Forget the snowbird phenomenon. The trend of retirees migrating to Florida when the weather is cold and returning to their home in the North at the first sign of spring will probably become the exception rather than the rule in the next few years. Instead, retirees will be flocking to the suburbs, according to a new book. William H. Hudnut, the book’s author, surmises that “Between now and 2030, the over-65 population will double in the nation’s suburbs.”

Kay Severinsen, Editor for SearchChicago-Homes.com, reviews Hudnut’s book, Changing Metropolitan America: Planning for a Sustainable Future in an article entitled “Suburbs to age ungracefully?” Severinsen shares that a recent study by the McKinsey Global Institute found that “older boomers, born between 1945 and 1954, are saving no more than 20 percent of their income in their late 40s, and young boomers, born between 1955 and 1964, are saving no more than 10 percent.”

If those in their late 40s are saving no more than 10 percent, I don’t even want to think about what people in my age group are saving. I already know that I should be saving a lot more than I am, but part of me thinks I’ll probably have to work until I’m 80 at the rate this economy is going, so why bother? And there is some truth to this theory of mine. As Severinsen continues, she confirms that because these boomers have not saved, they will be working well past the traditional retirement age. Now what does this have to do with flocking to the ‘burbs, you ask? She asserts these older workers will be less likely to maintain their aging properties, propelling them to suburban living.

On some levels, this makes sense, but I found the last few paragraphs of Severinsen’s article a bit offensive. First, she gives the example of 75-year-old “Joe Schmo” coming home from a long day at work and being too tired to fix the loose gutter. She then shares a personal example of someone she remembers as the “Cat Man” - an elderly man who lived with his even more elderly mother and a large number of feral cats — and she doesn’t mind admitting that her family moved to another neighborhood to get away from “Cat Man.” Now I don’t want to judge Ms. Severinsen — perhaps she or someone in her family was highly allergic to cats, and I understand from her article that the stench was atrocious.

While she makes some valid suggestions for the future of silver-haired suburban living — tax breaks, community clean-up days, free paint — she uses these two examples of Joe Schmo and Cat Man to illustrate a point that I find somewhat unsettling: “Today’s newer subdivisions still have that shiny, just built look, but they could become tomorrow’s problem neighborhoods, regardless of their original price.” Is she suggesting that the suburbs will become run down once the senior citizens move in? I think this is an unfair judgment. Personally, I prefer city dwelling and wouldn’t trade my 1920’s home for a suburban spot, but no matter where you live, there are always going to be people who don’t or can’t maintain their property in a way that suits everyone. Should cities and suburbs alike be prepared to support an aging population in their community? Sure. Should people currently living in the ‘burbs worry about Cat Man moving in next door? I don’t think so.

Given the current economic conditions and a boomer population that has saved less than their parents’ generation, it seems that we are looking at a future where retirees aren’t likely to buy that condo in Florida, even if it’s just for the winter months. Regardless of where retired elders end up, let’s be sure to check in on them now and then. Shovel their walkway when it snows or lend them a hand when you see them carrying heavy bags of groceries. Being a good neighbor doesn’t cost a penny, and in today’s world, you can’t find much with that price tag anymore.

- Michelle Seitzer

My dad, age 76, is a high school teacher and he teaches several of my friends’ children. Yesterday, someone was telling me a story about how he held up a busy hallway at school while he picked up a penny. While he was very young during the Great Depression, growing up the son of a farmer, he’s always been aware of money and has always planned carefully. And he’s never been one to leave money lying around.

Many seniors remember The Great Depression and they are reminded of those times during this current economic downturn. The habits they formed during that time are great examples for us today.

Their generation is well versed in making the best out of what they have and making things last, a lesson that most of us haven’t had to live. They can also teach us lessons about family and friends, banding together with one another, to pass the time and sometimes even to survive.

A strong work ethic is often the hallmark of someone who knew the Great Depression. Young people went to work early and contributed financially to the family and they learned self-reliance.

Saving money and living within one’s means is possibly the most important example many seniors give us. They know what it’s like to be without and, unfortunately many people are finding out that lesson the hard way right now.

Now, more than ever may be a good time to respect and learn from our elders.

