For 18 months ending in April 2003, 48 national organizations came together at the behest of the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging to develop consensus recommendations for assisted living. One hundred thirty-one recommendations were developed and 110 received consensus (two-thirds majority or greater) approval. What made this initiative especially unusual was the diversity of organizations that worked together including providers, consumer advocates, healthcare professionals, and regulators among others.

While 48 organizations committed to work together, only 36 were actually effective. Three separate groups emerged during the initiative: the free-market advocates (two organizations); the regulatory hard-liners (10 organizations); and the common-grounders (36 organizations). The common-grounders were the only effective group because of their commitment to work collaboratively, their willingness to set aside polarizing interests, good leadership, and the understanding that success would require some level of give and take on everyone’s part.

While the common-grounders did not agree on every issue, they were committed to learning about each organization’s position and working through areas of controversy. This altruistic approach to problem solving was not effortless, but fostered the development of recommendations that the common-grounders could live with – a far better outcome than stalemated positions.

Indeed, this same successful collaborative approach recently averted a major strike of unionized grocery store workers in the metropolitan Washington, DC area when their contract neared expiration. The store owners and union worker representatives had established trusted working relationships over the years. This trust permitted them to work together until they achieved a compromise agreement for a new contract that all parties could live with and approve.

Working together would appear to be the more effective and desirable way of conducting business, yet it is often a measure of last resort. Effective collaboration requires an unselfish regard for the welfare of the whole and not simply individual interests.

Newspaper articles about tragic resident care outcomes in assisted living have proliferated over the past 10 years. Finger pointing and denial do nothing to address the problems. Not all assisted living facilities are providing inconsistent and substandard care, but those that do give everyone a black eye.

Older adults will soon outnumber children for the first time in our nation’s history. Individuals 85 and older are currently the fastest growing sector of our population, and the tidal wave of aging baby boomers will soon follow. Now is the time to have the courage to admit substandard care problems exist, and commit to a collaborative course of action to meaningfully and sustainedly eliminate the problems. This is why we should bother.

Karen Love, a former assisted living administrator and family member of an assisted living resident, is the founder and chair of the Consumer Consortium on Assisted Living (CCAL). CCAL was founded in 1995.