What residents want from retirement communities is changing, and leaders need to keep up.
Dr Roger Pallant of the NSW Retirement Village Residents Association recently spoke at the National Village Leadership Forum about how that relationship is changing, the realities of ageing in place and what leaders need to consider as communities evolve.
Those changes are happening alongside significant operating pressures. “The biggest challenge I’m hearing is the need to keep retirement living affordable, sustainable and relevant as our communities age,” Pallant says. Residents are facing rising costs while needing more care, while operators are dealing with regulation and the cost of developing new communities.
“The key message I wanted village leaders to take away was that the relationship between management and residents really matters,” he says. Resident committees and management will not always agree, he adds, but disagreement does not have to turn into conflict.
Working with resident committees
Pallant says resident committees should be seen as a resource, not an obstacle. Residents know their communities well and involving them early can help operators make better decisions.
Respectful relationships don’t happen by accident,” he says. “They require good communication, transparency, patience and a willingness on both sides to listen.
That doesn’t mean operators need to agree to every request. “Good leadership sometimes means saying no. But explaining why, communicating openly and treating people respectfully can make a big difference to how that decision is received.”
What residents expect from retirement communities
Residents entering retirement communities today are generally more informed, connected and willing to ask questions, Pallant says. They want greater transparency around fees, budgets and major projects, as well as more involvement in decisions that affect their lives.
“They don’t just want somewhere to live – they want to have a voice in their community and to understand how decisions are made.”
For operators, consultation can’t just be meeting a formal requirement. Residents ask these questions because the village is their home and, in many cases, their biggest financial asset.
Technology is changing how residents communicate too, but Pallant says digital communication shouldn’t mean digital only. Many residents still value face-to-face contact.
Planning for ageing in place
Pallant says retirement communities also need to think about what happens as residents’ support needs become more complex.
“Ageing in place is no longer an aspiration; it is becoming an expectation.”
Someone who is independent when they move into a village may later need personal care, nursing, allied health support, mobility assistance or help with everyday activities.
Retirement villages are not aged care facilities, and operators shouldn’t be expected to become aged care providers. But they do need to think about how communities can support residents as their needs change.
That could mean accessible housing, transport, emergency response, community connections and relationships with external care providers. It also means being clear about “where the operator’s responsibility ends and where government-funded or privately funded care begins”.
“The experience of Support at Home has reinforced the importance of ensuring residents can access appropriate services while continuing to live independently,” Pallant says.
The RVRA’s national Support at Home survey drew 2,451 responses and more than 8,800 written comments, raising concerns about costs, waiting times, service availability and understanding the system.
“The question for retirement community leaders is: are we planning for that journey from the beginning?”
Hearing from residents who aren’t speaking up
Operators can also end up hearing mostly from residents who are prepared to attend meetings, write letters or make complaints.
“There is another, much larger group who may not complain at all,” Pallant says. “They might become frustrated, disengaged or feel that speaking up won’t make a difference.”
Residents don’t necessarily expect to get their own way. They want to understand why decisions are made, know their views have been considered and be treated as people with experience rather than being seen as difficult for asking questions.
“Don’t just listen to the residents who are speaking. Find ways to hear from the residents who aren’t.”
Planning for the resident of tomorrow
Pallant’s advice to leaders is to plan for the resident they will have tomorrow, not just the resident they have today.
That means considering how expectations around choice, transparency and technology will change, alongside longer lives and more complex support needs.
But preparing for the future is not only about buildings or technology. “It is about relationships,” he says. Leaders need strong relationships with residents, resident committees, families and care providers before they are needed.
“If we listen to residents today, we have a much better chance of building the retirement communities they will want to live in tomorrow.”
