Housing Audit

  • Belinda YuenEmail author
  • Parvathi Nair


Housing conditions strongly influence people’s quality of life and contribute to their health. Housing features such as entry stairs, narrow doorways could potentially help or hinder the older person’s ability to remain active, independent and socially included in the community. In thinking about the influence the home environment has on the older person’s quality of life, we have developed a Housing Audit Checklist to analyse the age-ready quality of individual homes. This Chapter introduces the Housing Audit Checklist, the results and recommendations from its pilot testing and validation on a sample of older residents in Singapore.


Public housingPublic Housing Housing Respondents servicesServices adaptabilityAdaptability accessibilityAccessibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We gratefully acknowledge the following for their generous support and assistance with the Housing Audit Survey: our colleague Cheong Sue Wei, student intern Lim Aunn Ning and interviewers for helping us conduct the interview; our colleague Dr. Hou Yuting for helping us with the statistical analysis of data; residents who participated in our interview and generously shared with us their responses and experiences of their in-home environments.


  1. Age UK Enterprises. (2015). Cost of home maintenance key concern for over 60s. Accessed March 8, 2016.
  2. Beales, S. (2012). Empowerment and older people: Enhancing capabilities in an ageing world. In Expert Group Meeting on Promoting People’s Empowerment in Achieving Poverty Eradication, Social Integration and Productive and Decent Work for All, September 10–12 2012, HelpAge International, UN Headquarters, New York, Accessed Accessed March 10, 2016.
  3. Buffel, T., Mcgarry, P., Phillipson, C., De Donder, L., Dury, S., De Witte, N., et al. (2014). Developing age-friendly cities: Case studies from Brussels and Manchester and implications for policy and practice. Journal of Aging and Social Policy, 26, 52–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bureau of Labor Statistics, US Department of Labor. (2014). The American time use survey 2013. Washington DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics.Google Scholar
  5. Burns, A., & Burns, R. (2008). Basic marketing research. Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  6. CABE. (2004). Housing audit: Assessing the design quality of new homes. London: CABE.Google Scholar
  7. Dukes, K. A. (2005). Likert scale, encyclopedia of biostatistics. Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Goldsmith, S. (1997). Designing for the disabled: The new paradigm. London: Architectural Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hanson, J. (2001). From sheltered housing to lifetime homes: An inclusive approach to housing. London: University College London.Google Scholar
  10. Help the Aged. (2006). Older people, decent homes and fuel poverty. London: Help the Aged.Google Scholar
  11. Lam, K. L., & Lee, S. L. T. (2009). Elderly participation and empowerment: Experiences of SAGE. APIAS Monograph Paper Series No. 21. Retrieved from Lingnan University website:
  12. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55.Google Scholar
  13. Lui, C. W., Everingham, J. A., Warburton, J., Cuthill, M., & Bartlett, H. (2009). What makes a community age-friendly: A review of international literature. Australasian Journal on Ageing, 28, 116–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mace, R. L., Hardie, G. J., & Place, J. P. (1991). Accessible environments: Toward universal design. In W. E. Preiser, J. C. Vischer & E. T. White (Eds.), Design intervention toward a more humane architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  15. Mountain, G., Gomersall, T., & Taylor, J. (2015). Developing medical, fitness and wellbeing environments to maintain health and wellbeing over the life course. Future of an Ageing Population: Evidence Review, Foresight, Government Office for Science, UK.Google Scholar
  16. Plouffe, L., & Kalache, A. (2010). Towards global age-friendly cities: Determining urban features that promote active aging. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 87(5), 733–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Oregon, US Department of Consumer and Business Services, Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division. (n.d.). Labor housing inspection checklist. Accessed August 13, 2017.
  18. Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, UK. (n.d.) Access audit checklist: Residential communal areas. Accessed August 13, 2017.
  19. World Health Organisation. (1946). Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, June 19–22 1946, Official Records of the World Health Organization, No. 2.Google Scholar
  20. World Health Organisation. (1998). Growing older—Staying well. Geneva: World Health Organisation.Google Scholar
  21. World Health Organisation. (2002). Active aging: A policy framework. Geneva: World Health Organisation.Google Scholar
  22. World Health Organisation. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Geneva: World Health Organisation.Google Scholar
  23. Wylde, M., Baron-Robbins, A., & Clark, S. (1994). Building for a lifetime: The design and construction of fully accessible homes. USA: Taunton Press.Google Scholar
  24. Yuen, B., & Soh, E. (2017). Housing for older people in Singapore: An annotated bibliography. Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Yuen, B., & Withanage, C. (2015, November 17). Smart designs for an ageing population. The Business Times.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Singapore University of Technology and DesignSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations