Rapid City Senior Needs Assessment
and Service Gaps Analysis
Initial Research Questions
1. What are the most pressing needs of the current senior
community of Rapid City?
2. How will the needs of residents age 50+ shift over the next
20 years?
3. What services, activities, or facilities will make Rapid City
a destination to live for 50+ adults and retirees?
Research methods included the following tasks:
1. Senior community telephone survey.
2. Senior community stakeholders focus groups.
3. Telephone interviews with community members with
particular insights into senior care needs and existing
resources.
4. Senior community resource inventory.
5. Gaps analysis.
6. Service category ratings.
More about the research
Seventeen community standards were assessed as part of this
analysis
Each were ranked at “below,” “at” or “above” the expressed
needs of the community.
Determinations were based on data collected through all
research methods (e.g., survey, focus groups, cultural inventory,
etc.)
Summary Findings
Through the analysis of survey, focus group, elite interview and
gaps analysis data we were able to determine that:
• 3 of 17 areas were ranked “above” the present community
need.
• 5 of 17 areas were ranked “at” the present community
need.
• 9 of 17 areas fell “below” expressed community need.
Above
At
Below
1. Civic and social
engagement.
2. Volunteer opportunities.
3. Community
development.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1. Access to health care
(including specialists).
2. Mental health.
3. Fitness opportunities.
4. Independent living.
5. Assisted living and
skilled care.
6. Access to services.
7. Shopping.
8. Housing.
9. Transportation, mobility,
and ADA-accessibility.
Community safety.
Sense of community.
Employment.
Recreational
opportunities.
5. Religious and spiritual
opportunities.
The interest in resources needed in the community
varied according to age , race and socioeconomic status.
Interesting observations were made in terms of the different interests
that four age groups hold for the seventeen service categories studied
here.
The four age groups are as follows:
1. Community members under 50 years old.
2. Community members between 50 and 64 years old.
3. Community members between 65 and 80 years old.
4. Community members older than 80 years.
Resource
Total Positive Cohort
Interest
One
(all cohorts)
Cohort
Two
Cohort
Three
Cohort
Four
Central Facility for Senior
Resources
63.8
65
75
57.3
55.8
Recreation and Fitness Center
53.4
65
64.8
46.9
43.9
Light Housekeeping and
Maintenance
45.8
80
51.1
35.6
53.8
Home Repair Program
45.7
70
56.4
41.1
28.4
Senior Center
44.2
52.6
49.4
43.6
32.5
Door to Door Transportation
41.6
70
50.8
33.6
35.8
Telephone Helpline
37.8
57.9
47.5
33.8
21.8
Senior Lunch Program
35.4
60
41.1
28.1
37
Personal Care at Home
30.2
40
39.2
25
22.2
Nutrition Education
23.6
45
24.7
22.1
19.8
Mental Health Counceling
23.2
35
32.6
14.9
22.2
Financial Planning
22.9
45
30.4
16.4
18.5
Adult Day Care
19.2
38.9
24
14.6
16.9
Respondents likely to use a single community center
by age cohort
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Cohort 1
Cohort 2
Unlikely
Cohort 3
Unsure
Likely
Cohort 4
New Senior Center as a broad-based solution
Survey respondents were asked to state their ideas on what Rapid
City can do to better serve senior interests in the next 5-10 years
and in the next 10-20 years.
Needs were articulated in the areas of improved access to
• General health care
• Housing
• Specialized health care (e.g., Alzheimer
and cancer centers)
• Recreation and fitness
• Affordable retail
•
•
•
•
Transportation infrastructure
Social and emotional support programs
Information sharing
Senior employment
On whole, it seems that several interests articulated by
respondents could be satisfied by investments in a comprehensive
and geographically central senior community resource center.
Ideally, this new facility would include coordinated activities and
fitness geared toward engaging seniors in healthy living practices,
a city-wide information resource that indexed programs ranging
from health care to companionship, and that would expand upon
the current level of residential programs for people transitioning
toward assisted living and skilled nursing contexts
Input from Focus Groups
Community Strengths
Small Town Feel
Climate and the Black Hills
Progressive Development Patterns
Quality Health Care
Parks, Bike Trails, Recreation and Activities
Senior Centers
Safety
Focus Groups (cont.)
Community Challenges
Transportation Resources
Nursing Homes, Assisted Living, Respite Care for Ill Seniors,
and End of Life Care
Single-floor affordable housing
Healthcare Targeted to Seniors
In-Home Services
Low Income Housing
Living Wage
Wellness Resources
Focus Groups (cont.)
Recommendations
Make a Plan – By far the most prevalent recommendation among focus groups is that
the community leaders need to be intentional about building a plan and then working
to implement that plan through zoning, community planning, partnering with
developers, motivating community boosters, and engaging in strong leadership
designed specifically to build community resources that entice people 50+ to stay and
to come to the city.
Increase the Depth and Quality of Senior Transportation – There was strong
empathy by focus group members that often ridership is low, causing leaders to not
move toward more complex and higher quality ridership. Participant’s challenged the
community to be creative in assuring transportation resources are available for people.
Downtown Development – Dovetailing on other recommendations to make the city
more enticing to 50+ people, creating more housing downtown that includes parking
and other amenities could act to recruit 50+ individuals.
Focus Groups (cont.)
Recommendations (cont.)
Neighborhood Shopping – Focus groups were clear that we 1) do not have enough
variety of shopping and virtually none that caters to 50+ buyers, 2) that shopping is
moving to the fringes of town making it less accessible, and 3) that neighborhood
development, especially on the west side, that includes shopping would be more
enticing to citizens 50+.
Enhancing Safety – Although focus groups lifted up safety as a strength of our
community, the need for continued diligence to increase safety of citizens was very
clear in their priorities. They did mention the need to look at neighborhoods where
safety is a concern, but provided no direct recommendations for what to do to build a
more safe community.
Recommendations from Rapid City Elites
Senior Community Housing and Health Care
Expanded access to nursing home beds.
State commitment to expanding Medicaid funding.
Remedies for disparate impact on economically disadvantaged
seniors (e.g., level the “payer mix” playing field).
Enhanced medial reconciliation and information sharing.
Elite Interviews (cont.)
Native Elders Housing Needs
Intergenerational housing.
Nursing home access.
Assistance for Native seniors raising small children.
Improve transportation, community integration and knowledge.
Elite Interviews (cont.)
Mental Health Needs
Expanded adult protective services.
Dedicated housing facility for those with mental health
disabilities.
Remedies for disparate impact on economically disadvantaged
seniors.
Elite Interviews (cont.)
Transportation Needs
Expanded bus routes.
Increased frequency of service on current routes.
Revised administration of dial-a-ride services to increase
accessibility and utility.
Elite Interviews (cont.)
Senior Engagement and Isolation
Expanded transportation infrastructure.
Expanded service and educational opportunities.
Facilitated information and engagement campaigns.
Elite Interviews (cont.)
Dialogue and Planning Needs
Expanded information sharing.
Openness to all options.
Expanded constituent model.