✨ Governance of CCRC/LifePlan Community

There are two bills HB476 and SB358 before the Virginia Legislature supported by VaCCRA although this posting is from me. These two bills include modest increases in meeting requirements and the Senate bill also includes a form of Resident on Board. These bills provide an excellent opportunity for you as CCRC residents to let your Delegates and Senators know if your Board and management are communicating critical information to residents and consulting with residents on critical issues. No need to identify your particular CCRC if you prefer not to. Leading Age and perhaps a couple CEOs will be testifying that things are perfect and that there's no need for the Legislature to interfere with their management style and disclosure policies which are perfect and will be getting even better.

The overview page for the Legislature is https://lis.virginia.gov/. See HB476 introduced by Delegate Vivian Watts (D) at https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB476 and SB 358 introduced by Senator Ryan McDougle (R) https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/SB358

In addition to contacting your legislator by phone or email you can submit written comments on the bills and when the bills are heard by subcommittee you can testify in person or remotely for one minute.

To comment on HB476 go to 

https://hodspeak.house.virginia.gov/committees/H14/bill_feedback

Scroll down to HB476 remembering that these are in numerical order except that bills that begin with a 1, 2, or 3 appear ahead of 476 i.e. HB1000s appears ahead of HB476 

Put a check on 476 and scroll to bottom and hit next and it will take you to where you leave your comments.

You can also click on "view comments" and you will see my screed which last time I looked was the only comment.

Herschel

Herschel Kanter

hekanter@yahoo.com

My comments on HB476 mailed today to residents and management of Ashby Ponds

— an Erickson Senior Living Community.

Erickson manages about 20 communities across a about a dozen states.

https://socratespatron.substack.com/p/changes-to-code-of-virginia-related

The State of Kansas has moved their 70 CCRC communities under the Kansas State Department of Aging and Disability (KDADS). Previously all to these 70 CCRCs had been under the Kansas Department of Insurance. In my opinion this is a move in the right direction as it moves the CCRC under a department with experience in, and an understanding of, the needs of vulnerable populations.

At the same time, the Independent Living (IL) part of the industry is now nudged toward some State oversight. Prior to this move, independent living residents were managed like renters and tenants with few rights. Kansas did not go so far as to say that independent living has the same level of oversight as the medically regulated parts of the industry. The language being used indicated that independent living (IL) is now "bundled" in with the regulated areas. Continuing care means a continuum of care that includes independent living. All this is in development at this time and should be beneficial to independent living CCRC retirees insuring their rights and access to services.

Maura Conry

NaCCRA

Forum Facilitator

The number of CCRCs in Kansas is in flux as facilities formerly registered as CCRCs upgrade or re-define their services to be in compliance with House Bill 2784. The Bill officially transfered CCRCs from oversight by to Kansas Insurance Department to the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS).

Correcting a previous post, the current number is between 20 to 25 and this number is expected to change as changes become implemented.

Maura Conry

NaCCRA

Forum Moderator

Quoting from an email by Penny Jez:

"VaCCRA's legislative proposal (HB 476 Continuing Care provbiders; quarterly meeting requirements

https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB476 passed the Virginia General Assembly this spring:

"Amends the quarterly meeting requirements for continuing care facilities to provide that at least two of such meetings per year shall be open to all residents and that certain individuals shall participate in at least two of such meetings per year. The bill also requires, if requested by the resident council or a majority of the independent living residents of a continuing care facility, the provider to include as a participant in the meetings of its board of directors or other governing body a resident representative elected by a majority of such residents, who shall participate in a non-voting, advisory capacity

"... [I]t passed unanimously in the Senate committee; it passed in the House with only 10 no votes.

"VaCCRA has been advocating for greater transparency in communication between management and promoting residents as voting members on CCRC boards of directors for over a decade."

Richmond Shreve

NaCCRA Board Member & VP

Forum Moderator

Just a theoretical question: Now that Virginia law specifies board meetings with residents (stakeholders), what recourse do residents have if the board announces that they will do the very minimum and not consider resident preferences. And if that announcement is bolstered by referring to having consulted with their attorney?

Residents of CCRC/Life Plan communities are in a similar position to employees of government or a business. Even when they have a union employees have no power unless they have a right to strike or a right to mediation, fact finding and arbitration. But residents, like employees, do have the power of public speech. If they go off the property of their community they can speak individually or in large groups to the press, including TV. Some are afraid to do that, because they don't want to reduce the waiting list to fill open slots. But before doing that they can make it clear that some residents will do that if the residents on the Board aren't taken seriously. Even nonprofits worry about the flow of money. Management companies and developers risk not listening to residents.

