August 2016

Report and 

Recommendations:

Fighting Elder Financial 

Exploitation through 

Community Networks

Office for Older Americans
1 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................3

1. Introduction...........................................................................................................6

2. Elder financial abuse is a severe and widespread problem..............................8

3. Networks help fight financial exploitation........................................................11

Networks improve response to financial exploitation........................................... 14

Networks increase reporting of suspected cases ....................................................15

Network participation enhances members’ skills and ability to address financial 

exploitation............................................................................................................. 16

Networks leverage and save community resources ............................................... 16

4. There are many different types of effective networks.....................................18

Networks provide varied valuable services............................................................ 21

5. Networks protect seniors in hundreds of communities..................................26

Most networks operate in densely populated counties .........................................28

Few networks operate in counties with the highest percentage of seniors...........29

Only a quarter of states have a network in most of their counties ........................30

6. Many networks share key characteristics ........................................................31

Many networks have a resourceful coordinator .................................................... 31

Many networks engage key stakeholders...............................................................32

Many networks seek technical assistance and funding during their formation ... 35

Many networks obtain ongoing funding from different sources........................... 37

Many networks seek opportunities for replication................................................39

7. Conclusion and recommendations...................................................................40

Recommendations..................................................................................................40
2 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Appendix A: Methodology....................................................................................42

Appendix B: Common Acronyms........................................................................48
3 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Executive Summary

The widespread prevalence of elder financial exploitation destroys the financial security of 

millions of older Americans annually. In response to this crisis, hundreds of communities across 

the United States have created collaborative networks to protect their older residents. These 

networks, which often bring together key community stakeholders and resources, engage in 

varied activities designed to prevent, detect, and respond to elder financial exploitation. 

To increase our understanding of how elder financial protection networks can grow and endure, 

the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) conducted research nationwide. With the 

help of the Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress, we attended network meetings 

and interviewed representatives from 23 elder protection networks and various experts in the 

field. Our inquiries focused on networks’ objectives, structure, leadership, funding, members, 

activities and challenges. In addition, we conducted a quantitative analysis to examine networks’ 

presence in communities across the United States. This report presents CFPB’s 

recommendations to existing networks and key stakeholders to develop and enhance their 

community’s collaborative efforts to fight financial exploitation.

Key findings

• Networks increase coordination and improve collaboration among responders, service 

providers and other relevant stakeholders.

• Networks improve the prevention, detection, reporting of and response to elder financial 

exploitation.

• Although hundreds of communities have developed networks, networks are not yet 

present in much of the United States - only 25 percent of all counties in the United States

currently have a network addressing elder abuse issues.
4 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

• Most networks addressing financial exploitation do so as part of a broader focus on elder 

abuse - only 6 percent of known networks specialize in preventing and responding to 

financial exploitation.

• Networks primarily follow the Triad and multi-disciplinary team models of 

collaboration. Triads often bring together seniors and law enforcement to increase 

community education about safety and crime. Multi-disciplinary teams bring together 

professionals from different fields to review cases of elder abuse including financial 

exploitation. 

• Networks’ most common ways of fighting financial exploitation are through community 

education, professional training and case review.

• Networks share some common features and needs, including a resourceful coordinator, 

some start-up funding and technical assistance support, and some long-term funding 

and staffing.

• Most networks do not require significant funding to start up or continue functioning.

• Existing networks are often the catalyst for new networks; effective networks seek

opportunities for replication and ensuring statewide coverage.

Recommendations

 Professionals working with or serving older adults should create networks in

communities where they do not currently exist, especially in communities with a large 

number of older people.

 Members of existing networks should seek to expand resources and capacity as needed.

 Elder abuse networks that do not focus on financial exploitation should develop activities 

and the capacity to respond to elder financial exploitation by seeking to include as 

network members professionals with financial expertise, such as forensic accountants.

Also, they should implement educational programs for older adults, caregivers, and

professionals on how to prevent, detect and respond to financial exploitation.
5 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

 Elder financial exploitation networks should seek to include law enforcement as network 

members and to encourage their meaningful participation in network activities, 

including but not limited to educational or case review efforts. 

 Because financial institutions are uniquely positioned to detect that an elder account 

holder has been targeted or victimized and to take action, elder financial exploitation 

networks should seek to include financial institutions, large and small, as network 

members. Similarly, financial institutions should seek to join and participate in local 

networks. 

 To help ensure the network’s long-term sustainability, financial exploitation networks 

should implement strategies to institutionalize the coordinator role as a permanent staff 

position.

 Networks in areas with older Americans of diverse linguistic, ethnic and racial 

backgrounds should seek to engage stakeholders that serve these populations and deliver 

educational and case review services relevant and appropriate to these populations.

 Networks should seek to expand coverage into rural areas by creating regional networks 

through which resources can be shared and by using teleconferencing and 

videoconferencing in lieu of travel when necessary.

