On April 24, 2025, there was a presentation about our “strategic planning” process for Kendal-Crosslands Communities (KCC). Lisa (CEO), Rick Spackman (KCC Board Clerk), Will Hurd (lead of the board’s Strategic Planning Committee), Jenn Helle (a new KCC board member with a background in strategic planning), and Diane Burfeindt (our strategic planning consultant) provided the context for thinking about strategic planning, along with more detailed information about the process and the timeline.

This presentation marked the beginning of “Phase 2” of the strategic planning process. Phase 1 was described as “pre-planning” and apparently involved having Diane bring the KCC Board and administration up to speed on her strategic planning approach. It was also a chance for Diane to learn about KCC, including meetings with the KRA and CRA presidents.

First, let me say that simply taking the time to do a strategic plan is a really important step for all KCC stakeholders—the board, administration, staff, and residents. Without a plan, we could lose our way. With a good plan, we can become an example of the very best that a CCRC can be. I am optimistic about the outcome of this process and eager to see what we come up with.

In this blog post, I will focus on just one area of the presentation, but that means I will leave out a lot of valuable information. I urge readers to watch the whole program, including the Q&A at the end. The link for the video is https://youtu.be/5K7nQCUZ5Ts

The link for the corresponding Crosslands video can be found on the Crosslands website. The presentation is essentially identical, but the character of the Q&A is quite different, so I suggest you watch at least the Q&A segment of the Crosslands video.

Overview of the planning process. Diane began her presentation by asking us to “think outside the box”, using as examples the radical business-model changes of Chick-Fil-A and Carvana. She described several of the companies that are disrupting the senior care industry through their innovations, and asked us to entertain a wide range of options for the future of KCC. We need to be ready for major changes in technology, medical treatment, staffing, and the desires and expectations of future residents, among other things.

Then Jenn provided a diagram showing the actual process of strategic planning.

This diagram, from Jenn Helle’s part of the presentation, shows the six major steps we will use in our strategic planning process.

All six steps will be important, and resident input will be needed on all of them, but for the immediate future (now through May) the focus will be on Step 1 and Step 2. This blog post focuses on Step 1 (“our why”) and the following post will focus on Step 2 (“strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats”).

Step 1: “Our Why”. The description associated with Step 1 is “Why do we exist? Where do we want to be? What is our purpose?” I think these are the most critical issues in the whole planning process. It probably goes without saying that these questions can’t be answered with the same answers that would apply to any other CCRC. Of course we need to have good health care, good food, and good housing. Every CCRC needs those. But those don’t define our “purpose” or the reason for our existence.  

Our official Mission Statement doesn’t define our purpose clearly enough for planning, either. The statement is found in our “Cornerstones” booklet. It reads: “Kendal-Crosslands Communities is committed to ensuring that the later years of life are filled with the potential for love, growth, friendship, peace, and dignity through services and communities that allow residents and staff to thrive.” Our Vision Statement, also in the Cornerstones booklet, is not specific enough for planning either. Nor, for that matter, are the four “cornerstones” and 12 “values” in the booklet. These are all very general statements, and it seems to me that most of them would apply equally to many other CCRCs. (You can download the whole Cornerstones booklet here or pick up a copy at the front desk.)

To get closer to our real purpose, I think it is necessary to dig a little deeper. Here are some examples of the kinds of questions that might help us identify our top priorities for the future. Some of these are things we already do well, but could lose if we don’t explicitly support them. Others may be things we should be aiming for in the future.  

  • Should it be a priority to have a resident association that can have real influence on how Kendal is run, and that can raise and disperse funds for committees that, in turn, run their own programs?
  • Should it be a priority for KCC and for KCC residents to be a force for change in the outside world? In what ways?
  • Should it be a priority to find ways to attract and support residents who have chosen a life of service (and, as a result, can’t afford Kendal)?
  • Should it be a priority to be able to have unique facilities (like we presently do with our weaving room and our hydroponics lab) initiated and run by residents?
  • Should it be a priority for residents to be on a first-name basis with the administrators who make the crucial decisions about the future of KCC? Should it be a priority that those administrators take resident input seriously?
  • Should it be a priority to be on a first-name basis with staff who cook the food, provide the medical care, fix the facilities, keep the place clean and running smoothly?
  • Should it be a priority for residents to know personally and to trust those to whom they entrust their medical care?
  • Should it be a priority to adopt technology that improves the quality and efficiency of our health care, our facilities, our dining services, and our ability to communicate with each other and with those outside KCC?
  • Should it be a priority to find ways to develop new services for the majority of middle-income people who will never be able to afford the CCRC model?
  • Should it be a priority to maintain our campus and our facilities in ways that support our climate and biodiversity?
  • Should it be a priority to focus on the retirement goals of the Boomer generation, and attempt to meet them?
  • Finally, should it be a priority that major decisions are made, to the extent possible, with rather than for residents? (I will return to this particular question below.)

No doubt you can think of many similar questions, each of which speaks to unique and irreplaceable features of life at Kendal, now and in the future. None of them are captured in a standard mission statement. The way we answer such questions is an essential part of the KCC’s “Why”.

It is questions like these that residents need to be able to voice and discuss in the “resident input” part of Step 1. We don’t yet know how this will be handled, but it is critical to make sure that residents have real influence on setting these goals. The board and the administration are sure to have some amazing ideas of their own, but there are many aspects of Kendal life that only residents can speak to.  

The key purpose of this blog post is to help residents be ready to participate thoughtfully in determining the answers to these and similar questions.

It will, of course, be challenging to come up with a process for serious discussion of issues like these, and then to craft an expression of some of these ideas that we all can agree is what we want KCC to strive for in the future. An aggressive target date (the end of May) will add to the difficulty.

“With, not for”.  I want to give extra emphasis to the question of role of residents in major decisions. From the very start of Kendal, the “Values and Practices” document (and its predecessor “Values and Standards”) have emphasized decision-making and planning that is “with, rather than for” residents. This goes far beyond “transparency” (letting residents know what is being decided,) or “requesting feedback” (asking for resident comment on a decision that has essentially been made already). The “with, not for” philosophy was reiterated as a KCC Board “strategy” as recently as April 2024 in the current version of the board’s “Long Range Strategic and Operation Focus Plan”, so it clearly remains on the mind of some board members.

This approach to decision-making is not always followed faithfully at KCC, but it is a worthy goal and when it happens it does set KCC apart from most CCRCs (especially the chains and for-profit CCRCs).

In the current process, it is therefore disappointing to see significant resident participation begin only in what is called “Phase 2” of this strategic planning process. As I understand it, even the residents chosen to be part of the board’s Strategic Planning committee were left out of much of Phase 1, including the board retreat with the consultant. The April 24 meeting could easily have been part of “Phase 1”. The fact that it wasn’t suggests that someone—perhaps everyone—involved in this phasing viewed the board and administration as the primary audience, and the residents as a secondary audience to be brought in subsequently. As a result, the process has begun in a way that (on the surface at least) subverts the goal of “with, not for”. I hope this is not a bad omen.

I remain optimistic. I am eager to see what the process from here on out will be like.

Within the next few days, I expect to publish a blog post about Step 2 of the process: “What are our strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats?” Step 2 will also require thoughtful consideration by residents (as will the remaining steps).