Charles Nadler

Wind Crest CCRC (Erickson Senior Living)

Highlands Ranch, Colorado

This is also true of for-profit CCRCs where, rather than a board, there may be a Resident Council. Like the NFP board it has no power other than persuasion unless residents are willing to engage in mediation/arbitration - a lengthy and costly alternative.

What has been the experience of others in using social media, especially rating services like Yelp as a lever to get ownership/management to listen? While actually posting a negative review has potential adverse impact on new entrants, the threat of such a posting could be an attention getter.

David Lemire

Vi at Grayhawk (LCS)

Scottsdale, AZ

David, it may be tempting to use social media to express such concern, but it strikes me as a poor choice to resolve community issues. In fact it conjures up the image of perceived “influencer “ who posts a negative yelp review for a restaurant because the service was slow. I think our communities have to find other ways to express dissatisfaction with management. The Residents Council is a beginning.

Peter Rotch

RiverMead, Nee Hampshire

While I agree with you about the negative of 'going public', perhaps in your experience the residents Council may have more legitimate power than in many CCRCs.

Leslie Durr

Westminster Canterbury of the Blue Ridge

Charlottesville, Virginia

Let's not fall into thinking that the corporation and its management are somehow separate from the community. Residents and the corporation are interdependent, and one can't thrive without the other. When you have a complaint, it's best to work at expressing it responsibly. Consider this this Blog post: (click)

Richmond Shreve

NaCCRA Board Member & VP

Forum Moderator

Richmond -

The blog post says, "Note that this is not necessarily the same as offering a suggested solution. It’s about sharing a goal for the solution."

However, there needs to be a bullet item added for offering a suggested solution as well. In corporate American I heard this adage more than once - to bring your boss solutions, not problems.

If you just bring problems then you are a complainer, not contributing as a problem solver.

Linda Kilcrease

Resident of a CCRC

The corporation and management are not separate from the community unless the corporation and management focuses on profit only. When demand is high management and the corporation can focus on profit only. When the community "representatives" on the resident advisory council are mostly from a corporate middle management world they tend to take a profit centered view. For example, I am in an Erickson community and communicate with the other communities once a month. Even though the Board told our RAC to represent the residents, as a general rule they do not. For example, I learned that the only Erickson community to not have a shuttle that stops at every building is mine. While we are big and have many buildings so do others. I learned that the Executive Director, who works for the management company subcontracted by the Board, made that decision. So far reasonable solutions have not been listened to.

Charles Nadler

Wind Crest CCRC (Erickson Senior Living)

Highlands Ranch, Colorado

Unfortunately, the Virginia legislation speaks to CCRCs incorporated in Virginia. Thus, it is not applicable to those communities incorporated in another state such as those of Erickson Living.

Pat Lund

Foreign Corporations in Virginia are governed by Virginia Code Article 14.

Charles Nadler

Wind Crest CCRC (Erickson Senior Living)

Highlands Ranch, Colorado

Charles,

Does Article 14 require that foreign corporations comply with the same regulatory requirements as domestic corporations?

Richmond Shreve

NaCCRA Board Member & VP

Forum Moderator

Florida requires a resident's council, an elected representative of which must be invited to any board meeting at which the annual budget or any change in resident fees or services is to be addressed. We would love to have required board representation. This post, however, is primarily addressed to the question of public protest regarding management positions and policies.

A.V. Powell has an excellent YouTube video on Assessing CCRC Long-Term Financial Solvency. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdzcaXot4lE In it, he speaks to the value of actuarial analysis, but comments that it can't determine the critical component of occupancy.

In reviewing these matters, our finance committee concluded that entrance fees generally get used for construction, bond debt, and other capital expenditures. That leads to the following formulation:

1. Financial condition is determined by monthly fees.
2. Monthly fees are determined by occupancy.
3. Occupancy is determined by reputation.
4. Reputation is determined by the satisfaction of current residents.

Accordingly, reputation is where the interests of management and residents should meet. If it is not maintained, both groups will suffer the consequences. Adverse publicity is therefore something we are careful to avoid when seeking to influence management positions -- you can shoot yourself in the foot.

John Ross, Chair and Designated Resident Representative

Resident's Council, Finance Committee -- Vicar's Landing

Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida

Thank you to John, Leslie and Peter.

Your points about owners' and residents' common interest in occupancy are well taken. In fact, I would argue that having a common interest is strong motivation for ownership listening and responding to residents' concerns. Sooner of later newer, younger residents are going to express themselves on social media.