understand more fully howwell builders and developers have anticipatedolder adults’ demands and to assist theindustry in better addressing the seniormarket’s needs, NOAHS asked older adultswhether certain amenities initially attractedthem to their homes. Typically, forhomeowners in each community type,features that contribute to comfort andconvenience top the list of amenities thatdrew them to their homes.

Highly-Attractive Home Features inBoth Community Types

Single-story living is in strong demand,especially among those living in age-restrictedcommunities. Ninety-three percent ofresidents in age-restricted communities live inone-story units, and two-thirds of theserespondents were initially attracted to theirhome because it offered single-level living.Bedrooms located on the first floor of multi-level homes are also attractive to residents of

7

Age-restricted communities are typically designed withamenities and features that are intended to addresswants and needs of older adults as they age.

both mixed-age and age-restrictedcommunities. This feature attracted 50percent of the 77 percent who reside inmixed-age communities, and 54 percent ofthe 92 percent who reside in age-restrictedcommunities.

Central heating and air conditioning arealso important features in attracting residentsto homes in both community types. Of the 53percent of mixed-age community dwellerswhose homes had central heating and airconditioning at the time of move-in, 77percent were initially attracted to their homebecause of it. Of the 84 percent ofhomeowners in age-restricted communitieswhose homes had central heating and airconditioning at the time of move-in, 84percent were initially attracted to their homebecause of it.

Low-maintenance exteriors also figuredprominently in the selection of bothcommunities. This feature is important tohomeowners in mixed-age communities,attracting 82 percent of the 34 percent whoseunits had such finishes at the time of move-in. For respondents from age-restrictedcommunities, 77 percent of the 69 percentwhose units had low-maintenance exteriorssaid it was a contributing factor to theirselections.

Many older adults reported that theyneed room to store all of the things that theyhave accumulated over the years. Accordingly,adequate storage space attracted 72 percent ofthe 58 percent of mixed-age communityresidents whose residences had adequatestorage space at the time of move-in, and 69

percent of the 42 percent of age-restrictedcommunity residents who likewise hadadequate storage at the time of move-in.

Attractive Mixed-Age CommunityAmenities and Features

Generally, respondents who live in mixed-agecommunities found features that related toconvenience most attractive. They seemed towant to locate in areas that accommodatebusy schedules, as some are still employed andhave children living with them. Accordingly,homeowners in mixed-age communities gavehigh rankings to proximity to shopping, work,restaurants, family, and elementary and highschools. There were slight differences in theranking of attractive amenities, but onlywalking trails and “other” moved between agegroups. These results are shown in Table 4.

8

TOP 10 AMENITIES THAT ATTRACTED HOMEOWNERSIN MIXED-AGE COMMUNITIES

TO THEIR CURRENT RESIDENCE

Table 4

Age 45 Age 65and Over and Over

Proximity to Shopping 48% 48%Proximity to Work 37% 23%Proximity to Restaurants 37% 37%Proximity to Family 34% 35%Proximity to Elementary/High School 32% 23%Access to PublicTransportation 29% 30%Proximity to Place ofWorship 28% 31%Proximity to Off-SiteMedical Services 26% 29%Other 25% Not in Top 10Landscaping 18% 18%Walking Trails Not in Top 10 16%

Attractive Age-Restricted CommunityAmenities and Features

In contrast to their counterparts in mixed-agecommunities, respondents in age-restrictedcommunities found the recreationalamenities and social activities to be the mostattractive of all amenities. At over 70 percent,more homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities rate “age-restricted status” as theone feature more than any other that initiallyattracted them to the community. Many alsoassigned a high ranking to the presence of acommunity center/clubhouse, proximity toshopping, planned social activities, anoutdoor pool, and proximity to restaurants.Moreover, little change in the ranking listoccurred between age groups, despite slightdifferences in rank order, as shown inTable 5.

Understanding that many amenities aremore likely to be included in an age-restrictedcommunity than in a mixed-age community,survey analysts isolated 13 proximity-relatedfeatures that are common to both communitytypes. Their relative ranking shows thatproximity to family ranks much lower forhomeowners in age-restricted communities,perhaps indicating weaker family ties or thelack of children or grandchildren. Thegroup’s high ranking of social features, i.e.,clubhouse and planned activities, alsosupports the likelihood of weaker family ties.With weaker or non-existent family networks,homeowners may seek out social contact tosatisfy their need for friendship.

Another important difference betweenthe two community types is the relativesignificance associated with age-restrictedhomeowners’ personal health. Specifically, as

9

TOP 10 AMENITIES THAT ATTRACTED HOMEOWNERS IN AGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITIES

TO THEIR CURRENT RESIDENCE

Table 5

Age 45 Age 65and Over and Over

Age-Restriction/RetirementStatus 72% 77%Community Center/Clubhouse 57% 63%Proximity to Shopping 56% 58%Planned Social Activities 55% 59%Outdoor Pool 50% 52%Proximity to Restaurants 46% 45%Proximity to Off-SiteMedical Services 42% 45%Landscaping 41% 42%Indoor/Outdoor RecreationCenter 41% 45%Planned Trips 39% 44%

First floor bedrooms are a popular feature for olderadults, regardless of community type. Single-story livingis also in strong demand, especially among those in age-restricted communities.

shown in Table 6, this group rankedproximity to off-site medical services andfitness centers substantially higher than theirmixed-age community counterparts.

Features and Amenities ThatOlder Adults Have Added toTheir Homes and Those ThatThey Say They Will Add

In most, but not all cases, the inclusion offeatures and amenities reflects the attempts ofbuilders and developers to anticipate demandand market their homes and communitiesmost effectively. In some cases, homeownershave added features that were not included inthe home when they initially purchased it.

The NOAHS questionnaire asked olderadults about the features or amenities thatwere present in the home at the time ofpurchase, and about those that they haveadded since the time of move-in. Analyzingthe features and upgrades that homeownershave added in disproportionate numbersreveals some missed opportunities for homebuilders, and may signal opportunities forrepair and remodeling professionals who canoffer the most popular upgrades toolder adults.

As noted earlier, homeowners in age-restricted communities tended to purchasehomes with features that would add to theircomfort and safety, and homeowners inmixed-age communities were, in general,more likely to add the features after move-in.Table 8 shows there is very little changebetween age groups for homeowners in age-restricted communities, except that theyounger group was more likely to have addedraised toilets, while the older group was morelikely to have added a side-opening oven.

