How AI Search Is Recommending Assisted Living Facilities: Monthly Trends

Executive Summary

The assisted living facilities category saw significant downward movement in August 2026, with three brands recording meaningful declines in recommendation coverage. Brookdale Senior Living now holds the category lead with 14.2% valid recommendation coverage, 6.2 points ahead of the next brand, Sunrise Senior Living, which fell to 8.0% after leading the category in July at 20.1%. Brookdale's own coverage eased only 2.6 points across the same period, a move within normal month-to-month variation, so its position at the top reflects the surrounding field contracting more than any move of its own.

Sunrise Senior Living posted the sharpest decline, dropping 12.1 points from 20.1% in July to 8.0% in August, a significant move that also erased its top recommendation positions. Atria Senior Living declined by a similar magnitude, falling 11.9 points from 18.1% to 6.2%. Both brands moved from the upper tier of the category into a more compressed middle band. Belmont Village also recorded a significant decline, dropping 5.5 points from 8.1% to 2.6%, though its smaller absolute counts warrant caution in interpretation.

The category experienced no significant risers in August, and seven of ten tracked brands held stable. The overall pattern is one of category-level contraction, particularly affecting presence and top-three recommendation rates, rather than a single brand being displaced. The July baseline showed a wider spread between leaders and the rest; August produced a tighter cluster where Brookdale Senior Living at 14.2% leads a field where the next six brands sit between 1.8% and 8.0%.

The current benchmark measured 403 total prompt-surface observations (286 unique questions) in August 2026. Of these, 403 mentioned a tracked brand or competitor; 318 were relevant to the category and 85 were irrelevant. The public benchmark uses the 113 observations that survived both qualification stages. The July 2026 baseline followed the same funnel structure (403 total prompts, 286 unique questions, 403 brand-mentioned, 318 relevant, 85 irrelevant) but retained 149 qualified observations.

Key Findings

Benchmark Context

The report separates the raw collection universe from the qualified analysis set. Brand-level recommendation percentages are calculated within the qualified benchmark set.

The qualified benchmark set shrank from 149 observations in July to 113 in August, even though the upstream collection volume held steady at 403 prompts and 286 unique questions across both months. That contraction is a meaningful part of the category-wide movement described above, and it affects how the benchmark-level metrics below should be read.

Benchmark-Level Metrics

AI Recommendation Trend

Category Leadership Narrowed as Three Brands Declined Significantly

The assisted living category shifted from a competitive four-brand leadership cluster in July to a clear two-tier structure in August. Brookdale Senior Living held its leadership position, though its own coverage eased from 16.8% to 14.2%, a movement within normal month-to-month variation. The broader story is the compression of the category, with three brands recording significant declines and none recording significant gains.

The category-level change came from the combination of three significant declines rather than a single brand's movement. No brand exceeded normal month-to-month variation in the upward direction, and seven brands remained within their expected range. The net effect is a narrower leadership band and a more compressed middle of the field.

What Changed This Month

Sunrise Senior Living

Sunrise Senior Living recorded the largest decline in August, with valid recommendation coverage falling 12.1 points from 20.1% in July to 8.0% in August. This was a significant movement and the largest single-month move for the brand in the series. Its recommendation-shaped answer share contributed to the decline, as the category overall saw these answers fall from 30.9% to 13.3%.

The brand's presence also contracted. Raw mention presence fell 41.9 points from 63.1% to 21.2%, a sharp decline. Top-three recommendation rate fell 11.6 points from 13.4% to 1.8%, and rank-one rate fell 4.0 points from 4.0% to 0.0%, with the brand recording no rank-one recommendations in August against 6 in July. Placement in top-ten results fell from 24 to 6 observations.

The distinction to notice is between presence and recommendation. Sunrise Senior Living remained the second-most-recommended brand overall at 8.0% coverage with 9 valid recommendations, but its rank-one positions disappeared entirely and its mention presence declined sharply. The drop in presence suggests the brand appears in fewer AI answers altogether, not merely lower in recommendation lists. Highest-priority diagnostic: which prompt themes drove the July presence that did not carry into August, and which competitor was recommended in the answers where Sunrise Senior Living was previously present.

Atria Senior Living

Atria Senior Living declined 11.9 points from 18.1% in July to 6.2% in August, a significant movement and the second-largest single-month move in the category. The brand saw its raw mention presence fall 35.1 points from 51.0% to 15.9%, and its top-three recommendation rate fell 10.8 points from 13.4% to 2.6%, with rank-one coverage easing from 3.4% to 0.9%.

The brand's valid recommendation count fell from 27 in July to 7 in August, and its top-ten placements fell from 23 to 5. Sentiment among the smaller mention base remained positive at 0.4 net sentiment score, though this is based on fewer observations. The brand's average recommended rank moved from 2.4 in July to 3.0 in August. Combined with the drop in valid recommendations, this indicates the issue was primarily about how often Atria appeared in eligible answers, though its placement within those answers also slipped modestly.