Many retirees in today’s troubled economy are asking themselves this question, as their nest eggs dwindled (some drastically) before their very eyes. Some were on the verge of retirement, on track to enjoy a comfortable future, until the economy took a dramatic turn in the wrong direction.

Melissa Dahl, a health writer for MSNBC.com, writes about this issue and its devastating effects on baby boomers that were looking forward to hobbies like grandparenting, gardening, or golf in their golden years. Instead, these boomers now suffer from increased anxiety, panic attacks and depression as they face the reality of having to delay retirement another five, 10 or, perhaps for some, an indefinite number of years.

Thoughts of suicide may also cross the minds of these individuals, although one MSNBC.com reader illustrated just how bad things really are by sharing this painful truth: “I have contemplated suicide, but my family does not have enough money to bury me.”

Statements such as these indicate to me that we have truly hit rock bottom, and it pains me to know that people are in such desperate situations. I really do hope for some kind of breakthrough soon, as do all of us, but as the saying goes, “none of this happened overnight, so none of it will go away overnight either.” While we must not completely throw our hands up in despair, we must also be sure that we become part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

On the bright side, I truly believe that these trying times have forced many who may have been living beyond their means to scale back and work within a more reasonable, practical budget. Even those who were living within their means may now have the unique opportunity to grow and be challenged by learning to become an even better steward of their finances, which could mean a greater reward when the economy is healthy once again.

Working on a budget is an extremely positive thing no matter what is happening on Wall Street. During these last few months, I can say that my husband and I have a little more peace of mind just knowing exactly what is coming in and exactly how much is going out… and, perhaps most important, the when and where of our income and expenses. We certainly don’t plan on cutting off our monthly budgeting when the economy rights itself - this is a life skill and a practice that will benefit us no matter what the economic climate may be. But I must admit it was these uncertain times that drove us to get smart about our finances.

While I find myself facing many more years in the workforce simply because I am only in my 30s, I understand that losing time and money from your retirement is not just about missing a few years on the beach drinking margaritas or a few extra rounds on the greens. For my own father, it likely means a few more years of a long and often stressful commute to Manhattan from Northeastern PA. Phyllis Moen, a sociologist from the University of Minnesota, says it this way: “It’s a real sense of shock… here they [retirees] thought they were in control, and they created a life that works — and suddenly, they’ve lost control.”

It’s almost too depressing to go on (and it makes me as a 30-something wonder if “retirement” as an activity or even a concept will even exist when I’m in my 50s or 60s), but if you are reading this article and either a. know a person in this situation who needs some help, or b. that someone is yourself, please read/ share the coping tips below:

HOW TO COPE

• Talk, talk, talk. Share your fears and frustrations with your family, so the financial struggle becomes a family project instead of your burden alone.
• If someone is telling you that they’re worried about you, don’t blow them off. “It’s really easy to say, ‘Oh, I’m fine,’” says Jennifer Harkstein, a New York City clinical psychologist. “But if people around you are noticing a behavioral change, that’s important.”
• Don’t go it alone. Experts encourage struggling retirees to find the time to volunteer or join social activities, to find peers that may be in similar situations and remind themselves that they’re not alone in this.
• If a self-loathing idea floats through your brain — Could I have worked harder? Saved more? — squash it.
• Try tucking away even just a small amount each week in savings. Experiencing the magic of watching a savings account that’s slowly growing will remind you that some things are still in your control.

- tips courtesy of the msnbc.com article “Retirement Dreams Give Way to Despair, Anger”

After a lifetime of hard work and careful planning, prospective retirees deserve to put their feet up. But if you’ve been hurt by this turbulent economy and may be looking at a few more years with your nose to the grindstone when you were really hoping to get that gold watch and big party soon, know that you’re not alone, and be sure to put your feet up the moment you get home from work.

- Michelle Seitzer

There are many “unsung heroes” in today’s world, and you could certainly agree that caregivers fit that bill. When a family member or loved one is in need, most caregivers take on that role willingly and would not trade it for any other job in the world, regardless of its extreme demands. While the types of caregiving vary based on the wide array of diseases, disabilities or special needs that such conditions require, the long-term care system is completely dependent on the informal caregiving network

Without them, no bailout of any amount could keep the system afloat. Yet in a world where people are living longer, a world where many chronic diseases (whose victims are in need of complex, comprehensive care) are on the rise, a world where the reality of increasing network shortages (from nurses to physicians to direct care workers) seem to point towards a perfect storm of titanic proportions, government and community leaders must do all they can to strengthen and sustain this crucial safety net. A quote from former First Lady Rosalynn Carter says it all: “There are only four kinds of people in the world – those who have been caregivers, those who are currently caregivers, those who will be caregivers and those who will need caregivers”. We are all impacted by caregiving in some way and will continue to be in the future.

