A new white paper is pressing financial advisors and aging-services professionals to move beyond demographic labels and treat solo aging as a planning challenge that can affect anyone whose reliable support cannot be assumed. The report, Navigating Solo: What 507 Voices Reveal About Planning, Support, and Systems for Solo Aging, is based on the 2026 Navigating Solo™ Community Snapshot Survey conducted by Ailene Gerhardt, MA, BCPA, CSA®, founder of Beacon Patient Solutions LLC.
The findings carry direct implications for advisors working with older clients, particularly the rising share of Americans who are single, widowed, or otherwise navigating retirement without a traditional support network. The survey found that solo aging concerns rarely appear in isolation: respondents selected an average of nearly five of the 11 planning areas presented, and 95.9% identified at least two concerns. Health, housing, finances, transportation, social connection, decision-making, and emergency preparation frequently co-occurred within the same individual's planning profile, challenging the idea that solo aging can be addressed through a single document, conversation, or referral.
Only 28.2% of respondents described themselves as somewhat or very confident in their solo aging plan. The remaining 71.8% were neutral, unsure, overwhelmed, or had no plan at all. That confidence gap has direct relevance for advisors: a client who has completed an estate document or long-term care plan may not feel—or be—prepared if the human and logistical support needed to execute that plan is not in place. As Gerhardt noted, "People can prepare thoughtfully and still encounter systems, services, and professional practices that assume someone else will be available to help."
An 'Architecture,' Not Just a Network
One of the paper's central contributions is a distinction between a support network and what it calls an Architecture of Support—an intentional structure of trusted people, skilled professionals, clearly understood roles, practical services, communication pathways, and backup options that can be reliably activated when needed. A client who names a healthcare proxy, designates a power of attorney, or lists an emergency contact has identified relationships, but may not have confirmed that the named individuals understand their roles, have agreed to serve, or can realistically be available at the right moment. Documentation can establish authority; it does not create the human capacity needed to carry it out.
Advisors working with financially solo clients are already navigating this terrain. A May 2026 Ameriprise Financial study found that while 85% of solo adults feel confident managing their money day-to-day, the same proportion worry about aging alone and the long-term decisions that come with it. The Navigating Solo™ findings add a structural dimension to that anxiety: the problem is not only financial confidence, but whether the right people and services will be available, appropriate, capable, and affordable when needed.
A Cost Burden Advisors Should Factor In
The paper introduces the concept of a "Solo Aging Support Premium"—the additional financial burden that arises when solo agers must purchase services that others obtain through personal relationships. Transportation, accompaniment, care coordination, fiduciary services, and emergency backup all carry potential out-of-pocket costs for clients who cannot rely on a spouse, adult child, or nearby family member. The paper does not quantify a specific dollar amount, but the concept aligns with what the Society of Actuaries Research Institute identified in its 2025 solo aging guide series: solo agers face a structurally different cost profile in retirement, one that financial plans built around couple-based assumptions often underestimate.
For advisors, this has practical implications. Cash flow modeling, long-term care planning, and estate strategies designed for partnered clients may not adequately reflect the support costs a solo client will face. Planning for solo retirement income and care costs requires a different analytical lens, one that accounts for the premium of purchasing support that partnered clients may obtain at no cost. As widowed Americans report confidence but seek financial guidance, the need for tailored advice becomes more evident.
Systems and Professionals Need to Adapt
The survey's systemic findings are equally pointed. A total of 65.3% of respondents identified systems not designed for people without immediate family as a barrier to planning, while 43.4% cited systems not designed for people without caregivers. Another 38.5% identified a lack of trusted professionals as a barrier. Open-ended responses described financial planners with "no comprehension of living solo and costs," healthcare systems that automatically assumed a spouse or adult child was available, and aging-services providers that sent communications addressed to "my family" rather than to the individual.
The paper calls this gap a design problem as much as an awareness problem. When a system requires a companion for a medical procedure, assumes a caregiver will coordinate discharge, or defaults form fields to spouse and next of kin, it embeds assumptions that may not reflect a client's actual circumstances. Gerhardt frames this as an opportunity for professionals, including financial advisors, to develop what the paper calls "Solo-Aware" practice: assessing the support actually available for a given role and circumstance rather than inferring it from relationship labels. "Family can be an invaluable source of support," Gerhardt said. "The problem is not family support. The problem is designing systems as though that support can always be assumed."
Advisors looking to enhance their practice may find parallels in direct indexing adoption trends and AI integration gaps, where data-driven approaches are reshaping client service. The solo aging survey underscores that a one-size-fits-all planning model is insufficient; a more nuanced, support-aware approach is needed.
