Mass Marketing Elder Fraud Intervention, United States, 1999-2023 (ICPSR 39001)

Version Date: May 14, 2025

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Lynn Langton, RTI International; Marti DeLiema, University of Minnesota

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR39001.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Alternate Title

MMEFI

Summary

Estimates suggest that up to 16% of American adults--approximately 40 million people--fall victim to mass marketing scams each year. Mass marketing scams include any attempts to fraudulently solicit money from consumers through mass communication methods, such as the internet, telephone, and mail. Complaints to consumer protection agencies have risen 240% in the past 10 years (Federal Trade Commission [FTC], 2013, 2023). According to conservative estimates from the most recent Consumer Sentinel Network Report (FTC, 2023), Americans reported more than $2.7 billion in direct losses from fraud in 2022. In addition to financial costs, consequences to victims include feelings of shame and embarrassment, loss of trust, depression, and, in the most severe cases, suicidal ideation. These consequences of fraud are particularly impactful for older adults who suffer higher losses per incident, on average (FTC, 2022) and face greater challenges recovering from losses after retirement. Research on elder mistreatment in general has shown that older victims consume 30% more mental health and substance abuse services and are hospitalized more often than non-victims.

These scams convince susceptible targets that they have won bogus sweepstakes, merchandise, free vacations, or lotteries, but they first need to pay money to claim their winnings. Based on data from one major investigation from 2011 to 2016, the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) found that Americans sent $558 million in checks, credit card payments, and money orders through the mail in response to such scams (USPIS internal data). Overall, the USPIS estimates that 3% of U.S. adults--7.5 million Americans--have mailed a payment in response to mass marketing fraud and that 60%-70% of these individuals are revictimized by a similar solicitation or an entirely different offer. Given these figures, reducing the incidence of mass marketing fraud could save millions of dollars annually.

Although the FTC, the National Council on Aging, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Better Business Bureau, American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), and other agencies and organizations routinely disseminate fraud education and awareness materials, it is unclear how much of these materials reach the most vulnerable populations. Much of the content is available online, yet according to the Pew Research Center, only 75% of adults older than age 65 use the internet, and only 64% have home broadband. Printed materials are also disseminated at senior centers, libraries, legal service offices, and outreach events, but older adults who are socially isolated and most susceptible to fraud are unlikely to be reached through these venues.

To address gaps in intervention research, Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International and the University of Minnesota conducted the Mass Marketing Elder Fraud Intervention (MMEFI) Study with collaboration and support from the USPIS. This multiphase research project included a secondary analysis of USPIS administrative data on prior scams and a randomized controlled trial test of the efficacy of two variations of a mailed intervention for preventing revictimization by mail fraud. The overall objective was to provide specific policy recommendations to the USPIS and other consumer protection agencies regarding the effectiveness of a mailed intervention. The MMEFI Study had the following specific goals:

  • Enhance knowledge and understanding of repeat victimization among older victims of mass marketing scams.
  • Engage in rigorous testing of the efficacy of two versions of a fraud intervention strategy geared toward preventing repeat victimization among older victims of mass marketing scams.
  • Assess victims' perceptions of the intervention and collect self-report data on experiences with other types of fraud by surveying individuals in the intervention study.

    • Citation

    Langton, Lynn, and DeLiema, Marti. Mass Marketing Elder Fraud Intervention, United States, 1999-2023. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2025-05-14. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR39001.v1

    Export Citation:

    • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
    • EndNote

    Funding

    United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice (2019-R2-CX-0053)

    Subject Terms

    Geographic Coverage

    Smallest Geographic Unit

    city

    Restrictions

    Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reasons for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research.

    Distributor(s)

    Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
    Hide

    Time Period(s)

    1998-06-06 -- 2023-07-26

    Date of Collection

    2021-07-01 -- 2023-07-26
    Hide

    Study Purpose

    The purpose of the study was to provide specific policy recommendations to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) and other consumer protection agencies regarding the effectiveness of mass marketing elder fraud intervention.

    Study Design

    Researchers focused on collecting data for both Intervention Experiment and Secondary Data Analysis.