The AARP Public Policy Institute just released their 2008 update to their report on the Economic Value of Caregiving and the results are staggering: in 2007, the estimated economic value of caregivers’ unpaid contributions was approximately $375 billion, up from an estimated $350 billion in 2006. That’s more than half of the $700 billion bailout package recently issued by the federal government, and, bear in mind, this is the estimated value based on a number of variables. Also remember: this is the value of their unpaid contributions. This is a stunning figure and should be cause for great concern as baby boomers age at rapid rates.

According to the report, the figure of $375 billion is based on 34 million caregivers age 18 and older providing an average of 21 hours of care per week to adults with limitations in daily activities, at an average value of $10.10 per hour. At best, it is a rough estimate that does not include caregivers under the age of 18, nor can it truly quantify the “opportunity costs” that many caregivers incur (foregone wages, loss of benefits such as health insurance, missed work time, etc.). It is nearly impossible to quantify the tremendously difficult work that caregivers do in an hourly rate of $10 per hour, and those who compiled the survey are well-aware of that. But it is clear that the majority of this group is not in this for the pay or the accolades. Their contribution to society and to preserving the dignity of their loved one in need is impossible to measure in terms of dollars and sense.

The balance of the report discusses methodology, variation among the states, just how much $375 billion really is, and the ripple effects that are a natural result of this burgeoning network under fire. We need to pay attention to this silent army and seek to support them in any way we can as they fight the frontline battles of balancing caregiving responsibilities with the demands of daily life. This is no easy task – but recall the words of Rosalynn Carter: the sobering reality is that we cannot live without needing or providing care at some time in our lives. Caregiving is a noble task, and indeed, today’s 34 million caregivers are truly unsung heroes.

- Michelle Seitzer

When you think of a caregiver, you probably think of a gentle, nurturing, motherly type, and in fact, studies have shown that the majority of caregivers are middle-aged women who are likely balancing family and work with their caregiving responsibilities. However, a recent New York Times article by John Leland suggests that times are changing:

The Alzheimer’s Association and the National Alliance for Caregiving estimate that men make up nearly 40 percent of family care providers now, up from 19 percent in a 1996 study by the Alzheimer’s Association. About 17 million men are caring for an adult.

Three male caregivers are profiled in the article, which explores the unique challenges and tensions faced by men who take on what has been traditionally been known as women’s work.

Although women still take the lion’s share of the caregiving pie, today’s changing family dynamics mean that more women are working full-time and are less available to provide care. The journey can be difficult on many levels. For one thing, women typically have a more extensive support system of friends and family to ease that loneliness, but men may have a harder time opening up or asking for help.

Besides the lack of a support system, many men wrestle with balancing their career accomplishments and caregiving — being the breadwinner and the breadmaker is difficult to resolve for men, who for generations have relied on their role as provider as the basis for their identity. A 2003 study of three Fortune 500 companies revealed that men were less likely to take advantage of employee-assistance programs geared towards caregivers for fear of losing their jobs or the respect of their colleagues.

Even senior service professionals who take on a family caregiving role find themselves feeling like a fish out of water. For Louis Colbert, director of the office of services for the aging in Delaware County, PA, sharing the caregiving load for a mother stricken with Alzheimer’s was not a smooth transition from his day job. The first time he drove to his mother’s house to assist with her care, he was afraid that he wouldn’t know what to do when he arrived. Now, Mr. Colbert arranges an annual meeting for male caregivers to voice their concerns. The one he hears the most? Men want their new role to be validated by society. They do not want to remain invisible. And thanks to the brave stories shared in the New York Times article by Peter Nicholson, Matt Kassin and Louis Colbert (representing the 17 million male counterparts in the caregiving equation)  will not remain invisible.

