A free senior-care directory with real first-hand resident reviews, but it earns referral fees from the very providers it lists, and by its own disclosure paid partnerships can affect listing order.
What it's really for A senior-care referral directory; communities pay referral fees for the families it sends.
What our grade covers The grade on this page is about its senior-care reviews and 'Caring Stars' list, not everything the site does.
High Scoring Confidence Checked against primary sources. We are confident in the facts and the grade here.
Senior living communities and home-care agencies pay the most, via per-lead and per-move-in referral fees plus listing subscriptions; by Caring.com's own disclosure this paid relationship can influence display order and prominence, though it states compensation does not dictate review content.
Source →- Operating since
- 2007 (19 years) · source
- What it costs you
- Free to read The reviews are free to read.
- How they make money
- It is a lead-generation referral service: senior living communities and home-care agencies pay Caring.com referral or lead fees plus optional listing subscriptions, supplemented by advertising and affiliate commissions, while remaining free to consumers.
- What they do
- Caring.com runs a U.S. directory of assisted living, memory care, and home-care providers with 400,000+ consumer reviews, a free helpline, and an annual "Caring Stars" best-of list.
- What to watch for
- The same providers it lists pay it referral and lead fees, and by its own disclosure advertising and partnerships can affect "how and where" providers appear, "including the order in which they appear," so listing prominence is not purely merit-based.
- Composite score
- 3.00 / 5.00 → grade B-
How the grade was reached
Does the site take money from the very entities it ranks? Pay-for-placement, vendor-funded data, and affiliate commissions all pull this down. The less the ranking can be bought, the higher the score.
What is the ranking actually built on? Hands-on testing scores highest, then verified first-hand reviews, then opinion or popularity surveys and self-reported figures, then pay-to-rank, which scores lowest.
Is the methodology published, specific, and reproducible? Can a reader see how a given rank was reached, or is it a black box?
Are commercial relationships, sponsorships, and affiliate arrangements disclosed clearly and near the rankings themselves, rather than buried?
How hard is it to game? Controls against fake reviews, solicited reviews, and vendor gaming raise this; an open box anyone can stuff lowers it.
Evidence
- By its own disclosure, compensation 'does not dictate our research and editorial content... nor how we manage our consumer reviews program,' but 'Advertising and partnerships can impact how and where products, services, and service providers are shown on our website, including the order in which they appear.' Providers pay referral fees on hire/move-in, per-lead fees regardless of conversion, and annual subscription fees for enhanced listings. Source: Caring.com - How We Make Money →
- The FTC required Caring.com to be divested as a condition of Red Ventures' $1.4B acquisition of Bankrate (its then-owner), because two of Red Ventures' largest shareholders jointly owned competitor A Place for Mom; Caring.com was the second-largest paid senior-living referral service. It was sold to Caring Holdings, LLC in 2018, confirming the paid-referral business model and concentration of the sector. Source: FTC press release (Nov 2017) →
- Consumer reviews are first-hand from residents and families, read by trained human processors who publish only submissions meeting guidelines and use proprietary technology to screen out conflict-of-interest, inauthentic, or invalid reviews; the Caring Stars list adds an integrity audit and state-licensure verification, requiring 10+ reviews and a 4.5+ rating with no unresolved complaints. Source: Caring.com - Reviews Methodology and FAQ →