 Networks engaging in educational activities, especially those networks with limited 

resources, should use existing federal, state and local educational resources.
6 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

1. Introduction

Elder financial exploitation destroys the financial security of millions of older Americans 

annually.1 In response to this crisis, hundreds of communities across the United States have

created collaborative networks to protect their older residents.2 These networks, which often

bring together key community stakeholders and resources, engage in varied activities designed 

to prevent, detect, and/or respond to elder financial exploitation.3 Though many strong 

networks exist nationwide, networks do not exist in most communities, including many in which 

seniors represent a large share of the population, which creates considerable opportunities to 

expand this approach.4

 

1 With over 60 million Americans age 60 and over according to Census estimates, and an annual prevalence rate of 

5.2 percent, an estimated 3.2 million Americans were victims of financial exploitation in 2014. See Ron Acierno, et 

al., Prevalence and Correlates of Emotional, Physical, Sexual and Financial Abuse and Potential Neglect in the 

United States: The National Elder Mistreatment Study, 100 American Journal of Public Health 292-97 (Feb. 2010), 

available at http://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.163089; Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Table 

S0101- 5 Year Estimates Population 60 years and over in the United States 2010-2014, 

http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/14_5YR/S0102 (last visited July 27, 2016).

2 Lisa Nerenberg, Communities Respond to Elder Abuse, 46 Journal of Gerontological Social Work 8 (2006), 

available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J083v46n03_02.

3 Georgia Anetzberger, The Evolution of a Multidisciplinary Response to Elder Abuse, 13 Marquette Elder’s Advisor 

13, 1 (2011), available at http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=elders. 

4 See the Quantitative analysis section in Appendix A for details about geographic analysis and categorization of 

existing networks.
7 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

To increase our understanding of how elder financial protection networks can grow and endure, 

the CFPB conducted research nationwide. With the help of the Federal Research Division of the 

Library of Congress, we attended network meetings and interviewed representatives from 23 

elder protection networks and various experts in the field.5 Our inquiries focused on networks’ 

objectives, structure, leadership, funding, members, activities and challenges. In addition, we 

conducted a quantitative analysis to examine networks’ presence in communities across the 

United States.6

This report highlights what elder financial exploitation prevention and response networks (also 

referred to as “networks” and “elder protection networks”) do, how they work, how they can 

work better, and how they can be established. The report presents CFPB’s recommendations to 

existing networks and key stakeholders to develop and enhance their community’s collaborative 

efforts to fight financial exploitation. Our goal is to help communities enhance and expand 

protections for older Americans against elder financial exploitation. Accompanying this report is 

a Resource Guide with promising practices, sample documents, and resource materials.

 

5 CFPB contracted with the Library of Congress through an Inter-Agency Agreement to conduct the qualitative 

portion of this study. CFPB staff participated in some of the interviews and case studies. 

6 See Appendix infra for a fuller discussion of the methodology used in producing this report.
8 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

2. Elder financial abuse is a 

severe and widespread 

problem

Financial abuse or exploitation is a widespread form of elder abuse that often occurs in tandem 

with neglect and other types of elder abuse.7 Financial abuse can be perpetrated by family 

members, caregivers, fiduciaries (such as court-appointed guardians and agents under a power 

of attorney), financial advisers, home repair contractors, scam artists, and others. Older adults 

can be attractive targets because they may have accumulated assets or equity in their homes,8

 

7 NCPEA, et al., The MetLife Study of Elder Financial Abuse: Crimes of Occasion, Desperation, and Predation 

Against America’s Elders, 17-18 (June 2011), available at http://www.giaging.org/documents/mmi-elder-financialabuse.pdf (hereinafter MetLife Study); Shelly L. Jackson and Thomas L. Hafemeister, Pure Financial Exploitation 

vs. Hybrid Financial Exploitation Co-Occurring With Physical Abuse and/or Neglect of Elderly Persons, 2 

Psychology of Violence 286 (2012), available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027273 (hereinafter Pure Financial 

Exploitation). For definitions of the forms of elder abuse, see National Center for Elder Abuse (NCEA), Types of 

Abuse, https://ncea.acl.gov/faq/abusetypes.html (last visited July 27, 2016).

8 The typical U.S. household headed by a person age 65 and older has a net worth 47 times greater than a household 

headed by someone under 35. Richard Fry, et al., The Rising Age Gap in Economic Well-Being (2011), available at

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/11/07/the-rising-age-gap-in-economic-well-being/. 
9 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

and often receive regular income such as Social Security or a pension.9 They may be especially 

vulnerable due to isolation, cognitive decline, physical disability, health problems or the recent 

loss of a loved one.10 For many older victims of financial exploitation, their losses are impossible 

to recover.11 Elder financial exploitation may also result in a loss of independence or material 

hardship,12 and may lead to depression or even suicide.13

Studies suggest that financial exploitation is the most common form of elder abuse and that only 

a small fraction of incidents are reported.14 Because elders often do not report their losses,

quantifying the true magnitude of the problem and its monetary impact is challenging, if not 

impossible. Estimates of losses from elder financial abuse range from $2.9 billion to as high as 

 

9 Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2015 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, Table PINC-08, Source 

of Income in 2014–People 15 Years Old and Over, by Income of Specified Type in 2014, Age, Race, Hispanic Origin, 

and Sex (2015), http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032015/perinc/pinc08_000.htm (last visited July 27, 

2016) 

10 Pure Financial Exploitation, supra note 7.

11 Lisa Nerenberg, Communities Respond to Elder Abuse, 46 Journal of Gerontological Social Work 8 (2006), 

available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J083v46n03_02.

12 True Link Financial, The True Link Report on Elder Financial Abuse 2015, 1, 4 (fn. 3) (January 2015), available at

https://truelink-wordpress-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/True-Link-Report-On-Elder-FinancialAbuse-012815.pdf. Estimating that 954,000 elders in the United States are currently skipping meals as a result of 

financial abuse.

