Assisted Living Locators
A family’s context stays with the recommendation.
Needs before options
Location · Budget · Care requirements · Urgency
A shortlist to discuss
Keep the requirements beside the options, then confirm the details with the family and provider.
Understand
Gather location, budget, care needs and urgency.
Compare
Organize relevant options for the advisor.
Confirm
Check current information and family priorities.
Discuss
Keep the advisor responsible for the recommendation.
Matching supports an advisor’s conversation. Availability, suitability and a family’s changing circumstances still need confirmation.
Illustrated from this case study. Examples are synthetic and contain no customer data.
The short version
The full story
Finding senior living is a personal decision made under very different circumstances. One family may be exploring options; another may need help quickly. A useful product needs to make that context easy for an advisor to understand.
The product
The project connected family intake with a matching workflow and an advisor console. Location, budget, care requirements and urgency help organize options for review. The console gives the advisor a place to work with that information and continue the conversation.
My contribution
I worked across the matching flow, interface and supporting data. The product challenge was to turn a collection of requirements into something an advisor could understand and act on, while keeping the family context visible.
The decision boundary
A recommendation is a starting point for a conversation. It is not clinical advice, a guarantee of availability or a placement decision. An advisor still needs to confirm current information, understand the family’s priorities and assess whether an option fits.
What I would improve next
I would connect recommendations to advisor feedback and eventual outcomes. That would help distinguish a plausible match from one that proves useful, and provide a better basis for adjusting the matching criteria.