In recognition of the situation, there was established in 1950 the Foundation of Social Housing for the Aged. A public body, the foundation, in some ways, operates like a housing authority in America: it can borrow money; it has authority to purchase (or lease) property; it can undertake planning and construction of housing (plans must be approved by the city council); and once a project is completed, it has the responsibility of management and administration. The foundation's activities, however, are restricted exclusively to housing for the low-income aged (it is the foundation that determines what rents will be paid) and it derives its money, in addition to rent income, mostly from the city-both general city treasury funds and city welfare funds (latter is justified, it is believed, because the "dwellings are for poor, old people")-and, sometimes, private interests chip in as well.

Once established, it didn't take the foundation long to get going. First came some intensive research into the needs of the aged and then the construction of the first 127 units of Espenhof. The units were completed by the end of the foundation's first year of operation.

Stage I Espenhof required a referendum in order to get citizen approval on the securing of credit. However, stage II Espenhof and the Hoengg project required only city council approval, because there was sufficient money available. Costs of each of the projects were as follows: Espenhof I, what would be around $672,000 in United States currency; Espenhof II, around $282,768; and Hoengg, around $215,520.

The whole of Espenhof, together with the Hoengg project, provide a total of 223 units, broken down as follows: 150 one-room units for single-person occupancy; 64 one-room units for couples; and 9 two-bedroom units for couples. Rents in each range from what would be the equivalent of around $15 to $21 per month, with, in addition, a charge of some $6 or $7 made each month for such services and facilities as heating, laundry, bathing, and cleaning of stair

cases.

In the Seebach development-it was just opened for occupancy this year-the foundation applied many of the lessons it had learned in the operation of the older developments. For example, the foundation observed in leasing the older projects that, while applications from single, elderly women far exceeded the supply of units, few elderly men seemed interested. The foundation did some investigation and came up with this idea that perhaps single, elderly men did not want quarters with full kitchen facilities as those in the city's projects for the aged. So a plan was conceived for a high-rise building with rooms that, instead of the usual kitchen equipment, would have only a place to heat coffee and tea. And then, before bringing the plan to the brick and mortar stage, the foundation surveyed the field of old folks to find our whether they would like to live in such a place. The answer: yes.

The Seebach development, therefore, is made up of (1) a 9-story structure providing 64 units-sans full kitchens-a moderately priced restaurant (large enough to accommodate 100 at a time), a hobby workshop, and other facilities and (2) 6 row houses (2- and 5-story buildings) providing a total of 114 units, most of which have full kitchen facilities. The project as a whole provides 159 one-room units and 19 two-room units. The units are variously arranged, with, for example, some one-room units having an alcove accommodating one bed, while others have alcoves large enough for two beds.

In addition to the living quarters and facilities already mentioned, project space has been devoted to such service areas as a practical nurse's room, a social worker's headquarters, a sewing room, a central laundry, a basement section for each unit, a bomb shelter. All buildings of over three stories have elevators.

For the Seebach development, Zurich voters again were asked to approve the raising of funds for public contributions to housing for the aged, and they did. Total costs, including borrowing charges, land, and construction, were in the vicinity of what would be, in U.S. currency, around $1.4 million.

ZANDVOORT: "NEW LOOK" HOUSING FOR OLD PEOPLE

Near the sea, in the beautiful duneland area of Zandvoort, is one of the 148 publicly assisted nonprofit developments for the elderly constructed in the Netherlands since 1949. Known as Huin in de Duinen, the development is representative of a "new look" in housing for the elderly that has developed in the country since World War II.

Huin in de Duinen is "new look" in appearance the architecture is modern, with an overall effect of openness that is heightened by a generous use of glass, plantings, and outdoor balconies. It is "new look” in size-it is only in the past few years that housing for the aged large enough for up to around 300 persons has been constructed in the Netherlands. And it is "new look” in the way of life it offers tenants; no place of hibernation this, the development was planned with the idea in mind that the elderly should be kept as active and as independent as possible, for as long as possible-a philosophy that the Dutch have come to believe is "to be strongly recommended for physical and psychical considerations."

Initiative for the development came from the Netherlands Center for Housing Aged People (Nederlandse Centrale voor Huisvesting voor Bejaarden), an organization devoted to helping the aged from all walks of life with their housing problems. It was the center that worked up the plans and supplied the money to carry through. (Total initial costs, including land, construction, inventory, administration, figured per bed, per paying customers, came to 9,558 florin, or about $2,293 in American money.) It was when the project was ready for occupancy, in 1955, that the center stepped out of the picture, turning administration over to a local foundation that was set up especially for the job.

