Chris Finlay, CEO of Lloyd Jones LLC, shares his view on trends in elderly housing investment, the firm’s strategy and future plans. He also predicts how technology will impact the sector.

by Beata Lorincz
Lloyd Jones LLC is a real estate investment, development and management firm that specializes in multifamily and senior housing throughout Florida, Texas and the Southeast. The company focuses on independent living and age-restricted facilities (ILFs), as opposed to communities that include a medical component, such as assisted living facilities (ALFs) and memory care (MC).

According to the National Investment Center for Seniors Housing & Care (NIC), senior housing occupancy in the U.S. averaged 87.9 percent in the second quarter of 2018, representing an eight-year low. Multi-Housing News reached out to Lloyd Jones CEO Chris Finlay for further insight on the senior housing market.

What do you look for in a senior community?
Finlay: Ideally, for existing assets, we look for properties 10 to 20 years old that we can acquire at substantially below replacement value, then improve or redevelop them so that they are competitive with new product. Unfortunately, very few of these opportunities exist. Consequently, our focus is on ground-up development, where we can create an active senior community designed specifically to our specifications—and to the expectations of our residents.

What are the latest trends in senior housing?
Finlay: More and more seniors are renting by choice. They are looking for lifestyle flexibility as well as freedom from taxes and household/yard maintenance. And they like being around like-minded friends, in a socially active and healthy-lifestyle-focused environment.

What are the greatest challenges in owning senior communities?
Finlay: Getting too attached to your residents. Our senior residents are wonderful. They are great to work with and so appreciative of the opportunities our communities provide.

Research shows that senior housing occupancy hit an eight-year low of 87.9 percent in the second quarter of 2018. What can you tell us about this drop? How does this impact the sector?
Finlay: Fifty-five-and-over occupancy is over 95 percent and ILFs are at 92 percent. ALFs/MC are overbuilt in nearly all major markets. We just got back from a seniors conference and our strategy was absolutely confirmed. This is where they’ve headed and will be staying for a long time and thanks to technology, many seniors may never have to go to an ALF/MC or skilled nursing facility (SNF).

What are your predictions for the senior housing market going forward?
Finlay: I see less demand for assisted living and memory care. With all the technology advances, seniors can avoid institutional facilities and stay independent for much longer.

Which are the most active multifamily markets at the moment?
Finlay: Jacksonville and Daytona are two of the hottest markets in Florida. We also like Houston and Fort Worth, Texas.

What are your predictions for the market?
Finlay: I think we have a few more years in this cycle, but demographics will continue to be positive for our industry for a very long time.

What can you tell us about the company’s strategy going forward?
Finlay: We are not planning to expand to any new markets. Our strategy is to focus on 55-and-over independent senior living, which is still doing very well.

Click here for the full article

The senior housing industry is in the midst of a big disruption.  Occupancy in assisted living hit a record low in the first quarter of 2018 – and continues to fall. There could be numerous reasons for this, including a bad flu season, but I think there’s something bigger going on.

At a recent conference I attended, one of the speakers addressed this subject.   He suggested that two major influencers are driving the disruption.

1. Labor shortage. A labor shortage is anticipated for high-intensity facilities such as assisted living, memory care, skilled nursing facilities. The average wage for a CNA (certified nursing assistant) is currently $11 per hour.  Soon, the speaker projects,  it will be $15. This will cause an 8% drop in NOI which translates to a 27% decline in asset value!  Or, more likely, rents will rise, and such facilities will become even less affordable.
2. Technology. And this is where it gets cool! Technology is focusing on aging-in-place, allowing seniors to avoid institutional facilities longer. The speaker shared that aging-in-place technology will become a $7 trillion economy. Venture capital is investing 10:1 on technology versus operational improvements.

So how does this affect you and me?
It means we can age in place almost anywhere.  The secret is in choosing the place. If we live long enough, each of us will need assistance at some point, (although most of us refuse to admit it).  But technology will allow us to live wherever we choose with on-demand assistance as necessary.