13 Id.; Pure Financial Exploitation, supra note 7, 286. 

14 Ron Acierno, et al., Prevalence and Correlates of Emotional, Physical, Sexual and Financial Abuse and Potential 

Neglect in the United States: The National Elder Mistreatment Study, 100 American Journal of Public Health 292-

97 (Feb. 2010), available at http://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.163089; Lifespan of Greater Rochester, Inc., et al., 

Under the Radar: New York State Elder Abuse Prevalence Study–Self-Reported Prevalence and Documented Case 

Surveys–Final Report, 50 (May 2011), available at

http://www.nyselderabuse.org/documents/ElderAbusePrevalenceStudy2011.pdf. This study estimated that only 1 

in 44 cases of financial abuse came to the attention of agencies that provide services to victims of elder abuse in New 

York State. 
10 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

$36.5 billion each year.15 Financial exploitation of older adults also has costs for society, 

resulting in economic losses for financial institutions, government agencies and programs (such 

as Medicare and Medicaid), and taxpayers.16

These individual and societal costs of financial crimes against older adults are likely to become 

an even bigger problem as the U.S. population ages. By 2050, the population age 65 and over is 

projected to be 83.7 million, almost double the estimated 43.1 million in 2012.17

 

15 MetLife Study, supra note 7, at 2; True Link Financial, The True Link Report on Elder Financial Abuse 2015, 

(January 2015), available at https://truelink-wordpress-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/TrueLink-Report-On-Elder-Financial-Abuse-012815.pdf. Estimates vary significantly largely due to definitional and 

methodological differences. For a discussion of the MetLife and True Link methodologies, see Tobie Stanger, 

Financial Elder Abuse Costs $3 Billion a Year. Or is it $36 billion? Consumer Reports, Sept. 29, 2015.

16 Yufan Huang and Alan Lawitz, The New York State Cost of Financial Exploitation Study (May 2016), available at

http://ocfs.ny.gov/main/reports/Cost%20of%20Financial%20Exploitation%20Study%20FINAL%20May%202016.

pdf ; Jilenne Gunther, The Utah Cost of Financial Exploitation, (August 2011) available at

http://victimsofcrime.org/docs/default-source/financial-fraud/2011-economic-cost-of-financialexploitation.pdf?sfvrsn=2. 

17 U.S. Census Bureau, An Aging Nation: The Older Population in the United States–Population Estimates and 

Projections–Current Population Reports, (May 2014), available at https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p25-

1140.pdf.
11 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

3. Networks help fight financial 

exploitation

No single community entity is responsible for

effectively preventing and responding to elder 

financial exploitation, nor can one entity do so.

Resources to combat this problem are also 

increasingly limited as the problem itself and the 

older population grow and funding levels remain

relatively static. In order to address these 

challenges, many communities have created 

networks to help prevent, detect, and/or respond to elder financial exploitation..

Generally, a network discussed in this report is a sustained and largely voluntary collaboration, 

coalition, alliance, or partnership of private and public entities, organizations and individuals 

that works with or on behalf of older people.18

 

18 Some of the networks examined in this project were created as a result of a state mandate to establish a team or 

protocol for multidisciplinary collaboration. For instance, California law requires Adult Protective Services agencies 

to lead multi-disciplinary team networks (MDT’s) in every California county. See Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15763(a) . 

Types of networks are discussed in Section 4.

An elder financial protection 

network is a sustained and 

largely voluntary collaboration 

or partnership that works to 

prevent, detect, and/or respond 

to elder financial exploitation.
12 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Over the last two decades a growing body of research has shown that networks are effective

community responses to elder financial exploitation. Notably, a 2013 study found that cases that 

were examined by a forensic center, a type of network that brings together experts from 

different agencies, had higher prosecution, conviction and restitution rates than cases that were 

not examined by a forensic center.19 Earlier studies had also shown that the creation of 

community networks resulted in an increased number of trainings, referrals and specialized 

assessments, and improved coordination among networks’ key stakeholders.20

Experts and professionals in the field agree that increased multidisciplinary community 

collaboration and interagency cooperation is vital to addressing the problem of elder abuse, 

especially financial exploitation.21 The 2014 Elder Justice Roadmap, which brought together 

 

19 Adria Navarro, et al., Holding Abusers Accountable: An Elder Abuse Forensic Center Increases Criminal 

Prosecution of Financial Exploitation, 53 The Gerontologist 303-312 (2013),

http://gerontologist.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/05/15/geront.gns075. (hereinafter Holding Abusers 

Accountable)

20 Aileen Wiglesworth, et al., Findings from an Elder Abuse Forensic Center, 46 The Gerontologist 277-283 (2006), 

available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16581893; Mary S. Twomey, et al., The Successes and 

Challenges of Seven Multidisciplinary Teams, 22 Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect 291–305 (2010), available at

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20711916.

