Search results

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

Drawing on the principles of Whole Person Dementia Assessment (Mast, 2011) and Appelbaum and Grisso's (1988) decision-making model, this project developed a tool, the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Rating Scale (LFDRS). The conceptual model for the LFDRS questionnaire integrates the measurement of contextual variables with financial capacity assessment. The purpose of the study was to establish reliability and validity of the LFDRS and to collect data on normative financial decision-making by older adults.

The researchers posited that as financial exploitation of older adults increases, investigation and prosecution of these cases remains difficult for criminal justice professionals who must balance protection of older adults with their right to autonomy; and that both under and over-protection of older adults can lead to damaging consequences. The project goal was to develop a set of new financial decision-making screening and comprehensive measures for criminal justice professionals and non-criminal justice professionals to aid in detecting and prosecuting financial exploitation of older adults. The LFDRS (described above) is meant to be used by mental health professionals, specially trained in assessment of older adults. In addition, the researchers developed a 10-item screening tool, the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Screening Scale or Short Scale (LFDSS), that was tested by multiple professionals working in diverse settings (e.g., APS workers, elder law attorneys, law enforcement personnel).

Family members are another group that are often aware of an older adult's vulnerability to financial exploitation and therefore, the researchers developed the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Rating Scale -- Family and Friends version (LFDRS - Family and Friends also known as the LFDRS Informant) to allow concerned professionals to interview confidantes of older adults to help measure financial capacity of a loved one. This tool may be particularly useful for Adult Protective Services to interview multiple people regarding their concerns about an older adult.

The collection contains 3 SPSS data files:

• LFDRS-Data-for-ICPSR.sav (200 cases, 109 variables)
• LFDRS_Informant-Data-for-ICPSR.sav (150 cases, 45 variables)
• LFDSS_Screener-Data-for-ICPSR.sav (213 cases, 24 variables)

Over the past two decades, as the proportion of older Americans has increased, so too have instances of elder abuse, including physical, emotional, and sexual abuse; financial exploitation; and caregiver neglect. The most recent national survey estimates show at least 1 in 10 community-residing older adults experience elder abuse each year, which translates to over 7 million Americans annually. Rates of abuse are magnified for older adults with the least financial and social resources, including those with low incomes, living in isolated rural communities, and facing structural barriers such as systemic racism. Emerging research on the COVID-19 pandemic prompts even greater concern for elder abuse: the virus has disproportionately affected older adults, resulting in increased social isolation, physical health impairment, and exposure to COVID-related fraud.

Recognizing the urgent need to develop and rigorously evaluate programs aimed at preventing elder abuse, the US Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice funded a demonstration from 2017 to 2021 during which researchers from the Urban Institute and practitioners at the Phoenix-based Area Agency on Aging, Region One ("the Area Agency") co-developed an elder abuse prevention program in Maricopa County, Arizona, which Urban's team then evaluated through a randomized controlled pilot study. This multiphase demonstration included an initial planning phase and a subsequent pilot study, which is the focus of this report.

The EMPOWER: Building Late-Life Resilience program is a 12-week in-home intervention, with one-hour weekly visits designed to empower community-residing older adults with the resiliency and resources to lead safe and healthy lives throughout the aging process. EMPOWER provides one-on-one assessments, client-centered prevention education, and needs-responsive life skills training embedded in a series of cognitive reframing conversations with an experienced facilitator. The program has eight modules, each of which culminates in an action plan focused on strengthening a client's internal assets and identifying sources of positive social support. Caseworkers facilitate motivational discussions centered on clients' self-identified goals and action planning, with the aim of optimizing clients' home safety, physical health, social connectedness, and emotional and financial well-being.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The objectives of the study were: (1) To determine the nature, incidence, and prevalence of fraud victimization among elderly consumers in Arizona and Florida; (2) To identify risk and protective factors associated with fraud victimization in this population; and (3) To evaluate the elderly population's awareness and use of state-based programs, including reporting behavior to law enforcement.