Even today, technology is available to get us what we need, when we need it: a voice activated communications system connected with family or emergency-response team;  a sensor to monitor activities and detect irregularities;  a wrist band connected to an AI platform that alerts the doctor if anything is out of kilter;  apps to remind us to take our pills; apps to call a ride; apps to order meals; apps to request assistance with dressing or bathing; apps for help hanging pictures or rearranging furniture.

And that’s today.  Just wait until that $7 trillion investment is realized!
I project the future of senior housing will be focused on the independent-living model with limited services – which will be offered a-la-carte.  Technology will replace the need for personal assistance. We will not need (nor can most of us afford) the full staff that comes with assisted-living facilities. With this exciting new technology, we will remain independent much longer as we age in place.

But aging-in-place doesn’t mean staying in your four-bedroom colonial with stairs, narrow doorways, and slippery bathtubs.  Forward-thinking baby boomers are eschewing their large family homesteads that require constant up-keep and high taxes for luxury apartment living.  Here, they can age in place, but in a place with more amenities, more fitness activities, more social involvement, and more companionship.  And that socialization is very important.  Studies show that social isolation increases the risk of death by 30%;  some show it as high as 60%!

Assisted living and memory care facilities, of course, will still be needed, but they will have a much higher cost and be even less affordable to the average senior.  That said, senior housing still ranks as the most attractive property class for investment according to a recent survey of commercial real estate owners, managers, developers, and lenders.

So, we will age, in place, independently, and wherever we want. And I suspect most of us will choose an independent-living community surrounded by like-minded, active, involved friends – and cool technology!

Christopher Finlay  is Chairman/CEO of Lloyd Jones, a real estate investment firm that specializes in the multifamily and senior housing sectors. Based in Miami, the firm acquires, develops, improves, and operates multifamily and senior housing communities in growth markets throughout Texas, Florida, and the Southeast.  The firm’s investment partners include institutions, family offices, and individual accredited investors.

“The golden era [of stocks and bonds] has now ended,” says a McKinsey & Company report issued last year.

The report suggests that returns on equities and fixed-income investments could see significant decreases – up to 400 or 500 basis points over the next twenty years.   According to the report, this will affect everybody, from pension funds that will face larger funding gaps; asset managers who will see lower fees; and insurers whose earnings depend on investment income.  And on a personal level, the new generation of retirees will retire later and with less income.

And more recently, Bloomberg reported that “U.S. markets are at their highest risk levels since before the 2008 financial crisis… according to Bill Gross, manager of the $2 billion Janus Henderson Global Unconstrained Bond Fund.” The article continues, “Gross said that ‘…returns are going to be lower.’”  These thoughts are echoing throughout the industry.

To prepare for the new era, investors are looking at alternatives.  Many are choosing real estate. And with good reason. In fact, as far back as 2012, a JP Morgan paper suggested that real estate is no longer an alternative, but rather a “way out.”  “An alternative no more.”  Just look at the endowment portfolios of major academic institutions, led by Yale whose successes are legendary. Yale has allocated 12.5% of its investment to real estate.

Maybe it’s time for you to consider diversifying your investment portfolio by adding real estate. Why?

Reduced Volatility
Real estate is stable, unlike the stock market that reacts to every nuanced whisper in politics or the economy.  It is not correlated to the stock and bond markets. Real estate offers a steady, reliable return.   Studies show that, by adding real estate to a mixed portfolio, you will see an increase in returns and, perhaps even more important, a reduction of risk based on return/unit of risk.
I’m not talking about a REIT.  A REIT is like a stock; it goes up and down with the equity markets.  I’m talking about a direct investment in private equity joint venture or a fund.

Cash Flow
Cash flow is the key.  You should receive, at the very least, six-plus percent annual return on your investment. Our goal in today’s market is yield – a reliable, on-going cash flow return.
And this is not about short term. The days of “fix and flip” passed us a couple of years ago. Now, we hold our properties for several years while enjoying the steady cash flow and substantial appreciation.