21 Page Ulrey and Bonnie Brandl, Collaboration is Essential: King County’s Response to a Case of Elder Abuse and 

Exploitation, 36 Journal of the American Society on Aging 77 (2012), available at

http://www.asaging.org/blog/collaboration-essential-king-countys-response-case-elder-abuse-and-exploitation; 

Georgia J. Anetzberger, The Evolution of a Multidisciplinary Response to Elder Abuse, 13 Marquette Elder’s 

Adviser 107-128 (2011), available at

http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=elders; Bonnie Brandl, et al., 

Enhancing Victim Safety Through Collaboration, 7 Care Management Journals 64-72 (2006), available at

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17214238.
13 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

experts, leading public officials, and stakeholders to discuss effective ways to address elder 

abuse, supports the creation of networks.22

Elder financial protection networks already exist in many areas throughout the country. Most 

networks focus on protecting seniors from financial exploitation as part of a broader mission to 

fight elder abuse, though some do have a singular focus on financial exploitation.23 The CFPB 

identified 891 networks nationwide working on financial exploitation issues. According to our 

analysis, 837 (94 percent) appear to have a broader focus on protecting seniors from all types of 

abuse, and 54 (or 6 percent) appear to be exclusively focused on financial exploitation.24

 

22 Marie-Therese Connolly, et al., The Elder Justice Roadmap: A Stakeholder Initiative to Respond to an Emerging 

Health, Justice, Financial and Social Crisis (July 2014), available at 

https://www.justice.gov/elderjustice/research/resources/EJRP_Roadmap.pdf.

23 The limited data available on networks that focus generally on elder abuse show that all of these networks are 

involved in tackling the problem of financial exploitation, yet their degree of engagement and resources devoted to 

fighting financial exploitation varies significantly. 

24 There is no existing comprehensive dataset on the activities and scope of these networks. Existing data do provide a 

basis for distinguishing between networks that work on elder financial exploitation as part of their broader focus on 

elder abuse and safety and networks that focus exclusively on elder financial exploitation. Many networks may also 

focus on abuse of all vulnerable adults (such as younger adults with disabilities).
14 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

FIGURE 1: NETWORKS BY FOCUS

We found that networks –whether focused exclusively on financial exploitation or more broadly 

on elder abuse– benefit older adults and the networks’ members. When asked about the benefits 

of their network to seniors and their organizations, representatives of the networks in our study 

spoke of their networks’ ability to (1) improve response to cases of financial exploitation, (2) 

increase reporting of cases, (3) enhance members’ skills and capacity to address financial 

exploitation, and (4) improve coordination, including the use of community resources.

Networks improve response to financial 

exploitation

Several networks in our study meet regularly to review and discuss cases of financial 

exploitation. These networks bring together professionals with different backgrounds and 

expertise to help law enforcement, adult protective services (APS) and local prosecutors gain a 

better understanding of the cases, provide support to victims, and prosecute perpetrators. The

local networks in Cook County, IL and Oklahoma City, OK, for instance, stated that the 

participation of financial experts, such as forensic accountants and compliance officers from 

financial institutions, was crucial in case review. The financial experts contribute advice and 

analysis regarding, among other things, financial transactions, access to needed documentation, 

and recovery of assets. 

6%

94%

Focused on

financial

exploitation

Focused on elder

abuse generally
15 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Networks often create new or improve existing channels of communication between first 

responders, such as APS, law enforcement, and financial service providers. In addition, 

networks help members gain a clear understanding of each other’s roles, policies, resources and

limitations. A member from a law enforcement agency in Cook County, IL said, “People get to 

know each other, you’ve met them, talked to them, know where to go for your victim.” A local 

network in Fairfield County, OH stated that network collaboration helped speed up processes 

such as obtaining guardianship orders and emergency orders for placement and to freeze assets. 

Similarly, members of networks in states that include financial institution representatives said

that law enforcement, APS, and prosecutors were able to act quickly to protect victims from 

further losses as a result of relationships they developed with network members from banks and 

credit unions.

Networks increase reporting of suspected 

cases

Most of the networks interviewed recounted that network participation improves reporting of 

cases. Members of networks across the board agreed that a major challenge in addressing 

financial exploitation is that many cases are unreported. Many networks located in states with 

mandatory reporting laws, including 

Colorado, Hawaii, and California,25 work to 

raise awareness of their states’ reporting 

requirements for financial institutions. In 

other states, networks have led the efforts 

to establish hotlines and referral protocols. 

 

25 See Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15630.1; Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-6.5-108(1); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 412:3-114.5. 

Networks report that their efforts 

have resulted in greater 

numbers of cases coming to the 

attention of authorities. 
16 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

These networks report that their efforts have resulted in greater numbers of cases coming to the 

attention of authorities. In Ohio, a local network generated an additional 950 referrals to APS in 

2014. 

In addition, some of the networks that we interviewed stated that they encourage reporting of 

financial exploitation through community education. Local networks in Pickaway County, OH

and Jefferson County, CO mentioned that their direct engagement of seniors has helped to 

improve reporting by strengthening trust between seniors and law enforcement. They said that 

their efforts help to embolden seniors in their communities to come forward and report cases, 

identify other seniors who may be victims of financial exploitation, and help the network’s 

education efforts by spreading the word. 

Network participation enhances members’

skills and ability to address financial 

exploitation

Improving reporting and response to cases of financial exploitation is also beneficial to the 

individual professionals who participate in the networks. These professionals mentioned that 

each case that they discussed and responded to as part of their collaborative work enhanced 

their professional expertise. These experiences provide them with problem-solving skills and 

knowledge about a variety of topics including how financial products and services work and how 

financial exploitation interacts with other forms of elder abuse. A local network in Hawaii

developed a process to institutionalize their experiences from their case review work through a 

‘lessons learned’ survey form. The case review team collects these reports to improve 

prosecution referrals, care provided to victims, and support for witnesses. 