If you are a male caregiver, find someone to talk to. Stay connected. Share your story — not for the attention, but for the validation that what you are doing is important, for the comfort that just knowing you’re not alone can bring. Caregiving transcends gender roles — it always has, but now the needs are too great for women to handle alone. We all must work together to care for our aging loved ones - and in doing so, we are preparing the next generation to care for us, too.

- Michelle Seitzer

Last month, the MetLife Mature Market Institute released their 2008 survey of nursing home and assisted living costs. As to be expected, rates increased since last year’s publication. The national average rate for an assisted living facility increased by 2.1% since 2007, bringing the monthly fees from $2,961 to $3,031 and the annual cost from $35,628 to $36,372.

A new feature of the 2008 report is the grouping of assisted living communities based on the number of services included in the base rate, which can vary greatly by community and thereby dramatically effect the overall cost of long-term care.

Most assisted living facilities are regulated at the state level; therefore, when crossing state lines, no two assisted living facilities operate equally. Even the basic definition of assisted living, a care setting that currently more than 900,000 Americans call home, varies greatly from state to state, which also contributes to the variances in costs. However, most assisted living communities advertise “a home-like setting” with assistance provided as needed, as opposed the 24-7 care provided in nursing homes.

Exactly how many standard services are included in the base rate also varies, and, as they age in place, many assisted living consumers will need several supplemental services. These additional services are often charged “a la carte” and can dramatically alter the grand total on the monthly bill.

There is yet another dimension to the already complicated base rate breakdown: charges for assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADLs). ADLs (bathing, dressing, toileting) and IADLs (medication management) can also drastically alter a consumer’s monthly charge, and each community has their own formula for how they calculate these charges.

Finally, if your loved one needs the specialized services offered in an Alzheimer’s wing (provided by 52% of the assisted living facilities surveyed in the report), be prepared to pay. The average base rate for Alzheimer’s and dementia care is $4,267 monthly and $51,204 annually, according to the report’s findings.

Assisted living is an actively evolving market. Baby boomers are aging, state regulations are changing, communities are adapting to provide more specialized services — and we all know that the current economy is unstable, to say the least. All of these factors will impact the bottom line and therefore impact the consumer’s ability to afford this category of care both now and in the future.

Cost analysis aside, choosing the right long-term care setting for a loved one is not an easy task. Just as a prospective home buyer must weigh all the options, pros and cons (hidden costs, taxes, maintenance, etc.), prospective assisted living consumers must do the same. Ask yourself: What is most important to you? For some, aesthetics may be more important than the staff-to-resident ratio. For others who may have more complex care needs, the staff-to-resident ratio will likely be a higher priority than whether there are manicured lawns and walking paths.

Regardless of how you assess your priorities in choosing an assisted living facility to call home, you must choose wisely. Though the data fluctuates by state, the report clearly indicates that life in assisted living communities, regardless of where they are located and how many ancillary services they provide, is expensive.

Be a smart shopper: Weigh all the potential future care needs (the base rate plus the cost of a la carte services), tour many facilities, spend time talking to the staff, eat a meal in the dining room, visit the facility on a weekend or in the evening (most facilities are well-staffed during the day, but a good quality indicator is how well-staffed they are during off-peak hours), do the research, read all the fine print, and ask lots of questions. Your final decision will significantly impact your finances and your family member, and this decision must not be rushed or taken lightly.

Find out more about assisted living options.

- Michelle Seitzer

In the largest increase since 1982, the Social Security Administration announced that the Social Security cost of living adjustment (COLA) will be 5.8% in 2009. The adjustment applies to several types of Social Security benefits: retirement, disability, survivors as well as the maximum family benefit.

This higher than usual cost of living adjustment is driven by the increase in food and gas costs over the past few months. The average monthly benefit of $1,153 for all retired workers in 2009, is $74 a month more than in 2008.

It’s also important to consider any increase in Medicare premiums when calculating Social Security benefits since Medicare payment can eat up Social Security benefits increases.

The good news is that the standard Medicare Part B monthly premium will be $96.40 in 2009, the same as the Part B premium for 2008. This is the first year since 2000 that there was no increase in the standard premium over the prior year.

