The complexity of long-term care is evident in how it is defined. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) defines long-term care as encompassing ". .. a diverse array of services provided over a sustained period of time to people of all ages with chronic conditions and functional limitations" (Wunderlich & Kohler, 2001, p. 36). Building on this definition, Kane, Priester, and Totten (2005) describe long-term care as informal, or unpaid, support and care from family and/or friends; paid care including personal care, meals, homemaking, and custodial/home care services; supportive services in residential care settings such as nursing homes or assisted living; and assistive technologies/ devices and environmental adaptations (Kane et al., 2005). Far from the popular conception that long-term care is commensurate with nursing homes (Reinhard & Young, 2009; White et al., 2013) or operates according to a linear continuum, long-term care is more accurately conceptualized as an interaction between services received and environments that may change dynamically over time (Gaugler, in press). This more complex conceptualization requires the incorporation of multiple stakeholder perspectives (formal care providers, residents themselves, family members) and integrated methodologies to better understand long-term care. The articles in this issue of the Journal of Applied Gerontology effectively demonstrate how the study of long-term care using multiple methods and perspectives results in more holistic scholarship. For example, Simmons, Durkin, Rahman, Schnelle, and Beuscher (2014) provided video vignettes to 17 nurse aides and 15 family members to determine how these participants perceived resident choice as occuring in these care episodes. Via qualitative data elicited during focus groups, families and aides emphasized how choice could enhance residents' quality of life and was consonant with their own personal values. In my mind, these findings further emphasize the critical role of resident choice in any, if not all, culture change and person-centered care efforts. In Etheridge et al. (2014), a series of four case studies explored why such change initiatives succeeded or failed in long-term care settings in Québec, Canada. Change initiatives that emphasized urgency, solidarity, intensity, and accumulation appeared the most successful in sustaining 544088J AGXXX10.