A growing body of research emphasizes the development of an understanding of the relationship between older adults and their physical and social environments (Wahl & Weisman, 2003). Researchers, planners, policymakers, and community residents have been increasingly interested in shaping urban environments as places that foster active aging and independence among older adults. Senior centers have served a critical role in their communities as focal points for older adults, as individuals or in groups, to participate in services and activities that support their independence and encourage their involvement in and with the community (NCOA, 1979). The aging of the population and influx of baby boomers into the older demographic, along with declines in participation rates and funding, are challenging senior center staff to be innovative and adaptive in order to demonstrate senior centers’ relevance to future older adults while maintaining the programming and services for their current participants. This research is a multiple-case study of five unique senior centers located throughout the Portland metropolitan area in Oregon. Different types and models of senior centers are represented by the selected cases, as they operate under different governance structures and vary in aspects such as administration, funding, participant characteristics, community partnerships, transportation options, physical environments, and range of services and programs offered. This study aims to better understand challenges, strengths, and future directions for different types of senior centers serving a metropolitan area. Data collection at each site included interviews with staff as well as focus groups with senior center participants. Interviews with key informants enriched the findings and provided outside perspectives of senior center experiences. Data analysis revealed challenges and strengths that were common across and unique to the different senior centers in this study. This research contributes to the literature in urban studies, community development, and gerontology by exploring potential opportunities for urban senior centers to adapt and continue to serve older adults. Recommendations were developed for how senior centers might capitalize on these opportunities and for how their communities might provide mechanisms of support to facilitate the continuation and contributions of senior centers in metropolitan areas.

This thesis reports on the perspectives and experiences of policymakers, advocates, agency supervisors, and experts in the field of gerontology, about the development of Aging and Disability Resource Centers (ADRC) programs and Options Counseling (OC). By examining the foundations upon which ADRCs and OC are built, this study sought to inform future research about the effectiveness of existing practice, increase understanding of best practices, and clarify whether these emerging services are accomplishing original goals. ADRCs and OC intend to address long-term care issues and healthcare needs by providing a single entry point to the social service system. ADRCs offer information, assistance, and OC to people of all ages, incomes, and disabilities, and promote long-term care options that honor independence and respect for the needs and preferences of individuals, their families, and caregivers. They are the latest iteration of policymakers' efforts to provide affordable home-and community-based care for older persons and their caregivers. A total of fifteen qualitative interviews were conducted and analyzed using grounded theory methods. Key persons interviewed included experts in the area of aging, aging policy, and aging. Participants were recruited through referrals suggested by Portland State University's (PSU) Institute on Aging (IOA) staff. In addition, several key experts known to the researcher through affiliation with PSU's IOA agreed to be interviewed. Snowball sampling was then used to locate additional key experts. Interview participants were classified as advocates, state decision makers, policy makers, or academicians. Advocates included national and state directors of agencies that promote the development and management of effective services to aging adults. State decision makers included state directors, ADRC directors and supervisors, and program analysts. Policy makers interviewed were national program directors responsible for shaping the future of developing programs to assist older adults. Academicians who participated in the study have been instrumental in developing and researching practices that promote well-being for the aging and the aged. These key experts were selected based on their knowledge and ability to inform the strengths, weakness, and development of ADRCs and Options Counseling. Many have been instrumental in health and aging policy and service development and research, and possess insider knowledge not available to the general public regarding attitudes and interests motivating the actors. Findings indicate that ADRCs and OC are designed to manage within existing social service systems. They can benefit some individuals by providing more options and support in accessing public and private services. It remains to be seen whether they have the capacity to ameliorate some existing system-level problems. Findings highlight program strengths and weaknesses, sustainability issues, and policymakers, state decision makers', and providers' commitment to sustaining ADRCs and OC.