# Breaking Barriers: Understanding the social connection challenges of older adults — An Auckland and Tauranga perspective

- Document ID: doc-0130
- Publisher: Age Concern Auckland; funded by CHT Aged Care Fund
- Catalogue publication date: August 2024
- Physical pages in preserved PDF: 110
- Original capture/access label: June 2026
- Primary-source review: 9 October 2026

[Preserved bundled original](/pdfs/2024%20-%20CHT%20-%20Breaking%20Report%20Loneliness%20and%20Social%20Isolation.pdf) · [Primary publisher](https://www.ageconcernauckland.org.nz/breaking-barriers-research/) · [Primary PDF reviewed](https://www.ageconcernauckland.org.nz/media/website_pages/breaking-barriers-research/ACAK-CHT-BREAKING-BARRIERS-REPORT.pdf)

[CHT public announcement](https://cht.co.nz/age-concern-report-shines-a-light-on-lonliness/)

## What this document contributes

Age Concern research funded by CHT explores how older adults experience social connection in Auckland and Tauranga. Emily Pedersen and Nikki Moloney used questionnaires and informal interviews with 102 adults aged 65+, recruited through services and community channels. Participants described challenges involving family relationships, health services, housing, purpose, confidence, grief and retirement. The report combines their accounts with wellbeing measures to inform community responses. Its 59% loneliness/isolation finding describes this selected cohort, not national prevalence. Rest-home residents and people with severe cognitive impairment were excluded, and Māori and Pasifika were under-represented. The report was publicly announced by 22 August 2024; that announcement does not establish the exact first PDF publication day.

## Substantive findings

- The sample comprised 102 adults aged 65+: 72 in Auckland and 30 in Tauranga (physical p.16 / printed p.14).
- Recruitment through Age Concern clients, community publicity, events and word of mouth was not a national probability sample; rest-home/long-term-care residents and people with severe cognitive impairment were excluded.
- A 62-question mixed qualitative/quantitative questionnaire and informal interviews explored social connection; Mandarin, Japanese and Korean translations supported participation (physical p.17).
- 59% of participants had recently felt lonely and/or isolated. The 30% who felt this often/always is a proportion of that lonely/isolated subset, not of all 102 participants (physical p.3).
- The report explicitly identifies under-representation of Māori and Pasifika; findings should not be generalised to these populations or all older New Zealanders.
- The Personal Wellbeing Index covers seven life domains on a 0–100 scale and does not directly measure loneliness (physical pp.20–21).
- Qualitative themes include family dynamics, health services, housing, purpose, confidence, grief and retirement planning; these accounts do not establish that a particular service prevents loneliness.

## Identity, dates and provenance

CHT announcement HTML dates publication to 22 August 2024; report available by that day, exact first PDF publication unverified.

The original PDF and filename are preserved. Its SHA-256 is `a1f8ed4a40c611ac71dd6b8e8d1eece1c8e9348302e6fdb457554bb627dbc717` (2,756,402 bytes). The reviewed primary PDF is byte-identical to the bundled original.

## Where to check the original

Physical pp.3,16–17,20–21,102; printed pagination is two pages lower in these sections.

## Evidence limits

Selected 102-person community sample, not national prevalence or a causal intervention evaluation. Excludes residential-care residents and severe cognitive impairment; Māori/Pasifika under-represented. Cover has no exact publication day; August 2024 is supported by the dated CHT announcement, separate from June 2026 capture and October 2026 review.

This companion is an evidence guide, not a replacement original, a new survey or a statement that historical proposals were implemented.

Repository research fixture `artifacts/research/seniors-social-demography-2026-10-09.json` records source identities, hashes, physical page evidence and publisher-date distinctions.