And we focus on Texas and the Southeast, home to ten of the 15 fastest growing cities plus seven of the ten “best cities for job growth.”  We like to be where the people like to be. Plus, we have existing operations throughout these markets.

Diversification
We like funds because you can spread the risk among various properties and geographic markets. A disappoint-ing performance of one asset will not affect the others. In fact, the others will most likely compensate for it.
We like eight to ten properties in four or more different markets for maximum diversification. We have operations in every market we serve, and our local presence gives us tremendous advantage in finding, acquiring, and operating properties within these territories.

Stand-Alone Entities
Our fund structure allows us to hold our investments property by property. Each one operates as a separate business. There is no cross-collateralization.  A market slow-down in one area will not affect the other properties. We prepare a business plan for each specific property, and we can choose individual hold terms and disposition times.

Alignment of Interest
We believe in our investments; we are thoroughly committed to them, so we participate financially in every one, alongside our investors.

So, what’s an investor to do?
I suggest that we all heed the words of today’s best-known economists and be prepared for the unknown future of the equity and fixed-income markets.  It would be wise to diversify your portfolio with multifamily real estate. Private-equity real estate offers protection from stock market swings and a hedge against inflation.  It provides a steady cash flow, appreciation, and great tax advantages.  What other asset class can say that?__________________________________________
About Christopher Finlay
Christopher Finlay is chairman/CEO of Lloyd Jones Capital, a private-equity real estate firm that specializes in the multifamily sector. For the past thirty-seven years, and through every economic cycle, he has owned and operated successful multifamily businesses. Predecessor companies include commercial brokerage, appraisal, property and asset management, construction, and development.
Headquartered in Miami, Lloyd Jones Capital acquires, improves, and operates multifamily real estate in growth markets throughout Texas, Florida, and the Southeast on behalf of institutional partners, private investors, and its own principals.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, the American dream was to own a modest home in which to raise a family. This was more than a dream; it was an assumption, an expectation. Even the lowest-income workers aimed for and usually achieved, this dream. Not anymore. There is a tremendous last of affordable housing. Millions of our working families cannot even afford a rental apartment.
But that can change. I submit that we can double affordable housing assistance without increasing funding. We currently spend

$50 billion for affordable housing programs

plus

$130 billion to assist non-low income households via tax deductions

Billions. That’s a lot of money. Where does it go?

1. Affordable housing.

Federal and state governments have literally hundreds of programs designed to provide housing assistance – $50 billion worth. This massive bureaucracy comes at a tremendous cost to efficiency, and it meets the needs of only a fraction of the very-low-income population. Plus, it drives up the costs.

2. Assistance for home-owners

We spend $130 billion to assist non-low- income households through mortgage interest and real estate tax deductions. $130 billion to home-owners when we have homeless families?

I’ve just finished reading a 2015 report by the Congressional Budget Office (Federal Housing Assistance for Low-Income Households). It looks at several potential policy changes to address the problem of affordable housing: revising the composition of the assisted population, adjusting tenant contributions to the rent payment on HUD’s voucher program, and repealing and/or replacing various programs. (Just repealing the LIHTC [Low Income Housing Tax Credit] program would increase revenues $42 billion over the next 10 years per the Joint Committee on Taxation.)

This CBO report is an analysis of various options; it offers no solutions. I propose an additional option, but first, we have to address the real issue.

The real issue:

In my opinion, these options do not address the underlying problem: the massive bureaucracy inherent in any government program. Layer upon layer of bureaucracy: administration, multi-tiered approvals, pages and pages of legislative rules and regulations, legal fees, accounting fees, compliance fees – and record maintenance into perpetuity. In one of my LIHTC compliance newsletters, the writer took over 350 words to explain “simply” which income limits to use to qualify a household. If it takes 350 words to tell me which year’s income limits I must use, it’s not simple. It takes attorneys, accountants, and compliance experts to understand the intricacies of each program. How many thousands of people are involved in every project? It’s very expensive to produce affordable housing. I recently read that the cost to construct a low-income housing tax credit unit is $250,000 – for one unit!! I suspect that same unit, market rate, would come in around $150,000.