10

Mixed-Age Age-Community RestrictedResidents CommunityRanking Residents

RankingProximity to Shopping 1 1Proximity toRestaurants 2 2Proximity to Off-SiteMedical Services 3 6Proximity to Place ofWorship 4 4Access to PublicTransportation 5 5Proximity to Fitness Center 6 12Proximity to Family 7 3Fishing 8 9Proximity to Work 9 7Proximity to University/College 10 10Proximity to Elementary/High School 11 8Transportation toElementary/High School 12 11Transportation toUniversity/College 13 13

RANKINGS OF THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF PROXIMITY-RELATEDAMENITIES BY COMMUNITY TYPE

Table 6

The age-restricted group ranked proximity to fitnesscenters and off-site medical services substantiallyhigher than their mixed-age community counterparts.

For 32 of the 42 listed improvements,homeowners in mixed-age communities weremore likely to have added features to theirhomes, as compared with homeowners in age-restricted communities. Homeowners in age-restricted communities made some of thesame types of additions, though at lowerrates, and were more likely to makeimprovements designed to accomodatemobility problems. For example, one in tenadded grab bars in showers. (See Table 8.)

Among the top features added to homesin mixed-age communities are those thatrelate to energy efficiency and occupantcomfort, regardless of age group. Table 7shows the only difference between ages isthat, among older groups, grab bars in theshower move onto the list, as whole-housesecurity systems move off the list. Littlechange is seen even after removing theyoungest 65 percent of the sample to obtainthe data for those age 65 and over.

11

Age 45 Percent Age 65 Percentand Over That Added and Over That AddedCeiling Fans 38 Ceiling Fans 40Energy-Efficient Appliances 38 Energy-Efficient Appliances 39Fluorescent Bulbs 30 Automatic Garage Door Opener 29Insulated, Energy-Efficient Windows 29 Insulated, Energy-Efficient Windows 29Programmable Thermostat 24 Fluorescent Bulbs 28Automatic Garage Door Opener 23 Energy-Efficient HVAC 25Low Maintenance Exterior Finishes 18 Programmable Thermostat 23Home Office 17 Low Maintenance Exterior Finishes 21Central HVAC 15 Central HVAC 17Whole-House Security System 14 Grab Bars in Shower 16

TOP 10 ADDITIONS TO HOMES IN MIXED-AGE COMMUNITIES

Table 7

Age 45 Percent Age 65 Percentand Over That Added and Over That AddedCeiling Fans 37 Ceiling Fans 33Energy-Efficient Appliances 17 Fluorescent Bulbs 19Fluorescent Bulbs 17 Programmable Thermostat 17Programmable Thermostat 14 Covered Porch 16Covered Porch 14 Energy-Efficient Appliances 12Seat in Shower 11 Adequate Storage 12Adequate Storage 11 Grab Bars in Shower 12Insulated, Energy-Efficient Windows 10 Side-Opening Oven 11Grab Bars in Shower 10 Seat in Shower 11Raised Toilet 9 Insulated, Energy-Efficient Windows 10

TOP 10 ADDITIONS TO HOMES IN AGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITIES

Table 8

Features that FacilitateAging in Place

The NOAHS questionnaire askedhomeowners in mixed-age and age-restrictedcommunities to list those home features thatfacilitate aging in place. Such features wouldhelp them to live more comfortably, safely,and independently in their homes.Respondents seemed almost unanimously toagree about the importance of many of thesefeatures, especially in age-restrictedcommunities. For example, over 90 percent ofrespondents in each community type reportedthat first floor bedrooms, central heating andair conditioning, and minimal/low-stepentrances would help them to live morecomfortably, safely, and independently. Thereare some slight differences betweencommunity types, nonetheless, most of thelisted features relate to occupant convenienceand comfort. All findings shown in Table 9pertain to respondents age 65 and over.

Why Older Adults Select aSpecific Community Type

The NOAHS questionnaire askedrespondents to rank the factors thatinfluenced their decision to move and toselect one community type over another.When asked why they chose an age-restricted

12

TOP 10 FEATURES THAT HELP OLDER ADULTS AGE 65 AND OVER LIVE COMFORTABLY, SAFELY, AND INDEPENDENTLY IN THEIR HOMES

Mixed-Age Age-RestrictedCommunities Percent Communities PercentFirst Floor Bedroom 94 First Floor Bedroom 99Central HVAC 92 Central Heating and Air Conditioning 95Low-Maintenance Exterior Finishes 92 Minimal/Low-Step Entrances 94Adequate Storage 91 Low-Maintenance Exterior Finishes 93Minimal/Low-Step Entrances 88 Automatic Garage Door Opener 91Attached Garage 88 Covered Porch 91Automatic Garage Door Opener 88 Energy-Efficient Heating and Air Conditioning 91Insulated, Energy-Efficient Windows 87 Energy-Efficient Appliances 88Energy-Efficient Appliances 86 Ceiling Fans 87Ceiling Fans 86 Separate Shower from Bathtub 87

Table 9

Respondents in both community types reported that firstfloor bedrooms, central heating and air conditioning, andminimal/low-step entrances would help them live morecomfortably, safely, and independently.

community, homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities responded that the primarybenefits related to improved lifestyle,including quieter neighborhoods and reducedmaintenance, as shown in Table 10.Interestingly, though, they ranked twoobvious features of age-restrictedcommunities—no children living in thecommunity and increased interaction withpeers—toward the middle or lower end ofthe list.

Homeowners in age-restricted and mixed-age communities share some interest in thefeatures that drew them to theirneighborhoods while, in other cases, theyplace substantially different importance onsuch features. These similarities anddifferences have major implications formarketing and strategic planning efforts.

Across community types and age groups,safety ranks as the most important factor inchoosing a community—lower crime rankedfirst for both mixed-age and age-restricted

communities, as shown in Table 11. Formixed-age homeowners, housingcharacteristics that are related to finances andconvenience, such as lower cost of living,living in a home that is less expensive thantheir previous home, and proximity to workand shopping, are important considerations.The implication is that the youngerhomeowners in mixed-age communities areemployed, and want to locate in areas that areconvenient to places and activities in theirdaily lives. For the older mixed-agehomeowners, amenities that relate to financesand health are more important.

Regardless of age, homeowners in age-restricted communities attached consistently-high rankings to amenities that are associatedwith an easier, more relaxed lifestyle, such aslower cost of living, weather/climate, andcommunity amenities. Other importantamenities for age-restricted communityresidents were maintenance costs included infees, and reduced home maintenance. Unliketheir mixed-age counterparts, they did notassign a high ranking to amenities that makelife more convenient as they age. Table 12shows these results.

Efforts to develop both mixed-age andage-restricted communities should emphasizesafety. Builders and developers of mixed-agecommunities who wish to attract older adultbuyers should locate housing communitiesclose to economic centers, shopping, andhealth services. For age-restricted communitydevelopments, however, builders anddevelopers should place an emphasis onreducing home maintenance, creatingpleasant surroundings, and marketingcommunity amenities.