The study is comprised of data from telephone surveys of 2,000 aged 60 years and older Arizona (n = 1,000) and Florida (n = 1,000). The survey was obtained via computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) administered by Precision Research in June and July of 2011. Data were collected seven days a week during specific times of the day that had the greatest probability of contacting a respondent. The interviews were primarily conducted in English but a Spanish survey instrument was constructed and used when necessary.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This was a two phase project designed to investigate the decision-making process of the coroner/medical examiner (CME) offices who are charged with investigating suspicious elder deaths and to pilot an intervention that augmented the decision-making process in three CME offices. In phase one, researchers collected case data from CME offices, public data on elder deaths, and interviews with CME investigators. Researchers then developed a brief screening tool, Elder Suspicious Death Field Screen (ESDFS), to be used by CME employees fielding reports of elder deaths. In phase two, the ESDFS was implemented in three counties for a six-month data collection period. An expert panel reviewed a subsample of cases to assess whether CME investigators made appropriate decisions to investigate or not.

Research tools available to help advance knowledge of effective community-based elder mistreatment (EM) interventions are limited. The field lacks an understanding of what success means in EM response program (EMRP) interventions, which work directly with victims to reduce the risk of re-victimization. Without establishing indicators of EMRP success, it is not possible to develop valid intervention outcome measures to compare different EMRP models toward the development of evidence-based practice. Informed by the EMRP practice principle of older adult self-determination, this study developed a victim-centric taxonomy of case outcomes that indicate EMRP success.

This study drew on two sources of data, including interviews with EM victims and a scoping review to inform taxonomy development. Prioritizing the perspective of victims, this study conducted interviews with 27 victims involved in EMRP services who vary in EM subtype, gender, and race/ethnicity.

The taxonomy of successful EMRP outcomes will serve as important research infrastructure to support the development of EMRP intervention outcome measurement in future research.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of the Los Angeles Elder Abuse Forensic Center (EAFC) by examining costs associated elder abuse cases processed under a multidisciplinary team approach. Using data collected in Evaluating the Elder Abuse Forensic Center Model in Los Angeles County, California, 2007-2009 (ICPSR 34979) researchers focused on the key components, participants, and processes necessary to operate the Los Angeles EAFC and identified the costs required to process an elder abuse case as well as the outcomes attained by the EAFC. This study also carried out a survey of Adult Protective Service (APS) social workers on time spent on different case process activity and their perception on efficiency of the Los Angeles EAFC, and collected associated costs estimates.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they there received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except of the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompany readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collections and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The purpose of the study was to examine the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) intervention - the Los Angeles County Elder Abuse Forensic Center to: 1) prosecute elder abuse, 2) protect vulnerable older adults through conservatorship, and 3) reduce or prevent recurring cases of abuse. The study used a quasi-experimental design and focused on elder abuse cases involving victims aged 65 or older reviewed at the Los Angeles County Elder Abuse Forensic Center (the Center) between April 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009. These Center cases were compared to a propensity score match sample of Los Angeles County Adult Protective Services (APS) cases. Data were collected from Adult Protective Services case files, District Attorney filings, and Office of the Public Guardian conservatorship records.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

These data were collected as part of a larger effort to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of a new computerized decision support system (Elder Abuse Decision Support System, EADSS) in elder abuse investigation and intervention programs in Illinois. Information on individuals with substantiated allegations of abuse includes basic demographics, physical, mental, and financial condition, and available resources. Variables describing the allegation cover the nature and severity of the abuse. Where possible, the alleged abuser(s) is(are) also evaluated physically, mentally, and financially, in addition to having basic demographics noted.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The purpose of the study was to:

• Examine resident abuse from staff report by direct care workers in a nationally representative sample of assisted living settings;
• Expand the scope of our understanding of resident abuse by including medication abuse in assisted living settings; and
• Use the data collected to examine: a. rates of abuse; b. the association of external organizational, and internal factors with resident abuse; c. direct care worker characteristics associated with abuse; d. resident characteristics associated with abuse; e. leadership characteristics associated with abuse; f. the inter-correlations of different types of abuse; and, g. resident-to-resident abuse.

