MINUTES

August 16, 2007

PRESENT: K. Grunwald (staff), M. Hart (staff), J. Scottron (guest), N. Sheehan, J.A. Bobbitt, J. Brubacher, S. Thomas, G. Padick (staff), Ray Washburn and Steve McPherson (Masonicare), A. Kenefick

REGRETS: G. Cole

I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS: members introduced themselves.

II. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE: no public comment

III. REVIEW OF MINUTES (notes): July 19, 2007: the minutes and notes were reviewed and accepted as written.

IV. COMMUNICATIONS:

A. Agenda

B. July 19, 2007 Notes

C. Listing of providers who have received the RFQ

V. DISCUSSION/NEW BUSINESS:

A. Review of Qualifications received: M. Hart and K. Grunwald reviewed the qualifications that have been received to date from Masonicare and Long Hill Associates. We have also received interest from Sunrise Assisted Living, Benchmark and Hawthorne Partners, and expect to be receiving qualifications from them shortly.

B. Staff from Masonicare presented their qualifications. They offer a full spectrum of medical care and assisted living services, addressing health, social, spiritual needs, provided in the setting most appropriate to the client.

Questions: Are all facilities linked to a long-term care facility; is there a full continuum of care? Answer: Masonicare is looking at establishing strategic alliances with existing providers/facilities. They assume a responsibility to continue with the individual throughout the entire span of care required. What is their planning process? They are looking for a project statement from this committee regarding interests and desires, and will follow-up with market research, resulting in a “give and take” to come up with a final plan. What are their preliminary thoughts about our project? A first pass market study of eastern CT shows both capacity and need for independent and assisted living; with some skilled nursing. They would use input to “size” the project to determine what would be built.

What are the site needs? This is determined partly by zoning regulations, parking requirements, etc. Parking generally determines square footage needs for the size of the facility. The preference of Masonicare is for as much green/open space as possible; their vision of the facility is as a community. The project needs to be financially viable and market viable; they will look at a possibility of future expansion.

J.A. Bobbitt: stressed the importance of supporting existing facilities: MCNR and Windham Hospital. Masonicare has had preliminary discussions with New Samaritan Corp. and is interested in working with them; they would consider the possibility of a joint application. They have had experience working with other providers in other parts of the state, and feel that they are partly able to do this because they are a non-profit provider.

Social Model vs. Medical Model of Assisted Living; how do you balance these? They don’t see these as being in conflict. Physicians don’t drive the model, but are there to provide ancillary services. They see these models as being complementary; an issue of convenience for the resident. Residents have choice of physician selection; they provide transportation to providers outside of their system.

What are the changing service needs for residents? Residents are coming in older with more service needs. They are looking at the use of technology and staffing for early intervention. Clinical staff are having input in apartment design to respond to the needs of residents. Their Masonicare Home Services would look at offering in-home services to non-residents. They have 1500 employees, 11 offices through CT VNA.

What is the Intake Process? Both a medical and a financial evaluation are done. A resident care coordinator works with the doctor to determine the level of care that the resident needs. They involve family members in this process as well. They may reject applicants for independent living as a result of this process. In Wallingford there are independent living options based on affordability. The goal is to maintain the highest level of independence for the individual. They develop a potential wait list for assisted living from both the independent facility and the community; priority is given to current residents.

What are the Fees? There is an upfront payment and a monthly rental for a CCRC; monthly rental model for independent living apartments. They offer the choice in Wallingford. Assisted living is generally on a monthly rental basis; the fee model would need to be determined ahead of time; can offer either. Fees are geared specifically to the services that are being provided.

What are the minimum economies of scale? These are based on staffing requirements, which includes the State of CT’s requirements and Masonicare’s standards. They are in the process of trying to calculate what the actual economies of scale are. The balance is probably 100 units of independent or assisted living; with a ratio of independent to assisted living, depending on age of residents and other variables. This is calculated based on an assumption of a minimum 30 bed skilled nursing facility. Staffing: the resident care coordinator is an RN; the facility manager has more of a social service background. Their organizational philosophy is not to be the biggest.

Siting and Marketplace Issues? What is the importance of locating near the Uconn campus vs. locating in the southern end of town; planned residential projects > competition re: independent living, etc.? Proximity to the campus is important to make a connection to the university re: services and joint projects. They are more concerned about a relationship than physical proximity; need to look at civil engineering requirements and development costs. They distinguish themselves from real estate developers to facilities that care for peoples’ needs (social, medical, spiritual).

Discussion: The Committee was invited to take a tour of their facilities. J.A. Bobbitt wondered how much they have taken the market analysis into account; focus on quality. A. Kenefick sees them as providing multiple opportunities for synergistic activities with the university. G. Padick was impressed with their interest in collaborating with local service providers. The importance of geriatrically trained staff was seen as a positive.

C. “Other”: There has been some recent press on local water issues; G. Padick states that indications continue to be that the university has an adequate water supply for committed projects. The University has committed to completing a study re: using waste water to cool their co-generation plant; should have the results in six months-year. A study re: water from the Willimantic river is yet to be completed. G. Padick gave an update on potential residential development projects that may have an impact on this project.

VI. SCHEDULE FOR FUTURE MEETINGS: K. Grunwald will poll members via email regarding meeting times starting in September.

VII. ADJOURNMENT: meeting adjourned at 10:50 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Kevin Grunwald