13

TOP 10 REASONS FOR CHOOSING TO LIVE IN ANAGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITY

Table 10

Age-RestrictedCommunityResidents

Easier Living 68%Quieter Neighborhoods 61%Maintenance Costs Included in Fees 60%Nicely Landscaped 57%Offers Arrange Social Activities 50%Wanted to Feel Safer 45%No Children in the Community 42%Offers Attractive Community Amenities 42%Wanted Increased Interaction with Peers 36%No School-Related Noise and Traffic 33%

2 Importance here is defined by responding to “Very Important” or “Extremely Important” in the survey.

Changes in Homeowners’Preferences as They Age

The factors that affect homeowners’ decisionsto move to specific housing communitieschange as they age. Given that the sample ofrespondents in mixed-age communities waslarger and exhibited greater diversity amongage groups than that of age-restrictedcommunities, this section is limited to adiscussion of homeowners residing in mixed-age communities.

Table 11

TOP 10 FEATURES THAT HOMEOWNERS AGE 45 YEARS AND OVER SELECTED AS IMPORTANTIN CHOOSING THEIR CURRENT COMMUNITY

Mixed-Age Ranking Age-Restricted Ranking1 Lower Crime 1 Lower crime2 Lower Cost of Living 2 Reduced Home Maintenance3 Proximity to Work 3 Weather/Climate4 Proximity to Shopping 4 Lower Cost of Living5 Proximity to Hospitals/Health Services 5 Less Expensive than Previous Home6 Less Expensive than Previous Home 6 Community Amenities7 Reduced Home Maintenance 7 Maintenance Costs Included in Fees8 Needed Larger Home 8 Home Safety Features9 Weather/Climate 9 Community Safety Features

10 Home Safety Features 10 Proximity to Hospitals/Health Services

TOP 10 FEATURES THAT HOMEOWNERS AGE 65 YEARS AND OVER SELECTED AS IMPORTANTIN CHOOSING THEIR CURRENT COMMUNITY

Mixed-Age Ranking Age-Restricted Ranking1 Lower Crime 1 Lower crime2 Lower Cost of Living 2 Reduced Home Maintenance3 Proximity to Hospitals/Health Services 3 Weather/Climate4 Weather/Climate 4 Lower Cost of Living5 Less Expensive than Previous Home 5 Maintenance Costs Included in Fees6 Proximity to Shopping 6 Community Amenities7 Reduced Home Maintenance 7 Home Safety Features8 Proximity to Children 8 Less Expensive than Previous Home9 Proximity to Grandchildren 9 Proximity to Hospitals/Health Services

10 Home Safety Features 10 Community Safety Features

Table 12

NOAHS respondents rated theimportance of 21 factors in their decision tolocate to their current homes as either notimportant, somewhat important, veryimportant, or extremely important. Several ofthese factors do not appear to change inimportance2 as homeowners age. Theyinclude: proximity to friends and otherfamily, lower crime, home and communitysafety features, and community amenities.

14

In general, the factors that showed thestrongest increase in importance over time tohomeowners in mixed-age communities wererelated to the cost and amount of effortrequired to maintain the home, and toconvenience. Specifically, the two factorsshowing the strongest increase in importanceas occupants age are the need for a smallerhome, which increased 27 percentage pointsfrom the youngest age group (age 45 to 54years) to the oldest age group (age 75 yearsand over), and maintenance costs included inhomeowners’ association fees, whichincreased by 23 percentage points from theyoungest to oldest age groups. Table 13

presents the other factors that increased inimportance with age.

Several factors seem to decrease inimportance as these homeowners age,suggesting that the oldest older adultssurveyed may no longer be employed, mayhave fewer people living in the household,may have less interest in and/or ability tofurther their educations, or may not haveschool-aged children living at home. The dataillustrated in Table 14 also imply that theseadults may be reluctant to assume additionalfinancial and maintenance responsibilities.

15

TOP FACTORS INCREASING IN IMPORTANCE AS HOMEOWNERS IN MIXED-AGE COMMUNITIES AGE

Table 13

Age 45 to 54 Age 75 Percentage Point ChangeYears Years from Youngest to Oldest(Percent) and Over Age Groups

Need for Smaller Home 11 38 +27Maintenance Costs Included in Fees 13 36 +23Proximity to Children 22 42 +20Proximity to Hospitals/Health Services 34 53 +19Proximity to Granchildren 17 35 +17Weather/Climate 30 47 +17Reduced Home Maintenance 31 48 +17Access to Public Transportation 25 39 +14

TOP FACTORS DECREASING IN IMPORTANCE AS HOMEOWNERS IN MIXED-AGE COMMUNITIES AGE

Table 14

Age 45 to 54 Age 75 Percentage Point ChangeYears Years from Youngest to Oldest(Percent) and Over Age Groups

Proximity to Work 49 24 -25Need for a Larger Home 41 24 -17Proximity to College/University 11 5 -7Desire to Start Over 24 19 -5

The two factors showing the strongest increase inimportance as occupants age are the need for a smallerhome, and maintenance costs included in homeowners’association fees.

Community Amenities Rankedas Beneficial by Homeowners

It is unclear whether the same features thatattracted people to their current residenceswere still considered beneficial afterhomeowners had lived with them for sometime. Accordingly, the survey askedrespondents whether they consideredcommunity amenities beneficial—whetherthey had them or not. The findings revealdifferences by age as well as bycommunity type.

Mixed-Age Community Amenities

Homeowners in mixed-age communitiesranked as highly-beneficial those amenitiesthat increased convenience. In fact, as shownin Table 15, the top five amenities wererelated directly to convenience.

Unlike the age-restricted dwellers,however, homeowners in mixed-agecommunities ranked proximity andtransportation to colleges or universitiessubstantially higher.

Mixed-age community dwellers rankedproximity to family as third most beneficial,even as age-restricted homeowners ranked thesame factor as 13th most beneficial. Onepossible reason homeowners select mixed-agecommunities may be their desire to increasesocial contact to replace what is commonlyfound in family relationships.

Age-Restricted Community Amenities

At the top of homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities list of beneficial communityfeatures was retirement or age-restrictedstatus. Over 60 percent of respondents fromboth age groups rated the restriction ashighly-beneficial. Proximity to medicalservices and shopping ranked second andthird for both groups. It is important to notethat these homeowners attached significantlylower importance to these amenities wheninitially considering the move to theircurrent location.