For the purposes of this research, an assisted living facility is defined as a long term care setting that typically provides residents for activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living. Using state listings from websites, researchers identified approximately 21,000 of assisting living facilities. A random sample of approximately seven percent (n=1,500) of these eligible assisted living facilities were selected from all 50 states. Administrators of assisted living facilities were asked if they were willing to complete the questionnaire (n=1,376). Administrators were also asked if they would be willing to distribute the questionnaire to direct care workers (n=12,555). Researchers requested that they distribute the survey to all full-time and part-time direct care workers on all shifts. Follow up reminder mailings and emails were used for the administrators.

This study examined financial exploitation of elderly people compared to other forms of elder maltreatment (physical abuse, neglect, and hybrid, i.e., financial exploitation and physical abuse and/or neglect) that occurred in a domestic setting. The cases were explored by obtaining information from a variety of sources including:

• Three different individuals about a given case including (1) the caseworker from APS that managed the reported case, (2) the person who had been reported to have experienced elder abuse and, (3) where they were available, a non-offending third party who knew the elder at the time of the APS response to the report of elder abuse (e.g., the elder's domestic partner, care provider, friend, or family member).
• Data derived from the Virginia Department of Social Services' Adult Services Adult Protective Services (ASAPS) Database which contains information drawn from several sources.
• Prosecutors in four states that were interviewed about their experience prosecuting elder abuse, barriers and facilitators associating with prosecuting such cases, and possible reforms.

The specific goals of this research were to (1) Determine unique aspects of financial exploitation as compared to other forms of elder maltreatment, including risk factors, reporting, investigation, and case outcomes; (2) Determine the degree of congruence between the perceptions of victims of elder maltreatment and APS caseworkers regarding these cases; and (3) Develop recommendations based on these findings for addressing the financial abuse of the elderly.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study sought to: (1) document the spectrum of injuries and injury characteristics observed among physically-abused older adults reported to Adult Protective Services (APS) and compare those findings to injuries found among non-abused older adults, (2) identify observable injury characteristics and abuse circumstances that healthcare providers, law enforcement and prosecutors consider to be key forensic markers of physical abuse, (3) document information and evidence integral for achieving successful criminal prosecution, and (4) describe approaches that community-based frontline workers can employ to better document evidence of physical abuse.

The data included in this collection were collected under a National Institute of Justice-funded project that sought to document the spectrum and characteristics of injuries observed among physically abused, community-dwelling APS clients.

The collection includes two SAS datasets: injury.sas7bdat (with 47 variables and 403 cases) and subjectleveldata.sas7bdat (with 122 variables and 165 cases); and three SAS System Program Files: analysis-code-v1.sas, cleaned-injury-datasets-v1.sas, and formats.sas. Demographic variables in the collection are in the subjectleveldata.sas7bdat dataset, and include age, year of birth, gender, race, language, and level of education.

In partnership with the Maine Department of Health and Human Services, this study analyzed approximately 200 case files of Maine Adult Protective Services (APS) substantiated investigations of financial exploitation that were opened and completed from 2007 through 2012. The case files included detailed information about the types of abuse individuals experienced, their functional limitations, and severity of risk status. The research team linked the case files with the individuals' Medicare and Medicaid claims data from 2006 through 2014 to examine their claims experience one year prior to APS contact, during their APS event year, and two years following their APS event year. Using a quasi-experimental design, the research team established health care use and cost profiles of the APS clients and compared their profiles to matched controls in the general older population. The project aimed to advance knowledge of the financial impact of elder abuse.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

Financial elder exploitation (FE) is an increasing problem for vulnerable elders exploited by opportunists and for the social service and criminal justice system designed to protect them. This study systematically investigated both objective and subjective measures of social support and isolation, along with common risk factors mentioned in FE theories, including dependency, physical health, depression, cognition, and demographic characteristics. Researchers collected data on individual difference variables with an emphasis on cognitive factors and data on contextual factors using an individually administered survey approach. The framework for this project was derived from known factors for FE, predicted protective factors for FE, and conceptual approaches from the child mistreatment literature on risk and resilience.