Networks leverage and save community 

resources

Networks allow organizations to align the work and leverage resources of the member 

organizations. Networks leverage their members’ resources in a number of ways. At the most 

functional level, members share resources such as volunteers, spaces for meeting and public 
17 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

events, teleconference lines and other means for remote participation. Similarly, network 

members share training and cross-promotion opportunities. In Pickaway County, OH, for 

example, the local network was able to use their private sector members’ access to media, 

billboards, and other vehicles to conduct their educational campaigns. In other networks, staff 

expertise was shared. The networks in Orange County, CA, Houston, TX, and Cook County, IL, 

among others, help APS staff, prosecutors and law enforcement by offering free professional 

services from geriatricians, forensic accountants, compliance officers, and elder law attorneys. 

Furthermore, in communities where more than one network exists, networks communicate with 

each other and find ways to avoid duplication of efforts. For instance, in Los Angeles, CA, two 

networks were actively reviewing cases of financial exploitation. As a result, one network shifted 

from conducting multidisciplinary case review to providing multidisciplinary training for those 

who provide service in the area of elder financial exploitation. 
18 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

4. There are many different 

types of effective networks

We found that networks often have different structures, perform different activities, and are 

known by a variety of names. Yet two models of collaboration seem to dominate: Triads and 

multi-disciplinary teams. Approximately 78 percent of all networks identified follow these

models of collaboration. In addition, we found that their most common activities include 

community education, professional training, and case review.

FIGURE 2: NETWORKS BY MODEL

Multi-Disciplinary Teams 

Multi-Disciplinary Teams provide agencies, such as APS and law enforcement, with 

resources, consultation, and advice regarding elder abuse cases. MDTs bring together social 

service, legal, medical, psychological, and law enforcement experts. While most MDTs are 

focused on case review activities, some MDTs provide education or training to members and the 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

MDTs

Other networks

Triads
19 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

public. MDTs account for 8 percent of all existing networks working on elder abuse, but 

comprise 87 percent of the networks that are focused exclusively on financial exploitation.26 

There are several types of specialized MDTs, including one specifically focused on financial 

exploitation. These specialized MDTs include Financial Abuse Specialist Teams (FASTs), 

Forensic Centers (FCs), and Elder Fatality Review Teams (EFRTs), also called Elder Death 

Review Teams (EDRTs).

 Financial Abuse Specialist Teams typically provide consultation and support to 

agencies, such as APS case workers, law enforcement, and long-term care ombudsmen,27

who are responding to and investigating cases of elder financial exploitation.28 Members 

often are comprised of public agencies but may include private sector experts from the 

fields of banking, insurance, accounting, law, medicine, and real estate.29

 Elder Abuse Forensic Centers bring together professionals in criminal justice, 

healthcare, and social services to review cases of abuse, assess and evaluate victims’

cognitive capacity, improve the prospects of prosecution, develop appropriate service 

 

26 NCEA, Multidisciplinary Teams, https://ncea.acl.gov/whatwedo/practice/teams-index.html (last visited July 27, 

2016).

27 Long-term care ombudsmen are advocates for residents of nursing facilities, board and care homes, assisted-living 

facilities and similar adult care facilities, in programs administered by the Administration on Aging/Administration 

for Community Living. Ombudsman staff and volunteers work to resolve problems and concerns of individual 

residents. Every state has an Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman headed by a full-time state 

ombudsman. For more information about financial exploitation in long-term care settings, see CFPB, Protecting 

residents from financial exploitation, A manual for assisted living and nursing facilities (May 2014), available at

http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201406_cfpb_guide_protecting-residents-from-financial-exploitation.pdf.

28 NCEA, Financial Abuse Specialist Teams (FAST), https://ncea.acl.gov/whatwedo/practice/teams-index.html 

(last visited July 27, 2016).

29 Joan Virginia Allen, Financial Abuse of Elders and Dependent Adults: The FAST (Financial Abuse Specialist 

Team) Approach, 12 Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect 85-91 (2000), available at

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J084v12n02_09.
20 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

responses, and support prevention of elder abuse through awareness campaigns and 

professional education.30 Team members also may conduct medical and other 

assessments, provide consultations during and between meetings, accept referrals for 

services, and testify as expert witnesses in legal proceedings. FCs can be a very effective 

form of elder abuse prevention network, yet they are relatively uncommon.31They are

also a resource-intensive form of network, and they may be difficult to create without 

ongoing funding and investment of professional expertise.

Triads

Triads provide coordination between law enforcement, elder service professionals, and older 

community members in order to promote crime awareness and prevention.32 Their primary 

activities include education and training of law enforcement, seniors, caregivers, and 

professionals involved in serving seniors. 33 They may also perform other activities involving 

crime reduction and safety. 

Triads are the most common form of community collaboration focused on elder abuse and 

safety. With over 600 Triads nationwide, Triads account for 70 percent of all networks. We are 

unaware of any Triads exclusively focused on elder financial exploitation. However, some Triads 

have made financial exploitation and fraud prevention a core focus of their educational efforts.

 

30 NCEA, Forensic Centers, https://ncea.acl.gov/whatwedo/practice/Teams-forensic.html (last visited July 27, 2016).

31 Holding Abusers Accountable, supra, note 19. A study of the Los Angeles County Elder Abuse Forensic Center 

found that FC case review significantly increased the rate of prosecution.

32 The Triad program focused on elder adults began at the national level in 1988. The National Association of Triads, 

Inc. (NATI), formed by the National Sheriffs Association, provides coordination and support for the development of 

Triads throughout the country. Triads are often run by a SALT (Seniors and Law Enforcement Together) council.

33 NATI, Triad Program Manual (2011), available at

https://www.sheriffs.org/sites/default/files/uploads/TRIAD/NATI%20Manual-2012.pdf .
21 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Their engagement of law enforcement and seniors and their presence in over 600 communities 

in nearly 40 states are key strengths of the Triad model.

Other types of networks

There are many other types of networks organized to fight elder abuse and elder financial abuse. 

Twenty-two percent of the networks working on elder abuse are not MDTs or Triads. These 

other networks, coalitions, and task forces engage in a variety of activities ranging from 

education to advocacy. Some of these networks also work on case consultation and review 

similar to financial abuse specialist teams (FASTs). Some of them may also focus on abuse of 

vulnerable adults of all ages (such as younger adults with disabilities).

Networks provide varied valuable services

Networks in our study facilitated collaboration on a variety of activities related to elder financial 

exploitation ranging from education to advocacy. Some networks performed a combination of 

these activities, while others specialized in only one. Nearly all networks studied were involved 

in education efforts. Over half of them conducted case consultation and review. 

Networks educate seniors and professionals

Consumer and professional education was the most common activity undertaken by the 

networks in our study. Many regarded education as critical to preventing elder financial 

exploitation. Training by these networks aimed to raise awareness about the problem and 

strategies for reducing it. In order to combat financial exploitation, such awareness on the part 

of older people and those who serve them is essential.

In reviewing network training activities, we found that all of the networks recognized the need 

for the education and training to be ongoing because of the ever-changing nature of certain 

forms of financial exploitation, staff turnover, changing laws, and the growing number of older 

people in their communities. 

Some of the networks we studied focused on educating their members, while others 

concentrated on educating seniors, caregivers, first responders (such as law enforcement 

personnel and APS workers), financial service providers, and the general public. Some networks 
22 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

used nationally recognized training materials, which can be accessed easily for free.34 Below, we 

provide a few examples of the activities of networks that are engaged in educating different 

target groups on elder abuse. 

Triads educate older adults about all types of 

elder abuse. They often invite speakers—

usually experts, but sometimes victims or 

their relatives—and show video 

presentations depicting stories about victims 

and perpetrators. In addition, some FASTs 

such as the Houston Financial Abuse 

Specialist Team (H-FAST) and the Los Angeles County Fiduciary Abuse Specialist Team (LAC 

FAST) provide training for their members, chiefly on elder financial exploitation.

Some networks use the CFPB’s and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s jointly created 

Money Smart for Older Adults (MSOA) curriculum as an educational resource. Members of the 

Illinois Financial Abuse Specialist Team (iFAST), for example, use MSOA to educate seniors.

The network plans to recruit non-member volunteers to provide trainings at senior venues and 

financial institutions. In 2014 and 2015, North Carolina’s State Department of Health and 

Human Services collaborated with the State Employees Credit Union (SECU) to implement a 

train-the-trainer MSOA initiative across the state. During May and June 2014 and 2015, SECU 

provided training in seven regions throughout the state for nearly 400 local professionals, 

including representatives from the 100 county social services departments, local Area Agency on 

Aging (AAA) staff, and the North Carolina Retired Government Employee Association. 

 

34 For free educational resources, see Section 6 of the Resource Guide at consumerfinance.gov/elder-protectionnetworks.

Ongoing training can profoundly 

improve a community’s ability to 

fight this crime.
23 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Two networks we looked at are using the National Clearinghouse on Abuse in Later Life’s 

(NCALL’s) nationally certified “train-the-trainer” course for law enforcement. In 2013, the St. 

Tammany SALT Council, LA worked with NCALL trainers to train seven teams of instructors to 

present the one-day program to law enforcement officers statewide. The instructor teams 

included a law enforcement officer, a prosecutor, an advocate, a protective services investigator, 

and a facilitator. The involvement of these different types of professionals, who work for 

different organizations and agencies, illustrates the collaborative potential that these local 

networks create. The Council continues to offer the training free to law enforcement agencies in 

the state that request it. 

Networks also offer training and education to financial institutions and their staff. For instance, 

the Elder Financial Protection Network (EFPN) in northern California created a training

program for financial institutions.35 Over the course of 12 years, EFPN worked with more than 

400 financial institutions to train their staff using this training program. EFPN also organized 

conferences and meetings with members of the banking industry, law enforcement and social 

services to enhance collaboration at the local, regional and state level.

Network collaboration helps professionals review difficult 

cases

Review of suspected cases of financial exploitation is the second most common activity that the 

networks examined in our study perform. Case review activities include: assisting law 

enforcement and APS case workers in the investigation of reported cases; preserving or 

recovering victims’ assets; facilitating the prosecution of perpetrators; educating network 

members on elder abuse; and identifying gaps in services.

 

35 A Senior Program Analyst in CFPB’s Office for Older Americans and member of the study team served as EFPN’s 

CEO from 2001 to 2011.
24 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

The networks that we studied with active case review programs report success in performing

these activities, except recovering victims’ assets, which is often not possible.