It is also noteworthy that the communityamenities ranked least beneficial all related toeducation—proximity and transportation tocolleges, universities, high schools, and gradeschools. The result is not surprising in view ofthe age requirements for residents of age-restricted communities. Also comprising mostof the bottom third of the rankings areamenities that are sports-related or thatrequire more strenuous physical activity. Theonly slight difference in response between age

16

groups in this category is that respondents inthe older age group seemed more interestedin less strenuous activities, such as bocce balland shuffleboard. It seems reasonable, then,that marketing efforts for age-restrictedcommunities should emphasize the morepopular amenities associated withconvenience, reduced maintenanceresponsibilities, and increased social activities,all of which earned the vast majority of higherrankings. Tables 17 and 18 show the most andleast beneficial amenities noted by residentsin age-restricted communities.

17

TOP 10 LEAST HIGHLY-BENEFICIALMIXED-AGE COMMUNITY AMENITIES

Table 16

Age 45 Years Age 65 Yearsand Over and Over(percent) (percent)

Bicycle Trails 13 9Fishing 11 10Planned Social Activities 11 Not in Top TenArts and Crafts Activities 10 10Planned Trips 9 10Transportation toCollege/University 9 6Golf Course 8 7Age Restriction orRetirement Status 6 8Shuffle Board 1 1Bocce Courts 0.8 0.4Tennis Courts Not in Top Ten 4

TOP 10 MOST HIGHLY-BENEFICIALAGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITY AMENITIES

Table 17


Age-Restriction/Retirement Status 62 66Proximity to Off-SiteMedical Services 60 66Proximity to Shopping 59 61Community Center/Clubhouse 55 61Outdoor Pool 54 60Planned Social Activities 48 53Indoor/OutdoorRecreation Center 46 50On-Site EmergencyMedical Services 44 46Landscaping 41 Not in Top TenPlanned Trips Not in Top Ten 42Proximity to Placeof Worship 39 42

TOP 10 MOST HIGHLY-BENEFICIALMIXED-AGE COMMUNITY AMENITIES

Table 15


Proximity to Shopping 51 48Proximity to Off-SiteMedical Services 45 46Proximity to Family 45 47Access toPublic Transportation 44 46Proximity to Restaurants 35 35Planned Social Activities 48 53Indoor Pool 32 Not in Top TenProximity to Placeof Worship 32 37Proximity toElementary/High School 25 23On-Site EmergencyMedical Services 24 26Walking Trails 23 Not in Top TenLandscaping Not in Top Ten 21Community Center/Clubhouse Not in Top Ten 20

Comparison of BeneficialAmenities Among Various AgeGroups in Mixed-AgeCommunities

Homeowners in mixed-age communitiesranked the top five amenities’ degree ofbenefit consistently across age groups. Forexample, proximity to shopping finishedhighest for all age groups. Additionally,respondents in each of the age groups forthese communities ranked access to publictransportation and proximity to off-sitemedical services and restaurants in their topfour community amenities. Interestingly,proximity to family finished fifth for theyoungest of the three age groups, but droppedout of the top five amenities for the oldest agegroup. Those age 75 years and older rankedproximity to place of worship as the fifth mostbeneficial community amenity.

Differences among age groups emerge,however, when other community features’degree of benefit is tracked. In all answercategories except fishing and arts and crafts,the percentage of homeowners respondingthat any feature is beneficial declined asrespondents aged; thus, on average,homeowners perceived fewer features as lessbeneficial over time.

Accordingly, to understand the relativeimportance of amenities by age, it is advisableto look at the individual amenity rankings—from first to 28th—by age group rather than interms of percentage of respondents. Table 3Cin Appendix 3 summarizes the necessarycomparison.

As homeowners in mixed-agecommunities age, several noticeable changesbecome evident. In general, access to morestrenuous physical activities—biking trails,walking trails, fitness centers, and indoorpools—declined in relative degree of benefit.Further, all community amenities relating toproximity or transportation to schools anduniversities decreased in degree of benefit. Infact, all categories that exhibited a significantdecline in ranking were related to physicalactivity or schools and universities.

Numerous community features increasedin degree of benefit as mixed-age communityhomeowners aged. With two exceptions, allamenities that showed a significant increasein rank were related to the availability ofsocial and otherwise less-strenuous forms ofentertainment or physical activity—fishing,arts and crafts activities, planned socialactivities, organized trips, community center/clubhouse, and golf. One understandableexception is proximity to on-site medicalservices, which denoted an increased reliance

18

TOP 10 LEAST HIGHLY-BENEFICIALAGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITY AMENITIES


Golf Course 24 26Shuffleboard 18 2Tennis Courts 15 17Bike Trails 12 12Bocce Courts 11 13Fishing 9 5Transportation toCollege/University 5 3Proximity toCollege/University 5 4Proximity toElementary/High School 4 3Transportation toElementary/High School 3 1

Table 18

As homeownersin mixed-agecommunities age,access to morestrenuousphysical activitiesdeclined inrelative degreeof benefit.

on regular medical care or a growing concernfor rapid access to medical services in caseof emergency.

Approximately half of the listedcommunity amenities showed little change indegree of benefit as occupants aged. Table 19shows most of the features with little or nochange related to convenience, but somerecreational activities also showedlittle change.

Health-Related DifferencesBetween Homeowners inMixed-Age and Age-RestrictedCommunities

NOAHS results provide insight into thehealth-related differences between olderadults who live in mixed-aged and age-restricted communities. The information isderived from survey questions that addressedwhether respondents suffered from varioushealth problems—allergies, diminished

eyesight, hearing and mobility impairments,arthritis, other, or none of the above.

The analysis shows that homeowners age65 years and over in mixed-age communitiestend to experience fewer health problemsthan their counterparts in age-restrictedcommunities. Specifically, approximately 20percent of the mixed-age community groupreported no major health problems, ascompared with 14 percent of homeowners inage-restricted communities. When askedabout diminished mobility, 22 percent ofolder adults living in mixed-age communitiesreported diminished mobility, as comparedwith 30 percent of age-restricted communityresidents. Further, 12 percent of homeownersin mixed-age communities reported needingassistance with activities of daily living, suchas bathing, dressing, or meal preparation, ascompared with 18 percent of homeowners inage-restricted communities. These differencesare shown in Table 20.

