Care homes are full of experts, they just don’t usually sit in the management office.
By Nadine van Dongen: Founder of CARE Market Research – an organisation that gives a voice to people in social care.
A call for care homes to do more research projects
Speaking to a CEO of an amazing care home in North London made me realise that the uptake and acceptance of introducing a new activity, app or dining initiative in a care home is not always self-evident and can encounter reluctance. Often, the problem isn’t the idea itself. It’s that residents weren’t involved early enough in shaping the idea.
That thought then brought me to a moment in the Care England conference on 12th March 2026, where Nuno Santos Lopes called all care providers in the room to do more research and- insights projects in care homes, to be part of innovation.
What the research actually says
One major review, ‘Participatory Design in Gerontechnology: A Systematic Literature Review’, examined dozens of studies exploring how older people are involved in designing products, services and technologies intended for later life. The conclusion was strikingly simple: services work better when older people help shape them.
Researchers call this “participatory design”. In practice, it means involving older adults earlier and more meaningfully in decisions that affect them — not simply asking for feedback once everything has already been decided.
Care homes conduct their yearly satisfaction surveys, and these might tell you residents dislike a new activity schedule. A deeper conversation might reveal why: perhaps the timing clashes with medication routines, perhaps the room feels too noisy, or perhaps residents feel the activity itself is unintentionally patronising.
These are the kinds of insights traditional feedback methods often miss and the new information streams with AI would definitely miss.
Designing with residents, not just for them
The review found that older adults frequently identify practical frustrations, emotional barriers and overlooked details that designers and providers simply do not see themselves. This includes everything from confusing technology and inaccessible interfaces to environmental stressors such as lighting, noise and signage.
Yet many services are still developed for older people rather than with them. In care settings, this often happens unintentionally. Pressured managers and stretched staff may rely on surveys or residents’ meetings — useful tools, but not always enough to uncover deeper insight.
The research review suggests there is an important difference between routine feedback and genuine co-design.
Some care homes are beginning to experiment with small resident listening groups focused on specific topics such as dining, activities, technology or daily routines. Others are using informal “walk-through” conversations, asking residents to describe moments of friction during an ordinary day. Instead of asking: “Did you enjoy lunch?”, they ask: “What would make mealtimes feel more comfortable?”. That distinction is very powerful.
Interestingly, studies show quieter residents are often the most important voices to reach. Traditional feedback systems tend to favour confident communicators, while people living with frailty, hearing loss, early cognitive decline or lower confidence may participate less frequently despite having equally important perspectives.
This is particularly relevant as care homes continue investing in new technologies. From digital care systems to resident apps and communication platforms, providers are increasingly expected to modernise services. But research repeatedly shows that technology adoption improves when older adults are involved before implementation rather than after problems emerge.
The issue is not whether older people can adapt. In fact, one of the most interesting findings from the research paper is that older adults are often more innovative than they are given credit for. Many develop creative workarounds, routines and coping strategies that can directly inform better service design.
What organisations sometimes mistake for “resistance” is actually expertise.
A resident declining to use a digital booking system may not be rejecting technology itself. They may be identifying a design flaw no one else has noticed: confusing navigation, poor contrast, unnecessary complexity or anxiety about getting something wrong.
When providers listen more carefully, these moments become opportunities for improvement rather than obstacles.
There is also a growing recognition that meaningful involvement supports dignity. Residents who feel listened to are more likely to feel respected, valued and emotionally connected to the community around them. Families notice this too.
None of this requires a major research department.
You can ask yourself the following 5 questions to start exploring this topic within your care home:
- Who do we hear from most and who do we rarely hear from?
- What assumptions are we making?
- What frustrates residents daily?
- What changes have residents directly shaped?
- How can we conduct more insights or research projects in the home?
Some care home managers are beginning to use more structured resident insight sessions using external facilitators to help gather deeper feedback, particularly where residents may feel more comfortable speaking openly to someone independent.
The strongest care organisations increasingly understand that listening is not simply about measuring satisfaction. It is about recognising residents as people with knowledge, judgement and lived expertise.
The research is clear on one point above all: older adults are not just users of services. They can be active contributors to improving them.
And in a sector facing rising expectations, financial pressure and changing demographics, that may be one of the most underused resources care homes already have.