Demographic shifts in China pose unprecedented challenges in the care of a rapidly growing older population. Sporadic reports suggest the recent emergence of institutional elder care in China, but little is currently known about this phenomenon. This study documents the growth, ownership, financing, staffing, and resident characteristics of elder care institutions using survey data collected in 2009 from Nanjing, China, supplemented with government registry data from seven additional major Chinese cities. Between one-half and two-thirds of facilities operating in these cities were founded in the last decade, primarily in the non-government sector. In Nanjing, government ownership dominated homes built before 1990 (96%) but was increasingly rare in the 1990s (60%) and in the 2000s (23%), a pattern observed in the other seven cities as well. In Nanjing, the average home now draws more than 80% of its daily operating revenues from private-pay or other non-government sources, and this share increases sharply with the recency of facility establishment. The majority (85%) of non-government-owned homes are receiving ongoing per-bed subsidies from the government. The lack of clinical staff characterizes the majority of study facilities; most care staff are rural migratory workers. There is considerable variability across facilities in the case-mix of residents in terms of functional dependence and acuity levels. These findings portray the emergence and rapid growth of a nascent industry of institutional long-term care in urban China and a fundamental shift in institutional ownership, financing, and clientele.

This study examines recent developments in institutional care for Chinese elders and attitudinal changes toward institutional care in Tianjin, China. Based on studies in 12 elder home sites and survey interviews with 265 older residents, this study compares institutional differences between government and non-government-owned elder homes, and examines elders' evaluations of elder homes' quality and their level of willingness to stay in elder homes. Findings suggest that government-owned elder homes still enjoy institutional and bureaucratic privileges in funding, staffing, and insurance. Elders' overall evaluation of elder home quality was high. Elders' former living arrangement and financial ability were related to their willingness to stay in the elder home. The unfair competition between governmental and non-governmental elder homes is likely to hinder the development of elder home industry in the free-market system and foster a growing gap between the rich and poor elders in their capability and decisions in elder home care. As adult children become increasingly unavailable due to the one-child policy and geographic mobility, institutional care for aging parents is likely to become one of the major options for parent care.