In comparing huge CCRCs with small memory care communities, projects with a couple of years’ worth of occupancy under their belts and those that are still in the rendering stages, the EFA Design Showcase jury is charged with a challenging task. One question grounds the process to avoid any apples-to-oranges traps, and that is: “In this particular project, how well does the design support the goals of the owner and enhance the quality of life for its residents?”

Collectively, the entries in the year’s competition seemed to do a good job of directly addressing this question, albeit with varying degrees of success. And in reviewing the projects that scored high enough to be considered award contenders, the jury found some promising common themes worth exploring—and pushing even further—for future projects of all shapes and sizes.

Interior motives

Interior design choices were a hot topic at this year’s in-person judging event, with lively debates and strong opinions about what’s appropriate, what’s not, and why, perhaps, “appropriateness” shouldn’t even be a question.


“The interiors were a bright spot in this year’s competition,” says CC Andrews, president and chief strategist of Quantum Age Collaborative (Cleveland). “The aesthetics were really solid overall and there was a great deal of deference to the specific demographic (lifestyle, region, etc.) that spaces were being designed to accommodate.” Many of her fellow jurors agreed. Adds Derek Perini, senior interior designer, Bernardon (Kennett Square, Pa.), “The years of Queen Anne-styled dining chairs with cabriole legs are gone. We’re seeing designs that are more universally accepted and are appealing not only to the seniors, but also to their children and grandchildren.”

Other jurors felt that while many of the interiors felt fresher and more appealing, there appeared to be some unfinished business. “Generally on the interiors, I thought many of them very nice, but they didn’t have the whole building on equal ground,” says John Stassi, director, asset solutions, for owner CommCare Corp. (Mandeville, La.). While some projects took pains to upgrade common areas, he says, “They left much to be desired in the resident rooms, or the furniture just didn’t fit the plan. There was always one section that was fantastic, but that did not pervade the building.”

For Rob Simonetti, senior associate, design director, SWBR Architects (Rochester, N.Y.), the strides made in independent and assisted living—“we saw many beautiful, refreshed interiors”—weren’t as evident within more healthcare-focused spaces. “What we saw less of were new or refreshed spaces that were striving to critically improve the environments for skilled and memory care elders,” he says.

Juror Lori Alford, chief operation officer of Avanti Senior Living (The Woodlands, Texas), is outspoken about risk-taking and questioning conventional wisdom when it comes to senior preferences, and that goes for interiors, as well. “In my experience, we have learned that just because they’re old doesn’t mean [residents] want to live in a community that looks like their age. The senior population wants to be hip and cool, not boring,” she says. “I think it’s easy to say what people don’t personally like. But at the end of the day, it’s about the end user (resident) and consumer (adult child; female)—not about what we think they want. They want and expect much more than we currently give.”

Design that works

Those increased expectations naturally apply to programming and choice as well, and in that respect, the Showcase jury was pleasantly surprised with projects that made thoughtful design decisions to support a broader range of choices in today’s communities.

Flexibility played a big role in these efforts. “I felt there was a real effort to try new floorplan configurations with the household concept,” says Jill Schroeder, senior planner and senior interior designer, Pope Architects (St. Paul, Minn.): “Things such as new placement of the bathrooms within an apartment; the inclusion of a refrigerator/freezer, microwave, and sink for a memory support apartment; an abbreviated kitchenette unit in apartments, which places more emphasis on the meal options for residents within the campus. I like to see well-considered risks. And to plan the community with the ability to quickly modify the concept if things don’t operate as well as expected is another positive I see.”

In common areas, flexibility also allows for a greater variety of amenities and activities—and some of the finalists, in particular, were applauded for taking creative design approaches here. One project’s curved façade, for example, allowed the community to strategically accommodate a range of rotating programs (art galleries, farmers’ markets, and the like) along its long central corridor in a pleasing and inviting way.

Gathering spaces, as well, were noted for some positive trends. “Designing a lounge or a dining room space so that it can be used for many purposes creates visual interest in those spaces, offers variety, and upgrades the space in general so that it’s a bit more unique and current with today’s on-the-go residents and families,” says Schroeder.

Open arms

Community involvement—both in the design of specific spaces and in terms of integrating senior housing within the greater community—is an important consideration in this competition. But the jury had mixed reviews.

“Most of this year’s design teams describe collaboration with property ownership and management, perhaps staff. ‘Community collaboration’ was relegated to zoning negotiations,” says Andrews. “While collaborating with residents, family, and the greater community is time-consuming and challenging to pull off, it is so worth it. That’s when true innovation can occur.”

Others, however, stressed that some progress has been made. “Last year the amount of collaboration was minimal,” Perini says, “but this year, communities are taking it to a higher level that’s more structured and involved.”

This year’s Award of Merit-winning project, St. John’s Brickstone, earned considerable praise from the jury for this very reason, with concerted effort all through its planning and development to both involve the community directly being served and welcome the rest of the neighborhood in.

And efforts by other project teams to engage residents, families, and the neighborhood across generations were similarly appreciated by the jury. BJ Miller, president, The Vision Group Studios (Asheville, N.C.), cited the “creeping in” of intergenerational components in a number of projects, such as the inclusion of retail offerings, cultural events, interconnected walking paths, and a “tot lot” to appeal to visiting grandkids. Teresa Whittington, vice president of clinical and continuum operations for owner C.C. Young (Dallas), found great promise in the “attempts to make environments for seniors that are truly intergenerational or part of the whole community and not just inside ‘four walls’—[senior living] is not an island!”

Room for improvement

Only one design element was near-universally lamented by the jury members who assembled in person in January for the final stage of award judging. That element: Long corridors. “The industry has yet to strike a balance on the perfect corridor,” says Miller, while Stassi takes a harder stance: “If there’s one thing I’d like to see incorporated into future design, it would be the elimination of windowless corridors.” Walking distances, lighting, color contrast, lack of seating, and dead ends were other negative notes struck as the jurors considered corridors in the submission materials. Whittington pointed to some attempts to decrease hall lengths, but overall, there was much disappointment.

“I really wish we didn’t see long, double-barreled hallways in 2016,” says Andrews. “There are so many other creative ways to configure the floorplan to make it more residential in scale.”

Through the discussions of both negative and positive elements in the many projects considered for this year’s Showcase, the call to arms for the industry was clear. “The stigma is strong for senior environments because modern design concepts and technology seem to lag behind the other housing and healthcare industries,” says Tu-Anh Bui Johnson, project manager, Horty Elving (Minneapolis). “What I’ve seen in the last two years [of judging] has been that designers are slowly trying to break out of the box on the traditional language of senior living environments.”

But we’re not there yet. “There is so much more that can be done to enhance the quality of life for our seniors,” says Stassi. “I’m waiting to see the owners make the leap to the extraordinary.” 

For more EFA Design Showcase coverage, see: