houses for case study

Share this story

The Case Study houses that made Los Angeles a modernist mecca

Mapping the homes that helped to define an era

Los Angeles is full of fantastic residential architecture styles, from Spanish Colonial Revival to Streamline Moderne. But the modernist Case Study Houses , sponsored by Arts & Architecture and designed between the 1940s and 1960s, are both native to Southern California and particularly emblematic of the region.

The Case Study series showcased homes commissioned by the magazine and designed by some of the most influential designers and architects of the era, including Charles and Ray Eames, Richard Neutra, and Pierre Koenig. The residences were intended to be relatively affordable, replicable houses for post-World War II family living, with an emphasis on “new materials and new techniques in house construction,” as the magazine’s program intro put it.

Technological innovation and practical, economical design features were emphasized—though the homes’ scintillating locations, on roomy lots in neighborhoods like Pacific Palisades and the Hollywood Hills , gave them a luxurious allure.

With the help of photographer Julius Shulman , who shot most of the homes, the most impressive of the homes came to represent not only new styles of home design, but the postwar lifestyle of the booming Southern California region.

A total of 36 houses and apartment buildings were commissioned; a couple dozen were built, and about 20 still stand in the greater Los Angeles area (there’s also one in Northern California, a set near San Diego, and a small apartment complex in Phoenix). Some have been remodeled, but others have been well preserved. Eleven were added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2013.

Here’s a guide to all the houses left to see—but keep in mind that, true to LA form, most are still private residences. The Eames and Stahl houses, two of the most famous Case Study Houses, are regularly open to visitors.

As for the unconventional house numbering, post-1962 A&A publisher David Travers writes that the explanation is “inexplicable, locked in the past.”

Case Study House No. 1

J.R. Davidson (with Greta Davidson) designed this house in 1948 (it was actually his second go at Case Study House No. 1). It was intended for “a hypothetical family" with two working parents and was designed to require "minimum maintenance.”

• Open in Google Maps

Case Study House No. 2

Case Study House No. 2 was designed in 1947 by Sumner Spaulding and John Rex. Arts & Architecture wrote that the home’s layout “achieves a sense of spaciousness and flexibility,” with an open living area and glass doors that lead out to adjoining terraces.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Samuel Dematraz (@samueldematraz) on Oct 28, 2018 at 1:07am PDT

Case Study House No. 7

Case Study House No. 7 was designed in 1948 by Thornton M. Abell. It has a “three-zone living area,” with space for study, activity, and relaxation/conversation; the areas can be separated by sliding panels or combined.

Eames House (Case Study House No. 8)

Legendary designer couple Charles and Ray Eames designed the Eames House in 1949 and even Arts & Architecture seemed kind of blown away by it. The home is built into a hillside behind a row of Eucalyptus trees on a bluff above Pacific Palisades. It's recognizable by its bright blue, red, and yellow panels. The Eameses lived in the house until their deaths. It’s now open to visitors five days per week, though reservations are required.

Entenza House (Case Study House No. 9)

The Entenza House was built in 1949 and designed by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen for Arts & Architecture editor John Entenza. According to the magazine, “In general, the purpose was to enclose as much space as possible within a reasonably simple construction.”

Case Study House No. 10

Case Study House No. 10 was designed in 1947 by Kemper Nomland. The house is built on several levels to mold into its sloping site. Recently restored, the home sold to Kristen Wiig in 2017.

Case Study House No. 15

Designed by J.R. Davidson in 1947, Case Study House No. 15 has south walls made of huge glass panels. Its flagstone patio and indoor floor are at the same level for that seamless indoor-outdoor feel. According to the magazine, the floorplan “is basically that of another Davidson house, Case Study House No. 11,” which has been demolished.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Samuel Dematraz (@samueldematraz) on Nov 15, 2018 at 6:13am PST

Case Study House for 1953

Craig Ellwood’s Case Study House for 1953 is usually numbered as 16 in the Case Study series . It has a modular steel structure and “the basic plan is a four-foot modular rectangle.” But the interior walls stick out past the exterior walls to bring the indoors out and the outdoors in. The Bel Air house hit the market in November with a $3 million price tag.

Case Study House No. 17 (A)

Case Study House No. 17 (A) was designed by Rodney Walker in 1947. A tight budget kept the house at just 1,560 square feet, “but more space was gained through the use of many glass areas.” The house also has a large front terrace with a fireplace that connects the indoor living room fireplace. The house has been remodeled .

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Case Study House #17, 1947 (@casestudy17) on Jun 11, 2016 at 2:20pm PDT

Case Study House No. 17 (B)

Case Study House No. 17 (B) was designed in 1956 by Craig Ellwood, but “governed by a specific program set forth by the client.” Ellwood took into account the clients' collection of contemporary paintings and made the living room “purposely undersized” to work best for small gatherings. The house was extensively remodeled in the sixties by Hollywood Regency architect John Elgin Woolf and his partner, interior designer Robert Koch Woolf.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by BAUKUNST™ El Arte de Construir (@i_volante) on Aug 13, 2017 at 4:42pm PDT

West House (Case Study House No. 18 [A])

Case Study House No. 18 (A) was designed by Rodney Walker in 1948. The house is oriented toward the ocean, but set back from the cliff edge it sits on to avoid noise issues. As A&A says, "High above the ocean, the privacy of the open south and east exposures of Case Study House No. 18 can be threatened only by an occasional sea-gull." The house features a "bricked garden room" separated from the living room by a two-sided fireplace.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by CaseStudyHouse18A (@casestudyhouse18a) on Oct 6, 2018 at 8:44pm PDT

Fields House (Case Study House No. 18 [B])

Case Study House No. 18 (B) was designed by Craig Ellwood in 1958. Ellwood didn’t attempt to hide that the house was prefabricated (the magazine explains that he believed “that the increasing cost of labor and the decline of the craftsman will within not too many years force a complete mechanization of residential construction methods”). The components of the house, however, are “strongly defined with color: ceiling and panels are off-white and the steel framework is blue.” According to A&A' s website, the house has been remodeled.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by MCM Daily (@dc_hillier) on Oct 29, 2018 at 8:32pm PDT

Case Study House No. 20 [A])

This two-bedroom house was meant “to serve young parents who find they can afford just that much,” according to architect Richard Neutra’s description. He also wrote that he used several different kinds of natural wood in the house.

Bass House (Case Study House No. 20 [B])

The Bass House was designed in 1958 by Buff, Straub, and Hensman for famed graphic designer Saul Bass. It's “unique in that it was based upon the experimental use of several prefabricated Douglas fir plywood products as part of the structural concept,” including hollow-core plywood vaults that covered the central part of the house.

Case Study House No. 21

Pierre Koenig designed Case Study House No. 21 in 1958. It was originally completely surrounded by water, with a walkway and driveway spanning the moat at the front door and carport, respectively. The house was severely messed with over the years, but restored in the ’90s with help from Koenig.

Stahl House (Case Study House No. 22)

Pierre Koenig's Stahl House , designed in 1960, is probably the most famous house in Los Angeles, thanks to an iconic photo by Julius Shulman . The house isn't much to look at from the street, but its backside is mostly glass surrounding a cliff's-edge pool. Tours are available Mondays, Wednesdays, and Friday—but book well ahead of time, as they sell out quickly.

Case Study House for 1950

The unnumbered Case Study House for 1950 was designed by Raphael Soriano. It's rectangular, with living room and bedrooms facing out to the view. However, in the kitchen and eating areas, the house “turns upon itself and living develops around a large kitchen-dining plan opening upon a terrace which leads directly into the living room interrupted only by the mass of two fireplaces.” According to A&A 's website, the house has been remodeled.

Frank House (Case Study House No. 25)

The two-story Frank House was designed by Killingsworth, Brady, and Smith and Associates in 1962 and it sits on a canal in Long Beach. A reflecting pool with stepping stones leads to its huge front door and inside to an 18-foot high courtyard. The house sold in 2015 with some unfortunate remodeling .

Case Study House No. 28

Case Study House No. 28 was designed in 1966 by Conrad Buff and Donald Hensman. According to the magazine, “the architects were asked to design a house that incorporated face brick as the primary structural material to demonstrate its particular advantages.” They came up with a plan for two symmetrical wings joined by glass galleries.

Site search

• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Archive.curbed.com
• For Sale
 in LA
• For Rent in LA
• Curbed Comparisons
• Neighborhoods
• Real Estate Market Reports
• Rental Market Reports
• Homelessness
• Development
 News
• Transportation
• Architecture


More From Forbes

The case study houses forever changed american architecture.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Scenes from the new showroom of Herman Miller which shows classic designs by Charles and Ray Eames, ... [+] in Culver City, Ca., Oct. 1, 2009. (Photo by Jay L. Clendenin/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

The Case Study House Program’s vision belonged to Los Angeles-based Arts & Architecture magazine Editor John Entenza.

Entenza sponsored and publicized some design competitions in the magazine and emphasized modern, affordable, easily built houses.

He announced the Case Study House Program's launch in the January 1945 issue of Arts & Architecture magazine . He envisioned the program to solve the problem of housing shortages and anticipated the coming building boom that would follow War World II and the Depression.

The front side of the Eames House Case Study #8 designed by architects Charles and Ray Eames in ... [+] Pacific Palisades. June 30, 2005. (Photo by Mark Boster/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

A 1937 Harwell Harris house has a Streamline Moderne exterior with a white curved porte cochere in ... [+] front (wide enough for the original owner, powerful architecture magazine editor John Entenza s 1925 Ford) and a round bedroom wall in back overlooking Santa Monica Canyon. Peter Rabitz, a co–worker visiting from Germany, enjoys the view into the canyon on a recent visit. (Photo by Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

A 1937 Harwell Harris house has the porte cochere at left and entrance to house at right. (Photo by ... [+] Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

The goal of the program was for each architect to create a home "capable of duplication and in no sense being an individual performance," Entenza said in his announcement.

"It is important that the best materials available be used in the best possible way in order to arrive at a good solution of each problem, which in the overall program will be general enough to be of practical assistance to the average American in search of a home in which he can afford to live in," he noted.

Architect Pierre Koenig designed two of the iconic Modernist houses in Los Angeles in the 1950s ... [+] known as Case Study House 21 and 22. Drawing of one of Koenig's designs. (Photo by Anacleto Rapping/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

The Case Study House Program served as a model for post-war living, providing the public and the building industry an opportunity to access affordable, mid-century modernism and simple designs.

Floor-to-ceiling glass, steel frames, horizontal lines, modular components, open-floor plans and multi-purpose rooms were all elements of the Case Study’s take on modernism. The furnished projects provided places for owners to enjoy a family-friendly home with public and private spaces to relax, watch TV, listen to music and entertain, merging indoor and outdoor worlds with walls of steel and glass to allow ample light.

Initially, Entenza invited Richard Neutra, Charles Eames, Eero Saarinen and five other architects to submit prototypes and planned that all eight houses would be open to the public until they were occupied. The project was ambitious. The Eames and Entenza houses were designed in 1945 but not completed until 1949. Still, the Case Study program was so successful that it ran until 1966 and saw 350,000 visitors tour the open homes before clients took up residence.

Architect Pierre Koenig designed two of the iconic Modernist houses in Los Angeles in the 1950s ... [+] known as Case Study House 21 and 22. Photos of Pierre and Gloria Koenig main living room inside their West Los Angeles home which Pierre designed. (Photo by Anacleto Rapping/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Twenty homes remain today, but 36 experimental prototypes, many unbuilt, documenting new ideas and residential designs, appeared in the magazine.

The majority of the homes were built in Southern California; some are located in San Diego and Northern California; a group of Case Study apartments was built in Phoenix.

Many architects such as Ray and Charles Eames, Saarinen, Craig Ellwood and Pierre Koenig became icons of modernism and earned international followings. The Case Study Houses launched the reputations of local architects such as Thornton Bell, Whitney R. Smith and Rodney Walker.

• Editorial Standards
• Forbes Accolades

By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy . We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services.

THE CASE STUDY HOUSES

• Share on Facebook
• Show more sharing options
• Share on WhatsApp
• Print This Page
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share to Flipboard
• Submit to Reddit
• Post to Tumblr

To fully appraise the Case Study program one should first see it within the context of similar endeavors which have been tried from time to time in this country and abroad. Throughout the 20th century, nu­merous “Idea houses” or “Houses of the future” have appeared in exhibitions and others have been spon­sored by home and women’s magazines. In 1927–28 the internationally famous Weissonhof housing proj­ects featured designs by Le Corbusier, Gropius, Mart Stam, J. J. P. Oud and others. A similar project to encourage the acceptance of modern architecture was instituted before the Second World War by the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis in their first “Idea house,” and continued in a second “Idea house” con­structed in 1947 behind the Center. In 1948 The Museum of Modern Art commissioned Marcel Breuer to build an exhibition house in the Museum court­yard; a second house was commissioned in 1950 to the California architect Gregory Ain. In the 1950’s the Guggenheim Museum, as part of its exhibition of Frank Lloyd Wright, built one of his “Usonian” houses.

Few of these programs have been able to sustain themselves for any appreciable length of time and it is difficult to say whether they have actually pro­duced their desired result. Even the influential ex­hibition and publication program of the Museum of Modern Art in architecture and design, first under Phillip Johnson in the early 1930’s, and later in the 40’s and early 50’s under Edgar Kaufman has pretty well fallen into a respectable intellectual doldrum in the hands of Arthur Drexler.

That this path is a precarious one is well illustrated by several of the most recent Case Study Houses, especially the Towri House on the Rivo Alto Canal, near Long Beach, and the Triad Development of houses at La Jolla, all by the firm of Killingsworth, Brady and Smith. In each of these houses there is a decided tinge of what has so aptly been labeled “Hollywood Regency.” Not that their forms are in any way eclectic––there is no evidence whatsoever of “French Provincial” or “English Regency” which is the normal mode of the Beverly Hills version of “Holly­wood Regency.” Yet their own involvement with formalism, with forced symmetry and their self-con­scious concern for uncluttered forms and surfaces has created a preciousness which compromises their total architectural statement. Man’s physical frame may well be symmetrical, but this does not mean that he necessarily lives or operates in this way. There is something dramatic about entering a house over a bridge, or via a series of stepping stones over a pool of water, but in the end is this architecture or simply a stage setting? In their house “A” at La Jolla, Kil­lingsworth, Brady and Smith provide this stagey, im­pressive entrance for guests and visitors and then they furnish an entrance for the family directly off the garage area which frankly conveys the informality of the contemporary California scene.

The view of architecture as an intellectual exercise in the realm of pristine sharp-edged forms and pre­cise proportions has long been a dominant theme in the Case Study program (as it has continually cropped up throughout the history of architecture), but in the earlier Case Study Houses by Craig Ellwood and Pierre Koenig the esthetic articulation of planes and volumes defined by precise rectangular shapes had been dominated by the structural form of the building. In Killingsworth, Brady and Smith there is a tendency to play down the structure as the salient motif and in its place to substitute an involvement with form.

The most recent of the Case Study Houses reveals as well a marked shift in the use of materials and the way in which they are exposed. The employment of steel as a relatively new building material in do­mestic architecture was initiated in the Case Study House program by Charles Eames for his own house and studio, built in 1949. The Eames house was the most successful of all the Case Study Houses in that it illustrated how the mass-produced product might be used in domestic architecture. The Eames house used materials, primarily steel and glass, in such a way that their quality of regularity and order never dominated the total form. In the later Case Study Houses of Ellwood and Koenig the steel frame did become the controlling element in the design, forci­bly establishing the surface, the proportion and the volume of the building. In several of the most recent examples of the Case Study Houses this directness of approach to materials and structure has been par­tially abandoned. The materials and structure no longer are an organic part of the design. As Mies van der Rohe, Walter Gropius and even Frank Lloyd Wright have pointed out, good design, especially in our century and here in America, is as much a result of negative self-restraint as it is positive affirmation. Certainly the success of the Eames house was the result of his adherence to the principle of self-re­straint.

Originally the Case Study House program had an­other dominating characteristic and that was its interest in the direct solution of the problems of the mass-produced project house. The first Case Study House by J. R. Davidson was an admirable and highly influential minimal house (of 1100 sq. ft.) and was reproduced as a mass-produced house. The same was true of Summer Spaulding’s and John Rex’s 1947 Case Study House, where a strict modular system was ad­hered to.

By the 1950’s Arts & Architecture had pretty well abandoned any direct concern for mass housing. The houses of the last 12 to 13 years seemed to be based upon the premise of influencing design through osmosis––by creating visual and structural “master­pieces” which will serve as a source of inspiration in the area of project and mass-produced housing. That the Case Study House Project has created significant monuments of the “modern movement” is undeniable and it is hoped that it will continue to do so, but whether this approach, as opposed to its direct in­volvement, can or will affect mass housing (which constitutes well over 90% of all houses built in the U.S.) is open to serious doubt.

–– David Gebhard

Most Popular

You may also like.

Search the Site

Popular pages.

• Historic Places of Los Angeles
• Important Issues
• Events Calendar

Case Study Houses

The Case Study Houses served as a blueprint and inspiration for Mid-Century homes in Southern California.

In 2013, ten Case Study House program residences were added to the National Register of Historic Places.

Relevant Places

Bass House (Case Study House #20B)

Case Study House #1

Case Study House #10

Case Study House #16

Case Study House #28

Entenza House (Case Study House #9)

Stahl House (Case Study House #22)

Triad (Case Study House #23A)

Triad (Case Study House #23C)

West House (Case Study House #18)

Launched in 1945 by John Entenza’s  Arts + Architecture  magazine, the Case Study House program commissioned architects to study, plan, design, and ultimately construct houses in anticipation of renewed building in the postwar years.

While the Case Study House program did not achieve its initial goals for mass production and affordability, it was responsible for some of Los Angeles’ most iconic and internationally recognized modern residences, such as the  Eames House (Case Study House #8)  by Charles and Ray Eames and the Pierre Koenig-designed  Stahl House (Case Study House #22) , famously photographed by Julius Shulman.

After a decade-long effort, L.A. Conservancy’s Modern Committee succeeded in listing ten Case Study residences on the National Register of Historic Places.

About This Issue

With an emphasis on experimentation, and a goal of promoting good, modern, affordable design for single-family homes, the program helped to disseminate the midcentury modern aesthetic through its thirty-five published plans. Of these, twenty-five houses and one apartment building were built in California and Arizona.

The program offered an unparalleled opportunity for commissions and publicity for established architects including Richard Neutra, J. R. Davidson, Sumner Spaulding, and William Wurster. It helped raise the profile of then-lesser-known designers including Craig Ellwood, A. Quincy Jones, Edward Killingsworth, Ralph Rapson, Eero Saarinen, and Raphael Soriano.

Our Position

On November 21, 2013, the  Los Angeles Conservancy Modern Committee was awarded a Governor’s Historic Preservation Award to recognize its work in nominating eleven Case Study Houses to the National Register of Historic Places.

Through the efforts of the Los Angeles Conservancy Modern Committee, eleven Case Study House residences in Los Angeles, San Diego, and Ventura counties are now recognized as nationally historic. Ten are officially listed in the National Register of Historic Places, and an eleventh was deemed eligible for listing.

Few of the Case Study Houses currently have preservation protections, and some have been demolished or significantly altered. This proactive step recognizes the eleven nominated homes and raises greater awareness about the Case Study House program while providing a historic context for future designation of the remaining eligible properties.

On May 1, 2013, the State Historical Resources Commission voted to recommend listing of ten Case Study Houses in the National Register of Historic Places.  These ten residences with certifying recommendations were submitted to the National Park Service for final review and listing by the Keeper of the National Trust.  They were formally listed on July 24, 2013.

An eleventh nominated residence, Case Study House #23A, was not formally listed because of owner objection, but it received a determination of eligibility for listing in the National Register. All eleven residences will be considered historic resources and will enjoy the same protections under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Several Case Study Houses were not included in the nomination — if they’ve been altered or demolished, or for other reasons — but with this platform in place, it will be easier for other CSH homes to be nominated in the future.

Likewise, a few CSH houses, such as the  Eames House  (CSH #8), weren’t included because they’re already individually listed.

Case Study House residences included in nomination:

Los Angeles County

• Case Study House #1 , 10152 Toluca Lake Ave., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #9 , 205 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #10 , 711 S. San Rafael Ave., Pasadena
• Case Study House #16 , 1811 Bel Air Rd., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #18 , 199 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #20 , 2275 N. Santa Rosa Ave., Altadena
• Case Study House #21 , 9038 Wonderland Park Ave., Los Angeles
• Case Study House #22 , 1635 Woods Dr., Los Angeles

San Diego County 

• Case Study House #23A , 2342 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego (determined eligible)
• Case Study House #23C , 2339 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego

Ventura County

• Case Study House #28 , 91 Inverness Rd., Thousand Oaks

The Case Study Houses Program: Mid-Century Modern Architecture

The Case Study Houses Program, promoted by the magazine Arts and Architecture in 1945, represented the most important American contribution to the Mid-Century Modern architecture .

Last month I wrote about the CSH #20 , today I want to give you the big picture about the Case Study Houses Program, its origins and inspirations.

The main inspiration of the thirty six houses designed for the program, was  the desire of a generation of architects to realize affordable and modern houses to satisfy the post war building boom.

Even though many of the designs were never built, the program proved -thanks to its success- that it was possible to realize affordable houses for residential uses.

The Case Study Houses Program’s Contribution to the Mid Century.

The Case Study Houses Program has, in fact, produced some of the most relevant examples of Mid-Century Modern architecture and its incredible success is proven by the influence that it still has today on the architectural culture worldwide.

The houses are an inspiration and a model for contemporary architects that look for experimental solutions to satisfy the need of reductive dwelling spaces.

John Entenza was the mind and the force behind the Arts and Architecture magazine and the Case Study Houses Program. Thanks to it, he wanted to offer a solution -both to the building industry and to the public- to the post World War lack of residences; proposing designs for affordable and modern houses.

The magazine was the vehicle through which Entenza promoted the designs and connected actual clients with the architects.

Already before the end of the war, Entenza hosted competitions for small house designs in the magazine anticipating and exploring the interest of the architects in the matter of building affordable residential houses.

Considering his interest in the architecture related fields of design, visual arts and music, Arts and Architecture was the natural place to gather the social and artistic concerns behind a project as the Case Study Houses Program.

Some of the architects joining the program were already internationally well-known as Richard Neutra , Charles and Ray Eames or Craig Ellwood , others -as Whitney R. Smith, Thornton Abell, and Rodney Walker- were mainly locally known and all of them represented a personal Entenza preference instead of a comprehensive overview of the American Mid-Century architects and their approach to the low-cost houses building.

As I said before, some of the designs were never built -as the Richard Neutra ’Omega’and ‘Alpha’ houses or the Whitney Smith’s ‘Loggia’ House- due to an actual lack of clients and sites. However, the ones built were in some cases greatly diverting from the original architects design due to the shortage of some materials or specific clients’ requests.

Two of the most famous case study houses, are the one that Entenza commissioned to Charles Eames and Eeero Saarinen for himself -the #9- and the one that Charles and Ray Eames designed and built for themselves; the #8. The Eameses house was one of the ones delayed due the post war scarcity of materials. The house was in fact first designed in 1945 but completed it in the 1949.

Despite its unquestionable success, the Case Study Houses Program  has not to be considered as an isolated attempt but as part of a wider architectural effort to find modern dwelling solutions.

(pics via [amazon_link id=”3836510219″ target=”_blank” container=”” container_class=”” ]Case Study Houses – The Complete CSH Program[/amazon_link])

The Case Study Houses Program: Richard Neutra’s Bailey House

The case study houses program: craig ellwood’s case study house 18.

Case Study: OFFbeat by Nick Deaver Jes Deaver Architecture

Vultures and at least one fox were living in this storybook house in Austin’s Travis Heights neighborhood when Jes and ...

Case Study: Wallingford by Prentiss + Balance + Wickline

Although the Seattle family with three young children loved life on the water in their lake house, they longed to ...

Case Study: Waverly Place by VJAA

Just before the new Walker Art Center opened in Minneapolis in 1971, Louise Walker McCannel, the granddaughter of founder Thomas ...

ARCHITECTURAL INTERIORS

Although the Seattle family with three young children loved life on the water in their lake house, they longed to…

Case Study: Tribeca Penthouse by Min Design

The penthouse apartment in the converted 1874 warehouse in New York had soaring ceiling heights, an abundance of daylight, and…

Case Study: Two Gables by Wheeler Kearns

The aptly named Two Gables residence in Glencoe, Illinois, might appear premeditated, but its symmetrical form emerged organically to serve…

Case Study: Tudor Redux by Cohen & Hacker Architects

The 1913 Tudor Revival would need more than gallons of white paint to turn it into a welcoming, light-filled home…

RURAL / SECOND HOMES

Case Study: Slide-By House by Estes Twombly + Titrington

Situated on the edge of Massachusetts near the border with Rhode Island, the eponymously named Westport was the westernmost port…

Case Study: Concord Blend by Eck MacNeely Architects

Before they lived in their current residence—whose design was meticulously orchestrated by Eck MacNeely Architects—the owners had lived in a…

Case Study: The Narrows by Whitten Architects

Like many retirees, Whitten Architects’ clients came to Downeast Maine looking for an escape from their full-time life near Boston,…

Case Study: Vermont Farmhouse by ART Architects

If anyone knows how to design the quintessential New England farmhouse, it’s the Boston-based firm of Albert, Righter & Tittmann…

Vultures and at least one fox were living in this storybook house in Austin’s Travis Heights neighborhood when Jes and…

Case Study: Barrera House by Cotton Estes Architect

We all have a different idea of what our last, best house might look like and where it might be.…

Just before the new Walker Art Center opened in Minneapolis in 1971, Louise Walker McCannel, the granddaughter of founder Thomas…

Case Study: Old Yacht Club by Elliott Architects

There are many reasons to rescue an old building—because you have to is one of them, because you want to…

Case Study: Presidio Heights Residence by Nick Noyes Architecture

Not far from the Presidio—a national park and Historic Landmark District at the foot of the Golden Gate Bridge—San Francisco’s…

ON THE BOARDS

Parti Shot: High Meadow Ranch by Richard Beard Architects

Richard Beard Architects has designed many wonderful houses on extraordinary sites, but this 47-acre parcel in California’s 20,000-acre Santa Lucia…

Parti Shot: Silver Cloud by Studio B

Slicing across a rocky ridge where two valleys converge, Silver Cloud accommodates a young family and its many passions and…

Parti Shot: Stacked Moor by Flavin Architects

Most homeowners feel they could benefit from just a little more space. In an older house, that need for space…

Parti Shot: Lake Tahoe Cabins by RO | ROCKETT DESIGN

Humans have a primal desire to live by the water, even if it means assuming some hardships to do so.…

Custom Doors Open Incredible Possibilities

A grand entrance to a home. A point of passage through an interior. A secure bulwark. A custom door is…

Sponsored Case Study: Simple Comfort in an Oregon Home

When architect Nahoko Ueda set out to design a family home in the rolling terrain outside Salem, Oregon, her goals…

Sponsored Case Study: A Private Lake Side Retreat in Texas

When you first see the 2,600sq ft lake house in Riverside, Texas, it looks like a glass box floating on…

Sponsored Case Study: Echo Hills Residence by Robert Gurney

Architect Robert Gurney leverages a site’s steeply sloped terrain to transform a suburban Maryland home into a tranquil oasis that takes its cues from nature.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

California Case Study Houses

In January 1945 John Entenza, the editor and publisher of Arts & Architecture magazine, announced the Case Study Houses Program (CSHP), which was envisioned as a creative response to the impending building boom expected to follow the housing shortages of the Great Depression and World War II. 

Case Study House #22 Los Angeles by Pierre Koenig | Photo © Julius Shulman

Entenza encouraged participating architects to use donated materials from industry and manufacturers to create low-cost, modern housing prototypes that might foster a dialogue between architectural professionals and laymen. The Case Study Houses were built between 1945-1966 mostly in LA by Richard Neutra , Raphael Soriano, Craig Ellwood , Charles and Ray Eames , Pierre Koenig and Eero Saarinen . 

Case Study House #8 at the Pacific Palisades in LA. | Photo via Wikipedia

The Eames House is a landmark of mid-20th century modern Architecture and was constructed in 1949 by Charles & Ray Eames to serve as their home and studio.

The Eames House consists of two glass and steel rectangular boxes: one is a residence; one a working studio. | Photo © Herman Miller

The design was first sketched out by Charles Eames with Eero Saarinen in 1945 as a raised steel and glass box projecting out of the slope and spanning the entrance drive before cantilevering dramatically over the front yard. 

The house emphasise connection to the desert landscape while offering shelter from harsh climatic conditions. | Photo via Blenheim Gang

The Kaufmann Desert House in Palm Springs was designed by Richard Neutra in 1946. It is one of the most important examples of International Style architecture in the United States

With a simple rectangular design, the house is divided into two separate sections. | Photo via Urbipedia

The Case Study House #18b was the more successful in the series of Craig Ellwood. One of the most significant improvements was the preconstruction factory structure and combining this with other pre-built elements such as walls, floors. Another standard feature was the sliding doors in the living spaces of the house that overlooked the terrace and a pool for entertaining guests or family.

The design emphasizes harmony of materials and balance between interior and exterior through the use of terraces, water and skylights. | Photo via The City Project

In the Case Study House #21 , an early-career exploration, Pierre Koenig used a constrained set of industrial materials—primarily steel and glass—to execute a pure expression of his design approach. His philosophy of functionality and honesty in aesthetics manifests in a structure that appears simple but contains complexity in plan and organization.

Case Study House #22 in the Hollywood Hills was designed by Pierre Koenig. The house is considered an iconic representation of modern architecture in Los Angeles during the 20th century. 

The house was made famous by a photo of Julius Shulman showing two women leisurely sitting at a corner of the house with a panoramic view of the city through the floor-to-ceiling glass walls at night. | Photo © Julius Shulman

The highly publicized program ran from 1945 to 1964, spanning thirty-six individual designs, many of which were never constructed. The initial program announcement stated that “each house must be capable of duplication and in no sense be an individual performance” and that “the overall program will be general enough to be of practical assistance to the average American in search of a home in which he can afford to live.”

Stahl House (Case Study House #22)

Pierre Koenig | Website | 1960 | Visitor Information

1635 Woods Drive , West Hollywood 90069, United States of America

The Stahl House by Pierre Koenig (also known as Case Study House #22) was part of the Case Study House Program, which produced some of the most iconic architectural projects of the 20th Century. The modern residence overlooks Los Angeles from the Hollywood Hills. It was completed in 1959 for Buck Stahl and his family. Stahl envisioned a modernist glass and steel constructed house that offered panoramic views of Los Angeles when he originally purchased the land for the house in 1954 for $13,500. When excavation began, he originally took on the duties of both architect and contractor. It was not until 1957 that Stahl hired Pierre Koenig to take over the design of the family’s residence. The two-bedroom, 2,200 square foot residence is a true testament to modernist architecture and the Case Study House Program. The program was set in place by John Entenza and sponsored by the Arts & Architecture magazine. The aim of the program was to introduce modernist principles into residential architecture, not only to advance the aesthetic but to introduce new ways of life, both stylistically and as a representation of modern lifestyle. Koenig was able to hone in on the vision of Buck Stahl and transform that vision into a modernist icon. The glass and steel construction is the most identifiable trait of the house’s architectural modernism, however, way in which Koenig organized the spatial layout of the house, taking both public and private aspects into great consideration, is also notable. As much as architectural modernism is associated with the materials and methods of construction, the juxtaposition of program and organization are important design principles that evoke utilitarian characteristics. The house is “L”-shaped, completely separating the public and private sections except for a single hallway connecting them. The adjacent swimming pool, which must be crossed to enter the house, is not only a spatial division of public and private but it serves as the interstitial space in which visitors can best experience the panoramic views. The living space of the house is behind the pool and is the only part of the house that has a solid wall, which backs up to the carport and the street. The entire house is one large viewing box, capturing amazing perspectives of the house, the landscape, and Los Angeles. Oddly enough, the Stahl house was fairly unknown and unrecognized for its advancement of modern American residential architecture until 1960 when photographer Julius Shulman captured the pure architectural essence of the house in a shot of two women sitting in the living room overlooking the bright lights of the city of Los Angeles. That photo put the Stahl House on the architectural radar as an architectural gem hidden in the Hollywood Hills. The Stahl House is still one of the most visited and admired buildings today. It has undergone many interior transformations. Today, you will not find the same iconic 1960s furniture inside, but the architecture, the view, and the experience still remain.

Tags: Classic , Los Angeles

Information provided in part by: ArchDaily

Projects in West Hollywood

Bradbury building, caltrans district 7 headquarters, eames house, emerson college, getty center, griffith observatory, la county museum of art, petersen automotive museum, samitaur tower, sheats-goldstein residence, the broad museum, walt disney concert hall, wilshire grand.

• BUILDING MATERIALS
• BOOKS & RESOURCES
• HISTORICAL TIMELINE
• INFLUENTIAL ARCHITECTS
• RANDOM INSPIRATION

The Eames House: A Deep Dive into Case Study House 8

Nestled in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles stands the Eames House, also known as Case Study House No. 8. It is more than just a work of mid-century modern architecture; it’s an enduring testament to the design sensibilities and philosophies of Charles and Ray Eames, the husband-and-wife team who not only designed it but also called it home. Built in 1949, this iconic structure encapsulates the couple’s holistic approach to design and life.

Eames House Technical Information

• Architects: Ray and Charles Eames
• Location: 203 North Chautauqua Boulevard, Pacific Palisades, Los Angeles , USA
• Topics: Mid-Century Modern
• Area: 1,500 ft 2 |  140  m 2
• Project Year: 1945 – 1949
• Photographs: © Eames Office, See Captions

The role of the designer is that of a very good, thoughtful host anticipating the needs of his guests.  – Charles and Ray Eames 1-2

Eames House Photographs

The Eames House: A Living Laboratory for Design Exploration 

From its initial construction to its life today as a museum, the Eames House offers a rich tapestry of history, ingenuity, and practical elegance. Commissioned by Arts & Architecture magazine for their Case Study House program, this residence has endured as a beacon of what Charles and Ray stood for—efficiency, innovation, and the honest use of materials. As Charles once said, “Just as a good host tries to anticipate the needs of his guest, so a good architect or a designer or a city planner tries to anticipate the needs of those who will live in or use the thing being designed.”

The Eameses purchased 1.4 acres from Arts & Architecture owner John Entenza in 1945, but the journey to the final construction was rife with modifications and resource constraints. Initial designs by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen , which envisioned a glass and steel box cantilevering dramatically over the property, were shelved. In part, due to material shortages in the post-war era, Charles and Ray turned inward, observing and soaking in the nuances of the site. The eventual design had the house sitting quietly in the land, harmonizing with the natural surroundings rather than imposing on it.

Two distinct boxes make up the residence—one serves as the living quarters and the other as a studio. The house and studio are separated by a concrete retaining wall that integrates seamlessly with the existing landscape. An 8-foot tall by 200-foot long concrete wall helps to anchor the site while also setting a dramatic backdrop for the architecture.

Both structures are predominantly characterized by their steel frame construction, filled with a variety of colored panels. The colored panels aren’t merely decorative; they are functional elements carefully calibrated to provide shifting patterns of light and shade throughout the day. The impact of light, so finely tuned in the design, showcases influences from Japanese architecture.

The Eames House doesn’t just make a statement from the outside; the interiors are equally compelling. The house is a melting pot of the Eameses’ diverse interests and design sensibilities—featuring Isamu Noguchi lamps , Thonet chairs, Native American baskets, and more. The living spaces are meticulously designed to serve multiple functions—a living room that transforms into a workspace, alcoves that turn into intimate conversation spots, and hallways lined with functional storage closets.

Living as Work, Work as Living

One of the most unique aspects of the Eames House is how it serves as a living laboratory for Charles and Ray’s iterative design process. As is evident from their film “Powers of Ten” or the constant evolution of their iconic furniture, the couple believed in refining, adjusting, and perfecting. The house was no different—it was a perpetual project, an embodiment of their philosophy of “life in work and work in life.”

For Charles and Ray, details weren’t just details—they were the product. The panels, steel columns, and even the gold-leaf panel marking the entry door were not afterthoughts but an integral part of the architectural dialogue. The Eames House reflects this in its intricate interplay of textures, colors, and spaces that come together to create a harmonious whole.

The Eames House is notable for its De Stijl influences, seen in the sliding walls and windows that allow for versatility and openness. It stands as a successful adaptation of European modernist principles within an American context.

The Eames House is not just an architectural statement but a comprehensive worldview translated into physical form. From its thoughtful integration with the landscape to its detailed articulations, it represents the legacy of two of the 20 th century’s most influential designers. Charles and Ray

Eames House Plans

Eames House Image Gallery

About Ray and Charles Eames

Charles and Ray Eames were a husband-and-wife design team who became icons of mid-20th-century modern design. Working primarily in the United States, they gained prominence for their contributions across multiple disciplines, including architecture, furniture design, industrial design, film, and exhibitions. Perhaps best known for their innovative furniture pieces, like the Eames Lounge Chair and Molded Plastic Chairs, they also left a lasting impact on architecture, most notably with the Eames House, also known as Case Study House No. 8. Their work is characterized by a playful yet disciplined approach, with a focus on functional design, innovative use of materials, and the importance of user experience.

Notes & Additional Credits

• While the quote is not specifically about the Eames House, it reflects the philosophy the Eameses applied to their design work, including their home. The Eames House is a manifestation of their belief in the “guest-host relationship,” where every design decision is made with the user’s experience in mind.
• Charles & Ray Eames: 1907-1978, 1912-1988: Pioneers of Mid-century Modernism  by Gloria Koenig

Share this:

Leave a reply cancel reply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Topics Overview
• Influential Architects
• 2020’s
• 2010’s
• 2000’s
• 1990’s
• 1980’s
• 1970’s
• 1960’s
• 1950’s
• 1940’s
• 1930’s
• 1920’s
• American Architecture
• Austrian Architecture
• British Architecture
• Chinese Architecture
• Danish Architecture
• German Architecture
• Japanese Architecture
• Mexican Architecture
• Portuguese Architecture
• Spanish Architecture
• Swiss Architecture
• Auditoriums
• Cultural Centers
• Installations
• Headquarters
• Universities
• Restaurants
• Cementeries
• Monasteries
• City Planning
• Landscape Architecture
• Top Book Recommendations
• Top Drawing Tools Recommendations
• Gifts for Architects

Email address:

Timeless Architecture

• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy

• Eames Foundation
• Eames House
• Charles and Ray

Eames House and the CSH program

• Case Study House Bluff
• Photo Gallery
• How to Visit
• Covid-19 Safety Protocols
• Guided Exterior Tour
• Group Guided Exterior Tour
• Interior Tour
• Members Appreciation Day
• Small Wedding
• Specialty Events
• Visitors Submissions
• Memberships
• Corporate Sponsorship
• 250 Year Project
• Collections
• On-going Studies
• Conservation Management Plan
• Team Thanks

The Eames House (also known as Case Study House No. 8) is a landmark of mid-20th century modern architecture located in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles. It was designed and constructed in 1949 by husband-and-wife Charles and Ray Eames to serve as their home and studio.

It was one of roughly two dozen homes built as part of The Case Study House Program. Begun in the mid-1940s and continuing through the early 1960s, the program was spearheaded by John Entenza, the publisher of  Arts & Architecture magazine. It was developed to address a looming issue: a housing crisis. Millions of soldiers would be returning from the battlefields of World War II, and were wanting to start families. John Entenza recognized that houses needed to be built quickly, inexpensively, yet without sacrificing good design. In a challenge to the architectural community, the magazine announced that it would be the client for a series of homes designed to express man’s life in the modern world. These homes were to be built and furnished using materials and techniques derived from the experiences of the Second World War. Each home was designed with a real or hypothetical client in mind, taking into consideration their particular housing needs.

Click here to see their design brief more clearly from the December 1945 issue of Arts & Architecture .

First Design: Bridge House (unbuilt)

The first plan of the Eameses’ home, known as the Bridge House, was designed in 1945 by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen. The design used pre-fabricated materials ordered from catalogues, a continuation of the idea of mass-production. The parts were ordered and the Bridge House design was published in the December 1945 issue of the magazine, but due to a war-driven shortage, the steel did not arrive until late 1948.

While they were waiting for delivery, Charles and Ray picnicked in the meadow with family and friends, flew kites and did archery.  By then, Charles and Ray had “fallen in love with the meadow,” in Ray’s words, and they realized that they wanted to avoid what many architects had done: destroy what they loved most about a site by building across it.

Second Design: Eames House

Charles and Ray then set themselves a new problem: How to build a house that would 1) not destroy the meadow and trees, and 2) “maximize volume from minimal materials”.  Using the same off-the-shelf parts, but notably ordering one extra steel beam, Charles and Ray re-configured the House. The new design integrated the House into the landscape, rather than imposing the House on it. These plans were published in the May 1949 issue of Arts & Architecture .  It is this design that was built and is seen today.

Charles and Ray moved into the House on Christmas Eve, 1949, and lived there for the rest of their lives.  The interior, its objects and its collections remain very much the way they were in Charles and Ray’s lifetimes.  The house they created offered them a space where work, play, life, and nature co-existed.

While many icons of the modern movement are depicted as stark, barren spaces devoid of human use, photographs and motion pictures taken at the Eames house reveal a richly decorated, almost cluttered space full of folk art, thousands of books, shells, rocks, prisms, etc. The Eameses’ gracious live-work lifestyle continues to be an influential model.

The House has now become something of an iconographic structure visited by people from around the world.  The charm and appeal of the House is perhaps best explained in the words of the Case Study House Program founder, John Entenza, who felt that the Eames House “represented an attempt to state an idea rather than a fixed architectural pattern.”

Help us share the Eameses’ joy and rigor with future visitors, so they may have a direct experience of Charles and Ray’s approach to life and work.

8 House by Bjarke Ingels: The bow-shaped building

The realm of architecture in Denmark took a revolutionary turn with the advent of BIG Architects, headed and founded by Bjarke Ingels – a local Danish architect with radical and inspiring concepts that changed the way Denmark went about building structures . His ideas have always been different, unique, and an amalgamation of two extremes of concept theory – Avant-Garde out-of-the-box theories welded with functional aesthetic. In his own words, Ingels aims to create a pragmatic, utopian architecture that can help create spaces that are “socially, economically, and environmentally perfect”, for lack of a better word. A prime example of this philosophy can be seen in the construction of the famous 8 House, built by Bjarke Ingels Group, or BIG, for their third commissioned project in the city of Copenhagen , Denmark.

Following the successful VM Houses and the Mountain, the 8 House is a mixed-use development built in the neighborhood of Orestad, consisting of commercial and office spaces, coupled with three different typologies of residential units. 

The 61,000 square meter bow-tied development amassed the area as the largest development undertaken in Denmark at the time, and the reason for this large expanse of the land area was due to the concept of an “urban neighborhood” instead of a traditional box-like apartment. The brief given to BIG Architects was to amalgamate the housing next to each other in a low-cost methodology. Ingels wanted to create the development to mimic his historical city, thus intimating the design of row houses in the bottom two levels, and having their facades designed by a different team of architects entirely to showcase the historic reflection of Denmark in this “urban neighborhood”. 

However, the way they approached it was as radical as any of their previous projects. Instead of simulating the row houses next to each other and getting a “fake difference” with the facades , which were ultimately only on a continuous homogeneous building, BIG proposed to stack the different typology of the units, like an “urban layer cake” where the commercial and office units are placed on the ground floor to have maximum exposure to the street level crowd, followed by two levels of row houses at the top, with a garden and wide pathway all along their perimeter, followed by apartments and then penthouses . This method of stacking aimed to induce the feeling of a classic Danish neighborhood at every level of the 8 House. 

However, the brief also mentioned the need for a direct passage between the east and west ends of the development, thus this four-sided block was turned into an 8 shape by adding a knot in its center, which gave way to the making of two separate new interior courtyards , and a direct east-west corridor for the users. This 9-meter wide passage gave users a direct passage from the park to the canals inside the 8 House. 

Furthermore, the southwestern part of the development is pushed to the bottom to provide that part of the apartment complex a nice view of the Amager Common, which is a large natural reserve in south Copenhagen. Simultaneously, the northeast part of the building was pushed up so that the residents in the opposite corner of the 8 House could also enjoy a nice view of the natural reserve. This distortion was done to optimize the sunlight and daylight levels to the maximum capacity for every part of the 8 House. 

Additionally, the perimeter pathway around the houses acting as their “outdoor garden” was also distorted, now acting as a “mountain slope” or a “bicycle track” that could be used by the residents to traverse the entire development without any obstacles in the way. This is side by side with the famous Green Roof which won BIG an award from the Scandinavian Green Roof Association in October 2010. It has also won the Utzon Prize for its innovative use of concrete for the structural integrity of the complex. 

The center of the 8 House, where the 8 crosses itself, is where all the communal and public facilities have been placed, such as common rooms, guest apartments, lounges, and many more. From the shopping centers at the bottom-most level to the penthouses and their roof gardens , the 8 House has acted as a single architectural amalgamation of plazas, stepped streets, courtyards, and mountain pathways. In Ingels’ own words, the 8 House “allows the city’s social life to invade higher altitudes”. 

“8 House is a three-dimensional neighborhood rather than an architectural object. An alley of 150-row houses stretches through the entire block and twists all the way from street level to the top and down again. Where social life, the spontaneous encounter, and neighbor interaction traditionally is restricted to the ground level, the 8 House allows it to expand all the way to the top,” Bjarke Ingels, Founding Partner, BIG.

Madiha Syed is an architecture student at the MEASI Academy of Architecture, Chennai. Crazy about fairy tales, chocolate, and waffles, she’s always got her head in the clouds; a free and digressing spirit, who’s hobbies include wanderlust, writing and binge eating. She’s friendly, but doesn’t share food. Be warned.

Examples of Outdoor Learning School Spaces

(Duplex)² by ACad Studio

Related posts.