While public money did not figure in the construction of Huin in de Duinen, it is as a direct result of participation of the Dutch Government in the scheme that elderly folk of even the most modest means can be accommodated in the development. In the case of the Zandvoort housing for the elderly, Government help has come in the form of a 50-year annual contribution toward the deficit in running expenses. (An alternative kind of help available to sponsors of such housing: A fixed down payment per bed.) In addition, there are nationalmunicipal rent subsidies available to elderly persons and couples with incomes below a set limit.

The Zandvoort project is made up of (1) a home. It provides 164 single rooms for oldtimers who, though in comparatively good health, may need partial services (e.g., prepared meals, housekeeping); 9 "sick" wards, providing another 23 beds for oldtimers, and other facilities; (2) 48 independent residences for old people able to do their own housekeeping and who, in other ways, are able to care for themselves.

Thus, in line with an aim established when the project was under planning, Huin in de Duinen offers a complete complement of services for those who need them, while, at the same time, has in effect a kind of hands-off policy for residents who can get along without help.

The location of the development invites outdoor activities that older people enjoy-walking, outdoor visiting with neighbors, gardening. (Tenants are encouraged, if they are able, to participate in keeping up gardens and, if they do, they can grow cut flowers with which to decorate their own rooms.) And, even for those residents confined by poor health to the premises, there are still the views of the dunes and gardens-they have been described as “magnificent”— which can be enjoyed from sheltered balconies.

Indoors, as well as outdoors, there are a number of sitting areas provided for "neighboring." There are also recreation rooms, for larger and more formal meetings, and a hobby room.

For residents of the home, complete board and lodging-including heating and washing-is available at present for 180 florin (roughly $43) per month for a single room and a 330-florin ($79) total for sharers of a double room. Rentals for the separate residences in which tenants do their own housekeeping come to what amounts to about $10 per month in U.S. currency.

IN UPPSALA: SPECIAL AIDS

In Uppsala-a university city in the southeastern section of Sweden-there was constructed a few years ago a development that demonstrates the way Sweden and Swedish communities, alike, have faced up to some of what they have found to be the facts of life in housing the elderly.

Fact I-Money (the lack of it) as a root of evil: The Swedes have recognized that old-agers who have little more in the way of income than what they get in pensions cannot afford suitable, standard housing. In the Uppsala development-and, incidentally, in other housing for the elderly throughout the country-rentals are covered, sometimes fully, by a combination of national and municipal subsidy. (The subsidy system is currently being revised and specifics as to what shape it will take are not yet available.)

Fact II-Go power (the lack of it) as a problem: Even healthy oldtimers, Swedish housing officials point out, sometimes cannot operate at full steam: many elderly people, even though they are capable of and, indeed, prefermanaging their own apartments, may need some housekeeping help, or help in the preparation of meals. The development at Uppsala was especially planned to provide partial services for oldtimers. The story follows.

In order to have necessary services close at hand and in order to effect certain economies in construction, the city of Uppsala decided to put up its apartment development for the elderly near an existing home for the aged. Thus the new development and the old home have such things in common as a water system, kitchen facilities, etc.

However, while the city recognized that it could cut corners by building the apartments near the existing home, it recognized, too, that such a plan could have a disadvantage: too-easy association of the rental development with the "institutional living" of the existing home. The result was, according to a Swedish housing official, that in planning the newer development it became "especially important to avoid a type of building that would manifest itself as an 'institution.' To escape this danger, the buildings have been structured as a pleasant residential area."

Hence, the building arrangement on the site; the type of structure used; and landscaping "tricks" employed all tend to retain the desired residential character and separate identity of the apartment development. The project is made up of 104 units in 2-story buildings, each of which fronts on a sunny court. The entire development is surrounded by a park.

Seventy-eight of the units in the development are intended for single-person occupancy; these have one room and a kitchenette for a total of around 290 square feet of floor space. The remaining 26 units, for couples, have two rooms and kitchenette, with about 410 square feet of space. A basement storeroom and larder goes with each apartment, while there are other basement facilities, such as storerooms for bicycles (apparently Swedish oldtimers like their bikes), hobby rooms, and laundries, which the tenants share. (Extra storage space is available for tenants who wish to rent it.)

