As for-profit companies capitalize on an aging population, the future of senior facilities is murky.

Pam Marino here, remembering how my late mom debated for years whether to move into a senior living community. She visited a beautiful facility in a bucolic setting not far from where she lived multiple times. I took a tour once with her and every resident we spoke to seemed genuinely glad to be there—their biggest complaint was that the meal portion sizes were too big.

My mom didn’t want to leave her home of a half-century and the garden she had lovingly tended all that time, so ultimately she didn’t move. Later, when she was disabled by stroke, our family was introduced to a whole new world of rehabilitation centers, skilled nursing facilities and debates over home care versus a long-term facility.

Anyone who’s had to grapple with such consequential decisions knows how difficult it is, and currently it’s all the more difficult due to the influx of for-profit companies taking over senior communities more interested in the bottom line than caring for seniors, coupled with understaffed state monitoring agencies that can’t keep up with violations.

That’s the focus of my cover story this week, “Not So Golden,” which looks at the state of some senior facilities in Monterey County. While there are places that offer quality housing and care—I featured Carmel Valley Manor, a nonprofit community with a solid state record—there are places like Pacific Grove Senior Living and The Park Lane, both owned by for-profit Pacifica Senior Living, that residents say have declined in quality since the company took over.

In the case of P.G. Senior Living, it’s not just residents who are complaining; a state monitor’s report catalogs the numerous problems that have arisen since Pacifica purchased it in 2022.

Pacifica is part of the larger Pacifica Companies, a real estate investment company based in San Diego with a focus mostly on apartments and hotels. Almost 20 years ago its leaders saw there was money to be made on aging baby boomers, and today Pacifica Senior Living has more than 80 assisted living and 55+ communities.

My research shows that in multiple situations where Pacifica purchased a facility or group of facilities, the acquisition is followed by cuts in staffing, diminished quality of food, lack of maintenance and fewer services offered. Meanwhile, fees go up, along with safety issues and formal complaints to state officials.

I hope you will read the story for yourself. It’s accompanied by some outstanding photos by photographer Daniel Dreifuss and sidebars on the different types of senior living facilities, plus where to find answers to questions like how to evaluate facilities when considering a move. 

For those that have experienced local senior living facilities, either as a resident or as a loved one, what’s your experience been like?