The Senate House, Chennai

Project in-depth: Frank Sinatra Residence by Paul Williams

The Burj Khalifa: Engineering Marvel and Design Icon

Norman Foster’s Mars Habitat Concepts

Lina Bo Bardi: Embracing Vernacular and Modernism

The Al Bahr Towers: Adaptive Facades and Sustainability

• Architectural Community
• Architectural Facts
• RTF Architectural Reviews
• Architectural styles
• City and Architecture
• Fun & Architecture
• History of Architecture
• Design Studio Portfolios
• Designing for typologies
• RTF Design Inspiration
• Architecture News
• Career Advice
• Case Studies
• Construction & Materials
• Covid and Architecture
• Interior Design
• Know Your Architects
• Landscape Architecture
• Materials & Construction
• Product Design
• RTF Fresh Perspectives
• Sustainable Architecture
• Top Architects
• Travel and Architecture
• Rethinking The Future Awards 2022
• RTF Awards 2021 | Results
• GADA 2021 | Results
• RTF Awards 2020 | Results
• ACD Awards 2020 | Results
• GADA 2019 | Results
• ACD Awards 2018 | Results
• GADA 2018 | Results
• RTF Awards 2017 | Results
• RTF Sustainability Awards 2017 | Results
• RTF Sustainability Awards 2016 | Results
• RTF Sustainability Awards 2015 | Results
• RTF Awards 2014 | Results
• RTF Architectural Visualization Competition 2020 – Results
• Architectural Photography Competition 2020 – Results
• Designer’s Days of Quarantine Contest – Results
• Urban Sketching Competition May 2020 – Results
• RTF Essay Writing Competition April 2020 – Results
• Architectural Photography Competition 2019 – Finalists
• The Ultimate Thesis Guide
• Introduction to Landscape Architecture
• Perfect Guide to Architecting Your Career
• How to Design Architecture Portfolio
• How to Design Streets
• Introduction to Urban Design
• Introduction to Product Design
• Complete Guide to Dissertation Writing
• Introduction to Skyscraper Design
• Educational
• Hospitality
• Institutional
• Office Buildings
• Public Building
• Residential
• Sports & Recreation
• Temporary Structure
• Commercial Interior Design
• Corporate Interior Design
• Healthcare Interior Design
• Hospitality Interior Design
• Residential Interior Design
• Sustainability
• Transportation
• Urban Design
• Host your Course with RTF
• Architectural Writing Training Programme | WFH
• Editorial Internship | In-office
• Graphic Design Internship
• Research Internship | WFH
• Research Internship | New Delhi
• RTF | About RTF
• Submit Your Story

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

• Faculty Experts
• Events Calendar

UW–Madison case study investigates gap in quality of life for Hmong nursing home residents

Mai See Thao, a medical anthropologist and professor, studied the experiences of Hmong residents in a nursing home in Minnesota to gain insights. Photo courtesy of Envato

While a growing body of research has revealed racial disparities in the quality of life for nursing home residents, few studies have focused on Hmong residents in these facilities. A new University of Wisconsin–Madison case study is filling that gap with key insights into the population’s needs that aren’t being met in the nursing home setting.

Mai See Thao, a medical anthropologist and professor at UW–Madison, along with researchers at the University of Minnesota and the University of Iowa, studied a nursing home in Minnesota to learn more about Hmong residents’ experiences. Their paper, recently published in the Journal of Applied Gerontology , explores significant shortcomings in care and quality of life.

“The residents in this space felt that they lived like they were in captivity,” says Thao, who is Hmong. “A lot of the work as an anthropologist is to bear witness to people’s stories and to tell [them], especially the stories of people who are being marginalized or who feel completely isolated in these spaces.”

The study’s key findings, based on many hours of observation and interviews with nursing home residents and staff, include:

• Language can be a barrier to belonging. Especially for Hmong residents who have limited or no English language knowledge, being in a nursing home without access to other Hmong speakers or a translator can be isolating and lead to neglect. Without easy methods of communication with staff and other residents, Hmong residents can lack community and connection.
• Meaningful activity and relationships are important. A lack of everyday activities that interest and engage Hmong residents can stunt meaningful interactions. Sometimes, visitation protocols can also make it difficult to maintain meaningful relationships with family members. These also influence feelings of community and belonging, which contribute to overall quality of life.
• Access to food that brings enjoyment is necessary. Lack of enjoyment of food options is a common complaint among nursing home residents of all ethnicities. For Hmong residents, lack of access to culturally relevant food can be especially isolating and negatively impact quality of life.
• Diversity in staff is not enough to address inequities . Even though the nursing home employed a diverse staff that included Hmong individuals, Hmong nursing home residents reported lower quality of life than their white peers. Thao says it’s necessary to take both a cultural and systematic approach, supported by proper funding and resources, to improve nursing home quality of life.

Thao’s research interests consider the position of Hmong people as a historical refugee community to apply a critical lens to science, medicine and the inequities in health care spaces.

Thao believes it’s essential to factor in refugees’ past experiences as they age in care facilities, to avoid reproducing feelings of isolation, abandonment and uncertainty. With Wisconsin being home to one of the largest populations of Hmong in the country, Thao notes that the study’s findings can translate to nursing homes in the state.

She also thinks that these critical insights can improve care for not only Hmong residents, but also for other underserved populations.

“It is oftentimes through the eye of ‘the other’ that we’re able to see clearly what we don’t even realize,” she says, adding that it’s important to reflect on how medical care is practiced every day, especially in nursing homes.

Tags: aging , anthropology , research

You may also like…

Weight loss may be early predictor of Alzheimer’s disease in Down syndrome

Archaeologists uncover evidence of intentional burial, cave engravings by early human ancestor

New paper links childhood deprivation to accelerated biological aging later in life

• Hispanoamérica
• Work at ArchDaily
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Architecture News

LA’s Iconic Case Study Houses (Finally!) Make National Register

• Written by Karissa Rosenfield
• Published on August 22, 2013

Ten of Los Angeles ’ Case Study Homes have been deemed historically significant an worthy of being included on US’s National Register of Historic Places . Despite the Los Angeles Conservancy’s belief that all of them deserve “equal preservation protections,” the 11th home was not included due to “owner objection.”

The Case Study Houses spawned from a post-WWII residential experiment, presented by the Arts & Architecture magazine in 1945, which introduced modern movement ideas for affordable and efficient housing. The homes - designed by the likes of Richard Neutra, Charles and Ray Eames, Pierre Koenig, Eero Saarinen and others - redefined the modern home. And, with the help of Julius Shulman, placed Los Angeles as an epicenter for mid-century modernism.

The 11 homes included on the register are:

Los Angeles County Case Study House #1, 10152 Toluca Lake Ave., Los Angeles Case Study House #9, 205 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles Case Study House #10, 711 S. San Rafael Ave., Pasadena Case Study House #16, 1811 Bel Air Rd., Los Angeles Case Study House #18, 199 Chautauqua Blvd., Los Angeles Case Study House #20, 2275 N. Santa Rosa Ave., Altadena Case Study House #21, 9038 Wonderland Park Ave., Los Angeles Case Study House #22, 1635 Woods Dr., Los Angeles

San Diego County Case Study House #23A, 2342 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego (determined eligible) Case Study House #23C, 2339 Rue de Anne, La Jolla, San Diego

Ventura County Case Study House #28, 91 Inverness Rd., Thousand Oaks

A selection of photos from the Case Study Homes can be found here .

References: LAist , Curbed Los Angeles

• Sustainability

世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!

想浏览archdaily中国吗, you've started following your first account, did you know.

You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.