20

CHANGES IN THE COMMUNITY AMENITIES’ DEGREE OF BENEFITAS MIXED-AGE COMMUNITY HOMEOWNERS AGE

Table 19

Increases in Importance Decreases in Importance Little or No ChangeFishing Biking Trails Proximity to FamilyArts and Crafts Activities Walking Trails Landscaping Included in FeesPlanned Social Activities Access to Fitness Centers Indoor/Outdoor Recreation CenterPlanned Trips Indoor Pools Outdoor PoolCommunity Center/Clubhouse Proximity to Elementary Proximity to Shopping

or High SchoolGolf Transportation to Elementary Access to Public Transportation

or High SchoolTennis Closeness to University or College Proximity to RestaurantsProximity to On-Site Transportation to University Proximity to Off-SiteMedical Services or College Medical Services

Bocce CourtsShuffle BoardProximity to Places of Worship

Health-Related HomeModifications

According to the U.S. Department ofHousing and Urban Development’sAmerican Housing Survey, about half of allAmerican homeowners undertake some typeof home repair or improvement annually, butonly a small percentage of them makemodifications for health-related reasons.Health-related reasons for the purposes ofNOAHS analysis include features associatedwith comfort and convenience, such ascentral air conditioning. NOAHS data revealthat 68 percent of homeowners living inmixed-age communities and 52 percent ofhomeowners in age-restricted communitieshave not made any of the health-related homemodifications listed in the surveyquestionnaire since moving into their homes.

Health-Related Home Modifications inMixed-Age Communities

The most common health-related homemodification in mixed-age communities,regardless of homeowners’ age, was theinstallation of a new heating and airconditioning system, signaling comfort as theprimary motivator. This statistic agrees withthe NAHB Research Center’s AnnualConsumer Practices Survey from 1999 and2000, which found that replacement ofheating and air conditioning was the mostcommon health-related home improvementor repair.

The next most common health-relatedhome improvements in mixed-agecommunities, regardless of homeowners’ age,addressed reduced mobility. Other popularmodifications, such as the addition of grabbars in the shower and the installation of

PERCENTAGE OF HOMEOWNERS AGE 65 YEARS AND OVER INEACH COMMUNITY TYPE REPORTING HEALTH CONDITIONS

Table 20

Mixed-Age Age-Community Restricted

CommunityNo Major Health Problems 20 14Diminished Mobility 22 30Assistance with Activitiesof Daily Living 12 18

adjustable, hand-held showerheads, increasedsafety. Table 21 lists the top ten health-relatedmodifications made in mixed-agecommunities.

Health-Related Home Modifications inAge-Restricted Communities

In general, homeowners in age-restrictedcommunities are more likely to add health-related features than their mixed-agecommunity counterparts, though thepercentage of health-related homemodifications is still relatively low. It isnotable that homeowners in age-restrictedand mixed-age communities made verysimilar modifications.

Regardless of age, homeowners in age-restricted communities were more likely tohave completed home upgrades that addressreduced mobility. For example, hand-heldshowerheads and grab bars in the showerwere first and second on homeowners’ lists.Especially among those age 65 years andolder, the majority of added featuresenhanced accessibility and convenience, suchas easy-to-reach shelving, audible or visualstrobe light alarm systems, and moreaccessible storage. Table 22 lists the top tenhealth-related modifications made in age-restricted communities.

21

Attitudes and PracticesRegarding Second Homes

Approximately 8 percent of the homeownersin mixed-age communities own secondhomes. The top ten reasons for choosing thelocation of those homes are listed in Table 23.

Climate and vacation amenities were themost important factors in the decision ofwhere to purchase a second home.Surprisingly, lower property taxes played arole in about 18 percent of the decisions topurchase a second home. Other factors

22

TOP 10 HEALTH-RELATED HOME MODIFICATIONS MADE IN MIXED-AGE COMMUNITIES

Table 21

Age 45 Years Age 65 Yearsand Over Percent and Over PercentNone of the Above 68 None of the Above 61Replaced Heating and Replaced Heating andAir Conditioning System 10 Air Conditioning System 13Replaced Appliances 9 Added Grab Bars in the Shower 12Installed Adjustable, Hand-Held Installed Adjustable, Hand-HeldShowerhead 8 Showerhead 11Added Grab Bars in the Shower 8 Eliminated Throw Rugs 9Made Storage Areas More Accessible 6 Replaced Appliances 9

Installed Audible or VisualEliminated Throw Rugs 5 Strobe Light Alarm System 8Installed Audible or VisualStrobe Light Alarm System 4 Made Storage Areas More Accessible 7Built Easy-to-Reach Shelving 4 Installed Higher Toilet 7Installed Higher Toilet 4 Built Easy-to-Reach Shelving 6

TOP 10 HEALTH-RELATED HOME MODIFICATIONS MADE IN AGE-RESTRICTED COMMUNITIES

Table 22

Age 45 Years Age 65 Yearsand Over Percent and Over PercentNone of the Above 53 None of the Above 53Installed Adjustable, Hand-HeldShowerhead 15 Added Grab Bars in the Shower 17

Installed Adjustable, Hand-HeldAdded Grab Bars in the Shower 15 Showerhead 13Eliminated Throw Rugs 12 Built Easy-to-Reach Shelving 11Replaced Appliances 9 Replaced Appliances 11Made Storage Areas More Accessible 9 Added Grab Bars around Toilet 10Built Easy-to-Reach Shelving 8 Eliminated Throw Rugs 10Replaced Heating and Installed Audible or VisualAir Conditioning System 8 Strobe Light Alarm System 10Installed Audible or VisualStrobe Light Alarm System 8 Made Storage Areas More Accessible 9Added Grab Bars Around Toilet 8 Installed Higher Toilet 8

Regardless of age,homeowners inage-restrictedcommunities weremore likely tohave completedhome upgradesthat addressmobility.

related to proximity to shopping, children,amenities, and entertainment.

Preferences and Profiles ofAssisted Living Residents

To obtain a more complete picture of seniors’housing, NOAHS asked children with parentsin assisted living facilities about theirexperiences with such housing. This approachwas used because the physical and mentallimitations that some assisted livingoccupants experience may lead to sample bias.

As might be expected, the survey resultsreveal that those who move to assisted living,on average, are among the oldest adults.Additionally, they have lived in the assistedliving facility for a shorter period of time thanolder adults who live in other communitytypes. Over 50 percent of older adultsresiding in assisted living facilities have livedthere for fewer than three years, 32 percenthave lived there for between four to 10 years,and 11 percent have lived there 11 yearsor more.

Why Older Adults Move toAssisted Living Facilities

The primary reasons for older adults to moveto assisted living facilities are medicalproblems and/or the inability to performactivities of daily living. For a substantialshare of older adults, however, the death of aspouse or a family’s prompting are theprecipitating factors for the move. Table 24displays the most common reasons that mostrespondents identified for moving to anassisted living facility.