The Oklahoma County Coalition Against Financial Exploitation of the Elderly (OK-CAFEE), 

which describes itself as a FAST, carries on a vigorous case review program. The Oklahoma 

County District Attorney’s Office reviews for possible prosecution every APS case in the county—

substantiated and unsubstantiated. The OK-CAFEE devotes part of every monthly meeting to 

work on those cases selected for prosecution. Select members of the network (the Deputy 

Assistant District Attorney, the APS Program Field Representative, law enforcement personnel, 

and representatives from the Division of Aging Services) participate, as well as guests deemed 

relevant to the case. Limiting the network’s personnel protects the victim’s privacy, which is an 

important consideration in case review. At the time of our interview, the Oklahoma County 

District Attorney’s Office had prosecuted 225 APS cases since 2005, all but four of which were 

elder financial exploitation cases. In the same time period, in a neighboring county with only 17 

percent fewer residents, there were only three cases of elder financial exploitation prosecuted.36

The members of the OK-CAFEE attributed the vastly different prosecution rates to the case

review activities of their network.

In looking at case review functions, we found that case 

review provided benefits beyond the improved 

resolution of individual cases. Team members became 

better acquainted with the roles and knowledge of the 

other professionals involved. They also developed a 

sense of unified purpose that helped them to carry out 

their duties on a day-to-day basis. Members learned

 

36 In 2012, the population age 65 and older in Oklahoma County was 90,381, whereas the population 65 and older in 

Tulsa County was 76,934. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Table S0103- 1-Year Estimates Population 

65 years and over in the United States 2012, http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/12_1YR/S0103

(last visited July 27, 2016).

The members of the OKCAFEE attributed the 

vastly different prosecution 

rates to the case review 

activities of their network.
25 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

common abusive scenarios, and whom to call for help. This cooperation enhances the individual 

members’ ability to prevent, detect and respond to financial exploitation. 

Some networks involved in case review help to advance policy changes to aid victims and 

prevent abuse. For example, the OK-CAFEE made recommendations that led to legislative 

changes to enhance protections against elder abuse and increase penalties for the perpetrators 

of such abuse.37

Networks face a number of challenges when conducting case review. For example, cases 

involving interstate or offshore scams and perpetrators were more difficult to review than cases 

where the perpetrator resided locally and law enforcement had the ability to intervene 

immediately. 

 

37 See 21 Okla. Stat. § 21-843.4; see also OK-CAFEE, A Successful Strategy to Identify and Combat Financial 

Exploitation, http://ltcombudsman.org/uploads/files/issues/EstherHousePPT.pdf (last visited July 27, 2016). 
26 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

5. Networks protect seniors in 

hundreds of communities

The benefits of networks and the variety of possible models are shown by the hundreds of 

communities where they exist. Nonetheless, large areas of the country do not currently have a 

network and are ripe areas for expansion of this beneficial approach. We identified many 

localities and regions throughout the country without networks.38 Only 25 percent of the 3,143 

counties in the U.S. have a known network working on elder abuse issues and only 2 percent of 

all counties appear to have a network focused exclusively on financial exploitation. As the older 

population continues to grow throughout the country, there is ample opportunity to create many 

more new networks to respond to the growing problem of elder financial exploitation.

 

38 See Appendix A for methodology and details about the scope and limitations of this geographic analysis.
27 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

FIGURE 3: MAP OF NETWORKS BY COUNTY

Counties with a network
28 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Most networks operate in densely populated 

counties

Networks, including those exclusively focused on financial exploitation, tend to operate in

densely populated counties. These counties have the largest number of residents age 65 and 

over and elders of diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds. Our analysis shows that the 20 

counties with the largest number of people age 65 and over have at least one network, and half 

of them have two or more. Over half of these counties also have a network focused exclusively on 

financial exploitation. 

TABLE 1: PRESENCE OF NETWORKS IN THE 20 COUNTIES WITH THE LARGEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE 

OVER 65

County*

Total

Population 

over 65

Number 

of networks

Los Angeles County, California 1,149,893 4

Cook County, Illinois** 649,182 11

Maricopa County, Arizona 513,536 2

Orange County, California 382,179 4

San Diego County, California 382,162 5

Miami-Dade County, Florida 379,862 1

Harris County, Texas 371,250 6

Kings County, New York 302,335 2

Queens County, New York 300,885 2

Palm Beach County, Florida 300,710 1

Riverside County, California 282,688 1

Broward County, Florida 267,480 1

Clark County, Nevada 247,087 1

Wayne County, Michigan 236,218 1

King County, Washington 232,417 1

Dallas County, Texas 225,872 3

New York, New York 225,277 3

Suffolk County, New York 215,852 1
29 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

County*

Total

Population 

over 65

Number 

of networks

Santa Clara County, California 214,715 2

Nassau County, New York 213,518 1

* Bolded county names indicate that the county has at least one network exclusively focused on financial 

exploitation.

** Cook County has multiple networks that serve specific townships and villages within the county.

Few networks operate in counties with the 

highest percentage of seniors

While counties with the largest number of older people have at least one network, counties with 

the largest share of their population over the age of 65 do not appear to have networks in 

operation. Networks exist in only five of the 20 counties with the largest percent of their 

population 65 and older. None of these counties has a known network specifically focused on 

financial exploitation. Counties with a large percent of older people tend to be rural. In these 

counties, distances and limited resources are often barriers to the development of networks.