    Intervention Experiment

    Researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of several intervention approaches for preventing revictimization among older victims of mass marketing fraud. The interventions included different fraud awareness materials that were sent to households identified by the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) as recent victims of mail fraud. Households in the intervention experiment were randomized into one of three conditions:

  • Treatment group 1 received an official letter from the USPIS informing them that a piece of their mail was sent to an address or P.O. Box currently under investigation for mass marketing fraud. The letter explained that they should have received their original payment envelope back in the mail and that their personal information was likely added to a list used by multiple criminal organizations for future fraud targeting attempts. The letter warns the receiver to be on the lookout for subsequent fraudulent solicitations by mail or phone. On the backside, the letter provides written tips and visual examples of fraudulent offers to educate the receiver on common mail scam tactics.
  • Treatment group 2 received additional materials mailed weeks apart to cultivate a "Fraud Fighter" mentality. In addition to the warning letter, treatment group 2 received a fraud prevention brochure with a perforated, tear-off panel encouraging them to join in the the USPIS's effort to protect others from fraud by sharing their stories and tips for detecting and avoiding scams. In addition to the letter and brochure, treatment group 2 was mailed new fraud awareness and empowerment materials every few weeks. The additional mailings included a flyer introducing the recipient to the USPIS and how to report mail fraud, a newsletter with stories from other victims and a crossword puzzle, a brochure showcasing the criminals behind the scams and how they use victims' money, and a "Thank you for being a Fraud Fighter" greeting card.
  • The control group did not receive any communication or materials from the USPIS but did receive their original payment returned in the original envelop with a yellow "Return to Sender" United States Postal Service sticker on it.

    • Secondary Data Analysis

    As part of their criminal investigations into mail fraud, the USPIS seized the customer relationship management (CRM) databases from four mail fraud enterprises: Maria Duval, Maria Rochefort, Fennel-Kern, and Data Matrix Inc. (DMI). The CRM databases are longitudinal, capturing the dates and number of separate payments victims mailed, in addition to how much they paid at each incident. Victims' names and addresses are also stored in the CRM databases; in the case of the two psychic scams, dates of birth were also collected purportedly to offer a more accurate psychic reading. All transactions ended in 2018 when the organizations were investigated and stopped by the USPIS.

    For Research Triangle Institute (RTI's) analysis, the USPIS added an 11-digit ZIP code to each address record in the CRM databases. These 11-digit ZIP codes correspond to each victim household's exact delivery point. The 11-digit ZIP codes helped to facilitate linking incidents to unique addresses within and across each of the CRM databases.

    The USPIS also attached a chaining address file to the Maria Duval and Maria Rochefort files. The address chaining file was intended to enable the research team to identify whether a victim moved to a new address over the nearly 20-year data period. For the Maria Duval and Maria Rochefort databases, the address chaining file was linked to less than 0.1% of 11-digit ZIP codes in the address databases. Because of the size of the DMI file and the time and resources required to do address chaining, the USPIS was not able to include an address chaining file with the DMI or Kern databases. Thus, the chaining file was not used in the analysis.

    In the final phase of the Mass Marketing Elder Fraud Intervention (MMEFI) Study, all individuals from the initial three lists of addresses provided by the USPIS were invited to complete a survey.

    Sample

  • Addresses identified by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) as having sent a mailed response to a scam solicitation.
  • Also, the historic data, provided by the USPIS, were confiscated from customer relationship management (CRM) databases.

    • Time Method

    Longitudinal

    Universe

    Addresses nationwide identified by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service as having responded to mail fraud.

    Unit(s) of Observation

    Address

    Data Type(s)

    Mode of Data Collection

    Description of Variables

    The study included three datasets (1 pubic dataset and 2 restricted datasets) and a total of 145 variables. The public use file contains results of all surveys received during the study. The restricted use files contain data that the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) seized from several criminal enterprise databases belonging to 4 large mail fraud organizations and the data was combined, and individuals linked between each dataset to create an overall historical transaction picture of scam victimization for each individual, and also data from 3 batches of mail captured by the United State Postal Services (USPS) sent to known scammer addresses.

    The Survey Data (DS1) set asked the respondents to describe their fraud experience, if the respondents gave out money to someone who they thought was a family member, how many times they received scammed products and services in a year, and their emotions and frustrations about scammers.

    The Historic Scam Transaction Data (DS2) included scam names, amount lost to scams, and date of scam transactions.

    The Intervention Victim Records Data (DS3) file included information about the most common year of birth and total dollars lost via variable ZIP11.

    The datasets also included additional demographic variables such as; state, birth year, race, marital status of the participants.

    Response Rates

    2253 individuals were mailed the survey. Of these, 562 responded (24.9%).

    Hide

    Original Release Date

    2025-05-14

    Version History

    2025-05-14 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

    • Performed consistency checks.

    Hide

    Notes

    • The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.

    • One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.