TOP 10 REASONS FOR CHOOSING THE LOCATIONOF A SECOND HOME

Table 23

PercentVacation Home/Proximity to Attraction 44Other Reason Not Stated 39Climate 31Lower Property Taxes 18Proximity to Shopping 15Proximity to Your Children 12Proximity to Amenities 11Proximity to Entertainment 10Maintenance Costs Included in Fees 10Proximity to Healthcare Services 8

TOP 10 PRIMARY REASONS THAT OLDER ADULTS MOVE TOASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES

Table 24

PercentMedical Reasons 77Difficulty Getting Around Home/Apartment 56Difficulty with Cooking and Cleaning 52Difficulty with Driving 39Family Prompted 32Death of Spouse 27Lacked Transportation to Shopping 16Children Live Far Away 14Other 13To be Closer to Family and Friends 12

Services That Attracted AdultChildren Looking for AssistedLiving for Their Parents

When asked what services most attractedthem to the assisted living centers where theirparents currently reside, and what factorsentered into their decisions to relocate theirparents to the specific center, respondentswere most likely to point to services associatedwith activities of daily living. (See Table 25.)

24

Those who move to assisted living are among theoldest of older adults. The primary reason for movingto an assisted living facility is the inability to performactivities of daily living.

It is notable that planned social activities,though ranking only fifth in importance,earned such ranking among 43 percent ofrespondents. The lower ranking indicates thatalthough improving residents’ social outlookis probably a secondary motivator in arelocation to an assisted living facility, it isstill important in contributing to the overallwell-being of the older adults residing there.

Benefits and Availability ofFeatures in Assisted LivingCenters

The NOAHS questionnaire asked adultchildren with parents in assisted livingfacilities to select the features and servicesthat are available in their parents’ facilities,and to rate each feature’s degree of benefit.The data reveal that some features werepresent in greater proportions than they areconsidered beneficial, and that some featuresconsidered beneficial were entirely lacking.

Table 26 lists various features and servicesoffered by assisted living facilities, thepercentage of respondents who reported thatthe features were available in their parents’facilities, and the percentage of respondentswho found the features beneficial for theirparents. A positive difference indicates thatthe feature was beneficial to more peoplethan had it available, perhaps presenting anopportunity for developers and owners ofassisted living facilities to improve the value oftheir services to residents. A negativedifference indicates where a feature orservice’s availability is greater than its need.

In general, many features that areconsidered beneficial were not available.Some relatively inexpensive improvementsthat may increase the value of assisted livingfacilities as a housing option for adultchildren and their parents (as prospectiveresidents) are stairs with non-slip treads, grab

25

PRIMARY SERVICES ATTRACTING OCCUPANTS TOASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES

Table 25

PercentDaily Meal Preparation 76Personal Assistance (Bathing, Dressing,Medication, Etc.) 65Housekeeping 64On-Site Health Services 50Planned Activities (Social, Exercise,Trips, Etc.) 43Laundry Service 42Transportation Services 32Maintenance (Leaf & Snow Removal,Landscaping, Etc.) 29

bars, and chair rails. Another feature, on-sitehealth services, could not be added without asignificant investment, although an incomepotential exists when such services are added.

COMPARISONS OF DEGREE OF BENEFIT AND AVAILABILITY FOR ASSISTED LIVING FEATURES AND SERVICES

Table 26

Highly or Somewhat Available Percentage PointBeneficial in Facility Difference(percent) (percent)

Stairs with Non-Slip Treads 87 35 51Elevator 97 56 51Wide Stairways 80 42 38Chair Rail 90 64 26On-Site Health Services 95 73 22Grab Bars 94 74 20Conveniently Located Activities 93 75 18Laundry Services 95 80 15Transportation Services 90 80 10Maintenance 85 77 8Housekeeping 99 92 7Daily Meal Preparation 98 91 7Personal Assistance 89 84 5Wide Doorways for Wheelchairs 90 89 1Planned Activities 86 85 1Wide Hallways for Wheelchairs 88 90 -2

Assisted living centers seem to have addressedthe needs of their residents for plannedactivities and wide doorways for wheelchairs.

26

Builders, developers, remodelers, and marketing professionals can use this report to betterunderstand the housing wants and needs of older adults. In the United States, the older adultpopulation continues to grow in proportion to the total U.S. population with the aging of thebaby boomer generation. Moreover, this age group has diverse housing wants and needs. Thissection of the report provides recommendations for the building industry on how to best serveolder adults.

For Builders and Developers:• Build new homes with features that facilitate aging in place, such as minimal/low-step

entrances, non-slip flooring, rocker light switches, levered door handles, crank-operatedwindows, non-slip treads on stairs, first floor bedrooms, wide doorways, and reinforcementsfor grab bars in bathroom walls.

• Offer single-story living or first floor bedrooms, which are in strong demand by older adults.• Consider the following features that respondents in mixed-age and age-restricted

communities reported were initially attractive to them when they purchased their currentresidence: central heating and air conditioning, low maintenance exteriors, and adequatestorage space.

• Incorporate recreational and social amenities in age-restricted developments for older adults.• Locate mixed-age housing developments in proximity to convenience factors, such as

shopping, restaurants, economic centers, and elementary and high schools. Locate age-restricted housing developments close to shopping and health services. Locate vacationhome developments for older adults near attractions.

• Offer features that promote energy efficiency and address reduced mobility for older adulthomeowners. The following features were commonly added by homeowners to homes inage-restricted communities: ceiling fans, fluorescent bulbs, programmable thermostats,energy-efficient appliances and windows, low-maintenance exterior finishes, automaticgarage door openers, grab bars in the shower, side-opening ovens, and seats in the shower.

• Emphasize community and home security features for older adults. Homeowners in mixed-age and age-restricted communities ranked lower crime of primary importance for choosingtheir current home.

• Include maintenance and landscaping services in homeowner association fees. Older adultstypically want to reduce the amount of maintenance on their homes, and may have adifficult time locating reliable services.

• Consider incorporating the most highly-beneficial amenities as ranked by homeowners inmixed-age and age-restricted communities. In mixed-age communities, these amenitiesinclude: access to public transportation and proximity to convenience factors, such asshopping and restaurants. Highly-ranked amenities in age-restricted communities are: age-restriction or retirement status, community center/clubhouse, and an outdoor pool.

• Ensure that all features that contribute to the accessibility of assisted living communities arepresent throughout the entire facility. This includes grab bars, wide doorways, non-sliptreads and surfaces, and wide hallways and stairways.

27

ConclusionsConclusions

For Remodelers:• Expect the market for home improvements relating to aging in place to increase. These

improvements accommodate reductions in mobility, aid the ease of upkeep, and increaseoccupant comfort. As homeowners in mixed-age and age-restricted communities continue tolive in their homes throughout retirement, they will need to make these changes.