Residents can, if they like, prepare their own meals in their apartments. On the other hand, if a resident doesn't feel up to doing his own cooking, he can go to a community building-located on a square at the core of the development-where he can either eat his meal in a dining room there, or pick up his meal and carry it off to his own apartment. The dining room accommodates only 20 persons at a time but, it has been found, most of the residents prefer the pickup meal service.

STURMINSTER COUNCIL: 10-YEAR EXPERIENCE

“An 84-year-old English lady who, for the first time in her life had a bathtub and running water in her house, told an interviewer: 'You know, Miss, that there bath-it's wonderful. You sits in and there's hot water all around you, both back and front.'

"And then there's the new-house story of another British lady, similarly along in years, Said she to the interviewer: "The only trouble is, Miss, I shan't want to die now.''

The anecdotes above were pulled out of a report, "The Housing of Old People," by Dr. Noel F. Pearson, medical officer of health, and Miss Marion Bradley, a British housing manager. The report resulted from an investigation into the achievements of the Sturminster Rural District Council-one of the early birds in the field of public housing for the elderly in Great Britain.

In England, as in many other parts of the world, big emphasis in housing construction since World War II, of necessity, has had to be in the provision of quarters for younger families. While there has been growing recognition of the needs of the aged (1951 census showed there were some 4 million households headed by persons 60 or over, with some 800,000 of these being elderly people living alone and, often, in substandard or unsuitable housing), it is only in recent months that the Ministry of Housing has felt the overall situation to be well enough in hand to recommend that a larger portion of particularly the publicly assisted housing planned be of a kind suitable for occupancy by the elderly (a subsidy of 10 pounds per year, or about $28, is payable to local authorities for each one-bedroom dwelling constructed). line with this shift in emphasis, the ministry earlier this year published and

In

distributed to local authorities a booklet, "Flatlets for Old People," that is intended to serve as a guide.

The Sturminster Rural District Council is, however, an old hand at housing the aged and, in fact, many of the tips offered in "Flatlets for Old People" are in line with the "do's and don'ts" that the council has learned in its 10 years of experience. The Sturminster council's story is presented below.

The Sturminster council has been building individual bungalows and what is called group housing-blocks of one- and two-bedroom and bed-sitting room units-virtually since the end of World War II. Out of a total postwar housing program of 844 units, 16 percent have been used for the elderly.

The individual bungalows, scattered through the council's various housing estates, are of a sort that in the early postwar days were intended for use by young married couples. As needs became known, however, the bungalows were made suitable for, and available to the elderly.

Group housing, on the other hand, was from the beginning intended especially for the aged. Earliest of the council's group blocks was ready for occupancy in 1948-a time when housing for old people more often than not conjured up a vision of an isolated nursing home. The council's housing represented a complete break with such traditional thinking: it was not isolated; it was not a nursing home; and it was not so much a setting for retiring as it was for living. It was a kind of housing in which elderly tenants were not only encouraged, but expected to live independently, taking care of their own apartments and day-to-day needs.

Today the district council operates such housing in each of its four major parishes: Bonslea Mead in Sturminster Newton; Vale Terrace in Shillingstone; Stalbridge Close in Stalbridge; and Marnhull Close in Marnhull. Each provides from 13 to 16 units and some in addition, have a community room for occasional social events, and visitors' rooms for out-of-town guests who could not be comfortably accommodated in the small quarters of their hosts.

In recognition of the fact that, in the case of the elderly, independence can be only a sometimes thing, there also is at each of the developments accommodation for a person known as a warden. The warden is a kind of overseer, responsible for the upkeep and management of communal portions of group housing; a friend and helper to tenants at all times; and a Johnny on the spot in the event of an emergency. The warden may perform a number of services for tenants free of charge (e.g., fitting light bulbs, fetching pensions, running errands). However, as a check on a very small minority who might otherwise impose on the warden, a small fee-it is recoverable from welfare funds, when necessary-has been affixed to some of the more demanding services, e.g., preparing meals in the event of illness). Says the district council: The combination of independent living accommodations plus a warden has produced "an atmosphere where illness is not expected but where sympathetic help is available should tenants become ill."

