Milwaukee County senior centers need so many repairs it might be cheaper to replace them for $24M, report says

Milwaukee County has an aging problem.

Its five county-owned senior centers — which range in age from 35 to 61 years — face substantial repair needs and by 2022 it might be more economical to fully replace them instead of putting more money into repairs.

The total replacement bill would run $24 million.

Those sobering facts underline a report released Thursday by the non-partisan Wisconsin Policy Forum. 

"While the facility challenges pose a huge problem, they also offer an opportunity for Milwaukee County officials and the broader community to reassess the role of senior centers," the report says.

In effect, the report — which identified best practices in older adult programming nationally — will serve as a conversation-starter on the future of the senior centers and perhaps new programming models.

"We do have a dwindling tax levy, aging facilities," said Holly Davis, director of the Milwaukee County Department on Aging, which commissioned the study.

"Forty-percent of the total operating budget for senior center programming is tied up in facility-related expenses," she said.

Rob Henken, president of the Wisconsin Policy Forum, said the report's "intent was to provide national context and perspective for what is, on the one hand, a very challenging problem for Milwaukee County but on the other hand an opportunity to take a step back" and ask a critical question.

"Is there a better way to use these resources to provide a more enhanced level of programming to achieve better results for older adults and their ability to live independently in the community?" Henken said.

The county-owned centers are Clinton Rose, Kelly, McGovern, Washington and Wilson. The county pays out about $1.1 million annually for contracted services at the centers, with attendance declining in recent years, according to the report.

In 2018, the average monthly attendance of 2,379 and a total of 6,608 people accessed the facilities over the course of a year.

"Older adults are living longer, creating distinct cohorts of seniors who have very different needs," the report says.

What's done elsewhere

The report looked at what's being done at senior centers in other places.

For example, in Dane County, the priority is given to nutrition, adult day care and case management services, as opposed to investing in physical locations.

In Allegheny County, Penn., officials consolidated senior facilities to free up funding for programs.

Arlington County, Va., "houses all senior centers in multi-generational, multi-purpose community centers," the report says.

The report concludes the current senior center model used in Milwaukee County "may not constitute the best use of the limited resources available to promote older adult independence."

The report says policymakers and citizens might want to consider several questions to drive discussion on the future of the centers and programming.

Among the questions:

"Should Milwaukee County own and pay for programming in large facilities that are exclusively devoted to older adult services?"

Could multi-generational centers achieve "more efficient use of space and gain broader support?"

If county-owned senior or multi-generational centers are impractical or no longer affordable, should the county "focus on funding outside agencies to provide senior center-type programming in their own facilities?

Or, should the county "allow senior centers to be the exclusive domain of municipal and community-based partners," and instead put resources into expanding services "in areas like transportation, enhanced community supports and an expanded call center?"

Davis said: "Our goal is to start having this conversation within the community. The report will be widely distributed."