• Offer appropriate and low-cost additions for older adults, including non-slip flooring, rockerlight switches, levered door handles, crank-operated windows, and non-slip treads on stairs.

• Offer conversions of first floor bedrooms to clients who want to age in place. Alsorecommend the addition of central heating and air conditioning, more storage areas, andother features that will increase safety and independence.

• Offer home improvements that promote energy efficiency and address reduced mobility inboth community types. Homeowners in age-restricted communities commonly addedfeatures such as ceiling fans, programmable thermostats, energy-efficient appliances andwindows, grab bars in the shower, side-opening ovens, and seats in the shower.

• Plan to add home upgrades that address reduced mobility in both community types, such ashand-held showerheads, grab bars in the shower, easy-to-reach shelving, audible or visualstrobe light alarm systems, and more accessible storage, to your list of services.

• Research and offer the most cost-effective improvements that increase occupant comfort.The most popular health-related home modification in mixed-age communities is theinstallation of a new heating and air conditioning system.

For Marketing Professionals:• Focus marketing efforts on shaping the opinions and preferences of older adults in mixed-

age communities. Over 40 percent of homeowners in this type of community currently haveno preference for the type of community in which they live.

• Highlight the presence of single-story living or bedrooms on the first floor, central heatingand air conditioning, low-maintenance exteriors, and adequate storage space.

• Emphasize the recreational and social amenities, lower maintenance, and age-restrictedstatus of age-restricted communities in marketing materials.

• Publicize a development’s location as it relates to shopping, restaurants, and medicalfacilities.

• Advertise both the community and home security features. These are the most importantfactors in choosing a community among homeowners in mixed-age and age-restrictedcommunity types.

• List popular amenities, when applicable, such as lower cost of living, and weather/climate.Other important amenities for homeowners in age-restricted communities are maintenanceand landscaping costs included in homeowner association dues, community centers, andoutdoor pools.

• Market the most attractive services of assisted living centers to prospective residents and toadult children of prospective residents. The data show that these are: daily mealpreparation; personal assistance with bathing, dressing, and medications; housekeeping; andon-site health services.

28

“American Housing Survey for the United States. 2001” U.S. Department of Housing andUrban Development. October 2002.

“Annual Consumer Practices Reports.” NAHB Research Center. 1999 and 2000.

“A Profile of Older Americans: 2001.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,Administration on Aging, 2001.

“A Quiet Crisis in America.” Report to Congress by the Commission on Affordable Housingand Health Facility Needs for Seniors in the 21st Century, June 30, 2002.

“Fixing to Stay: A National Survey of Housing and Home Modifications Issues.” AARP. May2000.

Schafer, Robert. “America’s Elderly Population and Their Needs for Supportive Services.” JointCenter for Housing Studies, Harvard University, W99-3, January 1999.

Schafer, Robert. “Determinants of the Living Arrangements of the Elderly.” Joint Center forHousing Studies, Harvard University, W99-6, June 1999.

Schafer, Robert. “Housing America’s Elderly Population.” Joint Center for Housing Studies,Harvard University, W99-4, January 1999.

29

SourcesSources

Appendix 1: A Comparison of Other Surveys with NOAHS FindingsAn analysis of the AHEAD (Assets and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest-Old) survey by

the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University found that income plays much lessof a role than might be expected in making housing choices. The analysis found that the mostaged (those over age 85 years) favor assisted living, especially when no children live within tenmiles of the elderly resident. The analysis also found that healthy households located in theSouth Atlantic, Mountain, and Pacific regions of the country, tend to choose age-restrictedcommunities, while those who live with or near their children mostly choose mixed-agecommunities.

A report by the Seniors’ Housing Commission found that in 1999, more than four-fifths ofthe 26 million households with a head age 65 years or older (82 percent) were living inconventional housing, often sharing the unit with cohabitants under age 65 years. Finally, thesurvey estimates that 2.7 million (10 percent) of elderly households are in what is defined as“supportive seniors’ housing units,” 6 percent in skilled nursing care, and only 2 percent inassisted living.

In a series of studies conducted since 1986, AARP found that the number of householderswho wish to age in place is steadily growing. The 2000 survey, Fixing to Stay, found that amonghouseholds with the head age 45 years and over, 72 percent “strongly agree” that they wouldlike to stay in their current home for as long as possible, and 63 percent believe that they willalways live in their current home. Respondents also indicated that they would be willing to makemodifications to or receive assistance in their current home to stay there. These shares havebeen rising as AARP repeats its survey over time.

A-1

AppendicesAppendices

Appendix 2: MethodologyThe study examines the choices that older adult households make with respect to

community amenities, home features, and living arrangements. It is targeted to builders,remodelers, product manufacturers, marketing professionals, and members of the agingindustry, so that they may better understand the housing wants and needs of this demographic.

NAHB Research Center staff led the development of the survey questionnaire, withimportant input from an external review committee. The study singled-out five populations thatlived in one of four housing options:

• Assisted living facilities• Age-restricted or active adult communities• Mixed-age residential communities• Adult children with parents in assisted living facilities• Parents who live in the homes of their adult children

One of the study’s main goals was to compare the amenities and features in each of the fourhousing options. The mixed-age residential community is, by a large measure, the most commonhousing option for older adults. As a result, a single mailing would likely produce more than asufficient number of responses for “mixed-age residential,” but an inadequate number for theother options. Therefore, the Research Center decided to mail a prequalification survey to alarge sample and a follow-up survey with the detailed survey to a smaller sample.

Given the depth of the information required of respondents, the Research Centerdetermined a mail survey to be an appropriate vehicle for fielding the detailed questionnaire. Itcontracted the mailing and data entry services to a national market research firm that maintainsa consumer panel that has agreed to participate regularly in its surveys. The use of a prescreenedmail panel ensured a high response rate.

Using the market research firm’s omnibus mailing, the prequalification card was sent to50,000 U.S. householders to obtain information on their age, community type, and other vitalinformation. The sample for the omnibus mailing was drawn from the market research firm’spanel of survey participants, and is nationally representative based on U.S. Census populationcharacteristics. The response rate for the prequalification mailing was 67 percent, with 33,578returns.

The goal of the prequalification mailing was to identify about 1,600 households from themixed-age communities and about 500 households from each of the other four housing optionswhose occupants were over 45 years of age. The sample was drawn randomly from the pool ofrespondents based on their meeting certain qualifying conditions. From these returns, a sampleof approximately 3,500 was drawn for the detailed questionnaire. The response rate for thedetailed survey was about 77 percent, with about 2,300 responses.