Atria did not lose its position within recommendation lists so much as it lost its presence in the answers that drive recommendations. The presence drop of 35.1 points suggests a broader visibility change rather than a ranking-specific issue. Highest-priority diagnostic: which sources or surface families previously surfaced Atria Senior Living in July, and which of those fell away in August.

Belmont Village

Belmont Village declined 5.5 points from 8.1% in July to 2.6% in August, a significant movement on a smaller base. Its raw mention presence fell from 14.1% to 8.8%, while its valid recommendation coverage fell from 12 to 3 observations.

Top-three recommendation rate eased from 3.4% to 1.8%, and rank-one rate from 1.3% to 0.9%. The brand recorded 1 rank-one recommendation in August against 2 in July, and its top-ten placements fell from 7 to 3. Its net sentiment score eased from 0.8 to 0.4, though this is based on a small mention base.

The small-count caveat applies here: with 3 valid recommendations and 10 mentions in August, percentage movements represent a handful of observations. The significant classification reflects the proportional change, but the absolute numbers are thin. Highest-priority diagnostic: which specific prompts generated the 3 valid recommendations in August, and whether those reflect a narrowing of the query themes where Belmont Village appears.

Brookdale Senior Living and the Stable Middle

Brookdale Senior Living retained the category lead despite a 2.6 point decline from 16.8% to 14.2%, a movement within normal variation. However, its presence fell sharply, from 67.8% to 37.2% (down 30.6 points), and its rank-one rate eased from 9.4% to 3.5% (down 5.9 points). The brand held 16 valid recommendations in August with an average rank of 1.7, meaning when Brookdale was recommended, it appeared early in the list.

The middle of the category was stable. Erickson Senior Living, Life Care Services (LCS), Pegasus Senior Living, Sonida Senior Living, Five Star Senior Living, and Holiday Retirement all moved within normal variation, though several saw presence declines that did not translate into significant coverage changes. The exception pattern is notable: sizable presence declines across multiple brands did not uniformly produce significant coverage declines, suggesting the relationship between being mentioned and being recommended did not move in lockstep across the category. Highest-priority diagnostic: whether the broad presence declines across the category reflect a change in which prompts AI systems answer with brand mentions at all.

Buyer-Intent Interpretation

In August, all 113 qualified observations fell into the brand recommendation cluster. No qualified observations were recorded for pricing and value or multi-brand comparison, despite the response type distribution showing 22 pricing analysis answers and 3 comparison analysis answers in the raw collection. The public benchmark therefore cannot yet answer which brand wins on price positioning or in head-to-head comparisons. The commercial question posed by this category is narrower: when a buyer asks for a recommendation, which brand appears, not which brand offers the better value or comparison.

Brand Opportunity Summary

The benchmark identifies where attention is warranted; a company-level analysis is needed to explain why.

Evidence Behind the Benchmark

The aggregate metrics are built from prompt-level observations covering the query, the AI surface used, the recommendation outcome, the rank of each brand mentioned, the sentiment expressed, and citations where exposed. Company-level analysis can go deeper into prompt, competitor, surface, and evidence patterns. Source presence is not automatically treated as proof of causation.

About This Benchmark

This report is part of the LLM Authority Index AI Market Discovery research program.

• AI Industry Market Discovery Methodology
• AI Industry Market Discovery Metrics
• AI Industry Market Discovery Standards

Report-Specific Interpretation Notes

• Small-count movement: several brands in this category operate on very small absolute counts (Five Star Senior Living at 1 valid recommendation, Sonida at 1, Belmont Village at 3). Their percentage movements represent a handful of observations and should be read with that context.
• Qualified denominator vs raw collection: percentages are calculated against the 113 qualified observations in August, not the 403 total prompts or the 318 relevant prompts. This means presence and coverage figures are conservative relative to the full collection.
• Directional analysis: month-over-month movement identifies changes worth investigating. The benchmark does not establish the cause of those changes. The simultaneous decline across multiple brands and the shift in response types from July to August suggest possible instrument or prompt-mix effects that a company-level analysis would need to examine.

Next Step

The Public Benchmark Shows Where a Brand Is Winning or Losing. A Company-Level Audit Shows Why.

Beneath the aggregate percentages sit specific questions: which high-intent prompts are won, which competitor takes the recommendation when a brand loses, what attributes AI associates with each facility option, and which external sources shape those answers. The August data shows which brands lost presence and coverage, but not the prompt-level reasons why.

A company-specific AI visibility audit maps those prompt, surface, competitor, ranking, sentiment, and evidence-source patterns into a prioritized visibility strategy. This turns the benchmark's directional signal into an actionable plan for restoring or extending recommendation coverage.

Request an AI visibility audit