My Proposal: Let’s dismantle the entire bureaucracy!

Let’s use the funds – from all sources – and provide assistance directly to the end user whose income is too low to afford a median-income rental apartment.

How many would qualify?
According to the CBO report, in 2014 the federal government provided about $50 billion in housing assistance to 4.8 million low-income households. But we have 20 million eligible households (those earning less than 50% of Area Median Income), so we still have 15 million very-low- income households that receive no assistance.

And what about those between 50% and 100% of median? Families earning $30,000 to $60,000 dollars? According to a 2015 report from Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, 20 percent of households earning $45,000–$74,999 (median area income range) were cost burdened in 2014.

The term “cost burdened” typically refers to those paying more than 30 percent of income on housing expenses, including utilities. In my opinion, that definition should be raised to 35 percent or 40 percent.

New System:

Now let’s design a system to provide funds directly to the end user– the household or person needing the assistance. Note that I said “directly.” Let’s cut out the middlemen. Let’s keep it simple. Basically, the recipient needs to prove his/her income, perhaps with an income tax return.

Households whose incomes are below national median income (adjusted for family size) will receive a stipend to supplement their incomes to the point that they can afford a median income rent (i.e. 30 percent of national median income.) This stipend will allow renters to go to any apartment in the country and rent whatever they want and wherever they want.

Assume national median income is $55,000. (In 2015, it was $55,775, per US Census.) Affordable rent for a median-income household of four is $1375 per month. ($55,000 /12 x .30)
So, let’s make sure every household can pay $1375 (adjusted for household size).

For instance, if the household earns only $40,000, it can afford $1167 without being overburdened. That household would receive a monthly stipend of $208. ($1375-$1167)
What if the household lives in a high-income area? Let’s take Dallas as an example.

Median income is $71,700, so median income rent is close to $1,800. This same household would have a choice: Stay in Dallas and pay an extra $450 out of pocket (The difference between national median rent and Dallas median rent) or move to a more affordable community. Again, it’s a choice.

The point is: instead of spending billions of dollars on bureaucracy and expensive production, give the money to the end users. Let them decide their own priorities. Proximity to work? Superior school system? Or maybe someone just likes a blue building. Whatever. The recipients may decide to spend more (or less) than 35% of their income on housing (like our Dallas household). That’s OK.

They can’t do that now with a HUD housing voucher. HUD restricts the amount they can pay, so they have no choice of lifestyle or location, or even the number of bedrooms, for that matter.

Employment- a very important issue

I’m talking here about low-income wage earners. There’s no employment requirement to receive HUD housing vouchers. In fact, the CBO report refers to studies that indicate receipt of a voucher reduces both household employment and earnings. About one-half of HUD’s housing voucher and public housing recipients are of work age and able-bodied, but only half of those count work as a majority of their income. Their other income comes from supplemental non-housing assistance.

In my plan, to receive the proposed stipend, households must show a willingness to work, preferably in a full-time capacity. But, per the report, the cost to wean recipients off housing assistance will cost about $10 billion. (more bureaucracy/administration?)
What has happened to common sense? Our voluminous legislative regulations, encouraged by special interest groups have us so tied up in “programs” that we are failing the working American family. There’s a lot of talk about adjusting programs, but I am talking about eliminating them.

Of course, my broad-brush vision is just that – a general concept. But it is based on my thirty-five years in the multifamily industry, as LIHTC developer, manager and now, investor. I think the number crunchers will show it can work. To get from here to there, however, will not be an easy task.

Christopher Finlay is Chairman/CEO of Lloyd Jones Capital, a private-equity real-estate firm that specializes in the multifamily sector. With 35 years of experience in the real estate industry, the firm acquires, manages and improves multifamily real estate on behalf of its institutional partners, private investors and its own principals. Headquartered in Miami, the firm has operations throughout Texas, Florida and the Southeast. For more information visit: lloydjones.wpengine.com.