The study includes 1 SPSS data file with 216 cases and 297 variables.

Initially funded in 2013 by the National Institute of Justice, the primary purpose of this project was to conduct a randomized-control test of the impact of a victim-focused, forensic collaborative relative to usual care (UC) on older adult victims' health, mental health, and criminal justice outcomes. During the course of the project, researchers responded to enrollment and consent challenges by implementing Arm 2 that focused on collecting caseworker and victim advocate perceptions of cases as well as administrative data from Adult Protective Services (APS).

This collection contains 6 datasets:

• Arm 1 (DS1) contains survey results from victim-focused interviews of 40 older adults who were reported to be victims of abuse, neglect, and/or financial exploitation over 4 time points. Variables describe victim and case characteristics, service use/needs, risk factors for abuse, consequences of abuse and exploitation, and criminal justice process and outcomes.
• Arm 2 (DS2) includes a survey of APS caseworkers reporting on a case of older adult abuse, such as client (older adult victim) and perpetrator demographics, mistreatment details (verbal abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, financial exploitation, and/or housing exploitation), and service use.
• Collateral assessments (DS3) surveyed a trusted individual related to the older adult respondent in Arm 1. This included data on the perceptions of the older adult's functioning and use of services; and the quality of decision-making procedures, desired treatment, and outcomes in the criminal justice system. Of the 40 Arm 1 participants interviewed, 33 gave collateral contact information. Of those 33, 16 could not be reached, one failed the consent quiz, and two declined to participate. Of the 14 who participated in an initial interview, only three participated at the follow-up nine months later.
• Revictimization and Prosecutorial Outcome Data (DS5) includes information on new incidents reported to law enforcement over the nine months following the original incident report and prosecution outcomes, gathered from publicly-accessible police reports and court information for Arm 1 and Arm 2 cases.
• APS administrative data (DS6), such as the demographics of the older adult victim and the primary perpetrator, assessment scores for risk and safety, the alleged mistreatment type, whether mistreatment was substantiated, and APS case status. The data included overall risk/safety scores and summary scores for the domains of physical functioning, environmental context, financial resources, mental health, cognition, medical issues, and mistreatment.

Arm 1 demographic variables includes age, gender, education, employment status, marital status, household size, ethnic minority, and income source. Arm 2 surveys reported ethnicity, gender, age, education, marital status, and employment status; APS data reported age and gender.

The purpose of the completed project was to follow the first National Elder Mistreatment Study (NEMS), which provided prevalence estimates, with a second study of a subset of the same participants to measure the effects of elder abuse in terms of (1) health and mental health outcomes and (2) criminal justice system participation and satisfaction, as well as to specify additional predictors of these effects. Data were collected from 774 older adults 8 years following their participation in Wave I of the NEMS. This represented the results of contacting every locatable participant who reported psychological, physical, or sexual (but not financial) abuse at Wave I (achieved subsample n = 183 of the original 753 Wave I victims) and a comparison sample of 591 randomly selected Wave I non-victims from the remaining 2,149 working phone numbers of the original 5,024 non-victims (at Wave I). As mentioned, financial abuse classification at Wave I was not used to identify the victim subgroup prior to sampling, however retrospective analysis indicated that the two aforementioned sampling groups (every working phone number of Wave I victims of psychological, physical, and sexual abuse AND every working phone number of the 2,149 comparison Wave I participants) accounted for all but 7 financial abuse victims identified as such at Wave I (i.e., no other financial abuse victims at Wave I could have possibly been re-contacted). The cooperation rate (upon contact), for Wave I victims of psychological, physical, or sexual abuse was 66 percent; the cooperation rate of comparison Wave I participants was 57 percent. (Note: it had originally been proposed to conduct propensity matching once the sample of Wave I victims was re-contacted, however by conserving funds during this first phase, the study was able to expand from propensity matching to random selection of a much larger group of over 2,149, for a final derived sample of 774.)