help_outline Skip to main content
Shopping Cart
cancel

Governance of CCRC/LifePlan Communities

Fiduciary Responsibilities of Management
Author Last Post
Anything recorded becomes documentary evidence if there is a judicial proceeding and documentary evidence is always more credible than mere recollection.

That said, I doubt that the ED was using the term "fiduciary" in its legal sense or context so in this case it would probably only mean that the ED thought that the management had a trust obligation toward the residents.

A designation of a person or corporation as a "fiduciary" would -- as I understand it from my lawyer friends (I am not a lawyer and legal advice should only come from a licensed attorney in the jurisdiction in question) designation as a "fiduciary" takes the personal and corporate obligations to a higher standard of care.

In California, the industry has persuaded the legislature explicitly to declare by statue that nonprofit organizations do not have a fiduciary responsibility toward the beneficiaries they serve (residents in the case of a CCRC).

Resident have few protections and they are pretty much on their own in almost all CCRCs when it comes to matters of corporate financial soundness, inclusion in governance, or having a voice in decisions affecting their lives and well-being.
This is a very delayed response, but I would like a discussion about "fiduciary" responsibility as well.  I believe this was an issue in the Rogue Valley Manor (RVM)  resident rebellion of about 2012, which became a law suit.  RVM was the flagship and original CCRC of Pacific Retirement Services (PRS).  The Exec Dir sided with the residents and was terminated, etc. etc.  Several Board members were replaced by PRS.   The matter was settled out of court, but I believe the attorney of the plaintiff (the residents) was permitted to reveal the terms.  As I recall, one of the terms was about formally accepting fiduciary responsibility... but I really cannot remember why that was, nor if that was JUST for RVM  or all of Pacific Retirement Services.

That said, we had an all-residents meeting the other day here at my CCRC, conducted by management.  It was to inform residents of a strategic move that would help our bottom line.  The ED said, "we have a fiduciary responsibility to ....."  my antennae went up a bit because of my recollection the RVM case.  Fortunately the meeting was broadcast on our in-house TV channel, and I had set my DVR.  I will save that recording.  

Is anyone reading this  "in the know" enough to say to me, "You've got a valuable admission recorded.  Don't erase the recording, as it may be important on down the line."  If that's true, can you explain its importance here?  Thanks!
In the March 5 AV Powell Webinar, Jack Cummings mentioned in the question and answer section that the California Legislature ruled that CCRC board of directors do not have fiduciary responsibility to residents (at time 114:40, i.e. in the part that has been cut off in the archived version).

This is consistent with the behavior of our BoD.

I would like to know the rationale behind this conclusion and general thoughts on the subject.
Return to Forum