While this increase is more than the originally projected 2.8%, many senior advocates argue that this year’s COLA doesn’t make up for years of inadequate increases and it doesn’t adequately reflect seniors’ expenses.

In its 2008 Long-Term Care Cost of Care research report, Prudential Financial found that assisted living facility costs have risen 13% over two years. Nursing home costs have risen 7% during this same period, and both are expected to continue to rise.

The report, which was based on data from 552 nursing homes, 533 assisted living facilities, and 528 home health care agencies, found that the average daily cost for an assisted-living facility is over $100, or about $3,241 per month. The average daily cost of a private room in a nursing home is now $217, or $79,205 annually. Costs were found to vary according to geographic location. Alaska, New York and Connecticut had the greatest costs, while Louisiana, Kansas and Missouri had the lowest costs.

Home health care experienced the smallest rate increase, rising just 5 percent over the past two years.

The long-term care cost study also found that while consumers understand the importance of saving financially for their future, there are misperceptions about the cost of long-term care and the insurance benefits related to long-term care. Most health insurance doesn’t pay for long term care, and Medicare usually only pays a fraction of the costs.

What’s most alarming is that the average cost of a two- to three-year nursing home stay could exhaust the assets of most Americans; approximately 5% spend at least five years in a nursing home.

The population is aging rapidly, yet people are living longer than before. Accordingly,  the demand for long term care services and the costs will only increase. How are you preparing yourself and your family for what’s ahead?

An analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation quantifies, for the first time, the number of Medicare Part D plan enrollees in 2007 who reached a gap in their prescription drug coverage known as the “doughnut hole,” as well as the changes in beneficiaries’ use of medications and out-of-pocket spending after they reached that gap.

The study excludes beneficiaries who receive low-income subsidies (because they do not face a gap in coverage under their Medicare drug plan).

Approximately 3.4 million Part D enrollees, including many with serious medical conditions, reached the coverage gap in 2007, leading some to stop treatment, according to the analysis.

Beneficiaries taking drugs for serious chronic conditions had a substantially higher risk of a gap in coverage under their Medicare drug plan. For example, 64 percent of enrollees taking medications for Alzheimer’s disease reached the coverage gap in 2007, as did 51 percent of those taking oral anti-diabetic medications and 45 percent of patients on antidepressants.

Conducted by researchers at Georgetown University, National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago and Kaiser, the study found evidence of patients changing their use of prescription drugs when they are required to pay the full cost of medications in the coverage gap. Across eight classes of drugs examined—used to treat a variety of relatively common chronic conditions—15 percent of Part D enrollees who reached the gap stopped their drug therapy for that condition, 5 percent switched to another medication in the class, and 1 percent reduced the number of drugs they were taking in the class.

”The Medicare drug benefit has produced tangible relief for millions of people, despite the unusual coverage gap that was created to make the benefit fit within budget constraints,” Kaiser CEO and President Drew Altman said. “But if a new president and Congress consider changes to the drug benefit, it will be important to keep in mind that the coverage gap has consequences for some patients with serious health conditions.”

Beneficiaries who reached the coverage gap faced substantial increases in out-of-pocket spending. For example, among Part D enrollees who reached the coverage gap, but did not receive catastrophic coverage, average monthly out-of-pocket costs nearly doubled from $104 prior to the coverage gap, to $196 in the “doughnut hole.” The vast majority (84 percent) of the Part D enrollees who reached the coverage gap did not have sufficient additional drug spending during the year to receive catastrophic coverage, at which point their Part D plan would pay 95 percent of drug costs.

The study analyzes retail pharmacy claims data, based on 4.5 million Medicare beneficiaries in Part D plans in 2007, the first year that most people would be enrolled in a Part D plan for a full calendar year. The analysis is based on 2007 data from IMS Health’s Longitudinal Prescription Drug Database, which includes prescription drug information that represents half of all retail prescriptions filled in the U.S.

In 2008 the gap starts when a recipient has used $2,510 worth of medications; coverage does not resume until they have used a total of $5,726 in covered prescriptions, creating a coverage “gap” of $3,216.

The research team includes: Jack Hoadley of Georgetown University, Elizabeth Hargrave of NORC at the University of Chicago, and Juliette Cubanski and Tricia Neuman at the Kaiser Family Foundation.

— Lori Woehrle