A-2

FEATURES THAT HOMEOWNERS AGE 45 YEARS AND OVER SELECTED AS VERY OR EXTREMELY IMPORTANTIN CHOOSING THEIR CURRENT COMMUNITY

Table 3A

Mixed-Age Age-Restricted Difference inCommunity Community Ranking

Lower Crime 1 1 0Lower Cost of Living 2 4 2Proximity to Work 3 21 18Proximity to Shopping 4 13 9Proximity to Hospitals/Health Services 5 10 5Less Expensive than Previous Home 6 5 1Reduced Home Maintenance 7 2 5Need Larger Home 8 23 15Weather/Climate 9 3 6Home Safety Features 10 8 2Proximity to Other Family Members 11 20 9Natural Beauty 12 12 0Proximity to Children 13 15 2Community Safety Features 14 9 5Proximity to Friends 15 16 1Access to Public Transportation 16 14 2Proximity to Grandchildren 17 17 0Wanted to Start Over 18 18 0Proximity to Entertainment 19 19 0Community Amenities 20 6 14Needed Smaller Home 21 11 10Maintenance Costs Included in Fees 22 7 15Proximity to College/Universities 23 22 1

A-3

Appendix 3: Supplemental Data

FEATURES THAT HOMEOWNERS AGE 65 YEARS AND OVER SELECTED AS VERY OR EXTREMELY IMPORTANTIN CHOOSING THEIR CURRENT COMMUNITY

Table 3B

Mixed-Age Age-Restricted Difference inCommunity Community Ranking

Lower Crime 1 1 0Lower Cost of Living 2 4 2Closer to Hospitals/Health Services 3 9 6Weather/Climate 4 3 -1Less Expensive than Previous Home 5 8 3Closer to Shopping 6 13 7Less Home Maintenance 7 2 -5Closer to Children 8 16 8Closer to Grandchildren 9 19 10Home Safety Features 10 7 -3Access to Public Transportation 11 14 3Closer to Other Family 12 20 8Community Safety Features 13 10 -3Closer to Friends 14 15 1Needed a Smaller Home 15 11 -4Closer to Work 16 21 5Natural Beauty 17 12 -5Needed a Larger Home 18 23 5Maintenance Costs Included in Fees 19 5 -14Community Amenities 20 6 -14Closer to Entertainment 21 17 -4Wanted to Start Over 22 18 -4Closer to College/University 23 22 -1

A-4

Appendix 3: Supplemental Data (continued)

45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 Over 75 Difference3

Closeness to Shopping 1 1 1 1 0Access to Public Transportation 2 3 3 2 0Closeness to Restaurants 3 4 4 3 0Closeness to Off-Site Medical Services 4 2 2 4 0Closeness to Family 5 5 5 6 -1Closeness to Place of Worship 6 6 6 5 1Walking Trails 7 8 9 16 -9Landscaping Included in Fees 8 7 8 9 -1Indoor/Outdoor Recreation Center 9 9 11 10 -1Closeness to Fitness Center 10 11 12 14 -4Closeness to Elementary or High School 11 15 17 20 -9Bike Trails 12 13 20 25 -13On-Site Emergency Medical Services 13 10 7 7 6Community Center/Clubhouse 14 12 10 8 6Closeness to University/College 15 20 18 19 -4Outdoor Pool 16 14 13 17 -1Indoor Pool 17 19 16 21 -4Transportation to Elementary/High Schools 18 22 22 24 -6Planned Social Activities 19 16 14 12 7Transportation to University/College 20 25 25 28 -8Arts and Crafts Activities 21 21 19 13 8Planned Trips 22 17 15 15 7Fishing 23 18 21 11 12Golf Course 24 23 23 18 6Tennis Courts 25 26 26 22 3Age Restriction or Retirement Status 26 24 24 23 3Shuffle Board 27 27 27 26 1Bocce Courts 28 28 28 27 1

3 Difference in ranking is: ranking at age 75 years and older minus ranking at age 45 to 54 years. Positivedifferences denote general increase in importance as occupants get older, while a negative differencesdenote decreasing importance with age.

CHANGES IN THE DEGREE OF PERCEIVED BENEFIT OF COMMUNITY AMENITIESAS HOMEOWNERS IN MIXED-AGE COMMUNITIES AGE

Table 3C

A-5

Appendix 4: NOAHS Questionnaire

A-6

A-7

A-8

A-9

A-10

A-11

A-12

A-13

A-14

A-15

A-16

A-17

About the National Center for Seniors’ Housing Research:The National Center for Seniors’ Housing Research (NCSHR) is a cooperative effort between the NAHB Research Center andthe U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration on Aging. The NCSHR’s goal is to offer the home buildingindustry the most current information on older adult housing issues and options so that all Americans can live comfortably,safely, and independently in their homes as they age.

For inquiries on the National Older Adult Housing Survey (NOAHS) database, contact [email protected].

About the NAHB Research Center:The NAHB Research Center, located in Upper Marlboro, Md., is known as America’s Housing Technology and InformationResource. In its nearly 40 years of service to the home building industry, the Research Center has provided product research andbuilding process improvements that have been widely adopted by home builders in the United States. Through testing andcertification services, the Research Center seal is recognized throughout the world as a mark of product quality and an assuranceof product performance.

NOTE ON STYLE USAGE: In order to identify this company and its work correctly, first reference should be “NAHB ResearchCenter.” In subsequent mentions, “Research Center” is the only acceptable and accurate alternative reference.

About the Joint Center for Housing Studies:The Joint Center for Housing Studies is Harvard University’s center for information and research on housing in the UnitedStates. The Joint Center analyzes the dynamic relationships between housing markets and economic, demographic, and socialtrends, providing leaders in government, business, and the non-profit sector with the knowledge needed to develop effectivepolicies and strategies.

NoticeNo part of this publication may be reproduced or used in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical,including photocopying or scanning, or by any information storage and retrival system without written permissionfrom the NAHB Research Center and the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University.

NAHB Research Center400 Prince George’s BoulevardUpper Marlboro, MD 20774-8731(800) 638-8556www.nahbrc.org

Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University1033 Massachusetts Avenue, Fifth FloorCambridge, MA 02143(617) 495-7908www.jchs.harvard.edu

NATIONAL OLDER ADULTHOUSING SURVEY

2002

NAHB RESEARCH CENTERin collaboration with

The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University

400 Prince George’s BoulevardUpper Marlboro, Maryland 20774

Telephone: (800) 638-8556Fax: (301)430-6180

www.nahbrc.org

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Documents

National Older Adult Housing Survey 2002 - Survey of Findings/media/Files/... · • Residents of assisted living facilities; • Adults with parents in assisted living facilities;