From the beginning it was hoped that the plan would have a kind of therapeutic effect on the elderly: helping to keep them self-reliant and on their own (belief in this notion was one of the factors that led the county council-it operates as a welfare agency-to participate in financing). And, in fact, the Pearson-Bradley study turned up data that would seem to indicate that the more you expect from oldtimers, the more you get. For example, the studyit was published in 1956 and based upon the Sturminster council's experience up until that time-yielded the following:

1. Of the 13 group-dwelling tenants who had died in the history of the housing. only 5 had been ill previous to their deaths for longer than a week and "none of these were ill for longer than a fortnight." Said the researchers: "There would *** seem to be strong indications that tenants of these group dwellings retain their powers (and, incidentally, their independence) right up to the last." 2. Turnover has not been as great as had been expected, suggesting, according to the Pearson-Bradley report, "that these dwellings encourage longevity."

3. "There has been no increase in disability among existing tenants, while some degree of improvement has been noticeable in several cases." Among cases cited: A lady who progressed "from a bedridden state in an old cottage to performance of her own housework and shopping in her new surroundings"; that of a "lady granted tenancy at 87 years*** who has now reached 96 and is still able to look after herself despite an arthritic hip and diabetes."

It was results such as those pointed up in the Pearson-Bradley report that has led the Ministry of Housing and others to label the group housing plan a

"complete success." And, while the Sturminister District Council agrees that the group units "without a doubt fill a need," the council is the first to point up the pitfalls and potentials in this kind of housing for the aged. Some of the major items in the lessons learned in 10 years of experience in the field are enumerated below.

1. The warden can make or break the group plan. Says the council: "The most important single factor" in operating group housing successfully is the selection of the right person for the job. Best choice: "An ordinary housewife having common sense, interest, and sympathy. We have found," says the council, "that the most successful appointments have been made, not from answers to advertisements, but by selection from among tenants of the normal dwellings, some of whom have never previously considered applying for such a post."

2. Close liaison with health and welfare authorities and with relatives of tenants is an absolute must. Such liaison is particularly useful, the council says, in tackling the difficult problems that arise "in cases of senility where there is some mental confusion, but not of a sufficiently marked degree to require mental hospital admission."

3. "Serious problems may arise in the case of illness where admission to a hospital cannot be secured immediately." The solution hit upon by the council to insure preparedness for "operation emergency”: Setting up a panel of persons who may be called upon to care for sick people.

4. "Too much emphasis can be placed on gadgets for the elderly." What should be taken into consideration, according to the council, are such items as nonslip floors that are easy to maintain; low window sills, to provide a view for those confined to chairs; grips for the bathroom; proper placement of cooking and sink facilities.

5. While group housing is filling the bill now, it may be that in the future a different sort of housing for the elderly will be needed. Says the council: "It may be that the separate dwellings integrated in the normal residential area of a community should be the chief aim in the future." With social changes taking place, the council feels that, perhaps, "aged persons of 10 to 15 years hence will have greater developed interests than those with whom it is necessary to deal at the present time. And, if this is so," says the council, "then it may be that the group dwellings with a warden should be considered only as a place to which aged persons can be temporarily accommodated ***" (e.g., when an elderly person discharged from a hospital requires some assistance prior to resuming life in her own separate dwelling; when relatives or others caring for the elderly require a rest or holiday).

ANOTHER FROM ENGLAND: CONVERSIONS

A pioneer in the conversion of existing housing into dwellings for the lowincome elderly in England has been Church Army Housing, Ltd. And the British Ministry of Housing so approves of what is known as Church Army's "Churchill House Plan" that the pattern has been recommended to local authorities as a means of their providing housing for seniors.

Here, in brief, is how the plan works: Church Army Housing buys up big old houses-almost always of a kind that have outlived their usefulness as singlefamily quarters and, often, badly dilapidated. The place is refurnished and fixed up into sleeping rooms, each with a closeted kitchenette, a wardrobe, and, when possible, with one of the open fireplaces dear to the hearts of Englishmen. Then the units are rented unfurnished to people over 60 who are in need of housing help.

History

The Churchill House plan was undertaken by Church Army soon after World War II. Returning war veterans were causing a tight squeeze on the housing market-and those most badly pinched were the elderly of limited means. The Church Army Churchill plan was an idea that, at one and the same time, offered a way to (1) preserve and uplift downgraded housing; (2) release some of the larger units occupied by the elderly for families of returning servicemen; (3) provide housing for the elderly within their means to pay for it. The plan was dedicated to Winston Churchill, whose enthusiastic support was reflected in the naming of his daughter, Mary, as his personal emissary with regard to the program.

Since the plan got started, Church Army Housing has had a continuously increasing demand for the converted units. Evidence of its success lies in the record today: with 51 houses in London and the provincial areas supplying