TABLE 2: PRESENCE OF NETWORKS IN THE 20 COUNTIES WITH THE LARGEST PERCENT OF 

POPULATION OVER 65 

County Percent of

Population over 65 

Number 

of networks*

Sumter County, Florida 48.7 -

Mineral County, Colorado 38.9 -

Charlotte County, Florida 36.0 -

Hooker County, Nebraska 34.9 -

La Paz County, Arizona 34.4 -

Real County, Texas 33.8 -

Sierra County, New Mexico 33.6 -

Citrus County, Florida 33.6 2

Highland County, Virginia 33.2 1

Alcona County, Michigan 33.2 -
30 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

County Percent of

Population over 65 

Number 

of networks*

Llano County, Texas 33.0 -

Highlands County, Florida 33.0 -

Lancaster County, Virginia 32.9 1

McIntosh County, North Dakota 32.9 -

Sarasota County, Florida 32.5 2

Hinsdale County, Colorado 32.5 -

Northumberland County, Virginia 32.2 1

Jeff Davis County, Texas 31.9 -

Foard County, Texas 30.9 -

Hickory County, Missouri 30.9 -

* [-] Indicates that we did not identify a network in this county

Only a quarter of states have a network in 

most of their counties 

In about 12 states, networks operate in most of their counties. In Wyoming and California, for 

example, multidisciplinary teams led by APS are responsible for providing statewide coverage.

In Virginia and Kentucky, statewide coverage is provided through a number of regional or multicounty networks that operate in two or more counties and allow small counties to share 

resources. These states offer promising models to expand coverage into rural and less densely 

populated areas.
31 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

6. Many networks share key 

characteristics

Many successful networks share common attributes. Many of these networks have an engaged 

coordinator. They also have representatives from law enforcement agencies and financial 

institutions. They seek technical expertise and advice and funding and other resources to ensure 

their long-term presence in their communities.

Many networks have a resourceful

coordinator

Networks need a coordinator to oversee administration and activities.39 The network 

coordinators we spoke to had many responsibilities that varied depending on the nature of the 

network. Typically, the coordinators: (1) identify and recruit members; (2) facilitate the 

development of the mission and goals; (3) secure resources such as meeting space; (4) schedule 

 

39 Similar findings regarding the role of coordinators can be found in Risa Breckman, et al., Elder Abuse 

Multidisciplinary Teams: Planning for the Future, (April 2015), available at http://nyceac.com/wpcontent/uploads/2015/04/Elder_Abuse_MDTs_Planning_for_the_Future_Final.pdf .
32 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

and organize meetings and events; (5) identify training needs, topics and speakers; and (6) 

secure grants or other funding to ensure the network’s continuation.

Most network members described the coordinators as well-connected, multi-skilled, passionate, 

inclusive, and able to create an environment where all members felt comfortable raising issues. 

Members understood that the coordinators’ roles were critical for the success of their networks. 

The coordinators’ abilities to develop and maintain their networks depended, according to 

many, largely on access to sufficient resources, which often included adequate funding. Some 

networks benefited from multi-year grants that allowed them to create full or part-time 

positions for their coordinators.40 Other coordinators had full-time paid positions related to 

elder services or law enforcement, but network coordination was only one of their 

responsibilities.41 There were also coordinators who volunteered their time.42

Many networks engage key stakeholders

Network members were diverse in number and affiliation. Membership typically aligned with 

the primary activities of the networks. For example, networks that conducted case reviews had 

representatives from APS among their members. But regardless of the primary network 

activities undertaken, common network partners for combatting elder financial abuse are law 

 

40 For example, the coordinators of the Elder Abuse Law Enforcement Collaboration (EALEC) in Hawaii and the 

District's Collaborative Training & Response for Older Victims (DC TROV) had full-time positions funded by grants. 

The Colorado Coalition for Elder Rights and Abuse Prevention used grants to pay its coordinator to work for 27 

hours per month. 

41 In Jefferson County, CO, the District Attorney’s Office provided funding for one of the two Triad coordinators to 

run the organization, among many other activities. The Los Angeles County, CA Financial Abuse Specialist Team 

coordinator received grants for part-time staff. In Denver, the District Attorney’s Office provided funding for a parttime coordinator of CASE. The police department partially funded the Oklahoma City Triad coordinator position. 

42 For example, the coordinators of the St. Tammany SALT Council and Broward County Triad volunteered their time.
33 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

enforcement, legal professionals including prosecutors and legal aid organizations, financial 

institutions, Area Agencies on Aging or other local senior service organizations, long-term care 

ombudsmen, healthcare providers, and housing counselors.

Almost all of the networks interviewed considered law enforcement agencies to be key network 

members because of their critical roles in responding to elder abuse. Some networks have robust 

participation by law enforcement. The Triads in Broward County, FL, Jefferson County, CO, 

Oklahoma City, OK, and Oklahoma County, OK, for example, have representatives from the 

sheriff’s offices and police departments attending meetings and giving crime updates. The 

Northeast Kingdom Vulnerable Adult Action Coalition in Vermont had four local law 

enforcement agencies involved: the state police, the city police, and two county sheriff’s offices. 

In Illinois, the iFAST received support from the Director of Senior Citizens Services in the Cook 

County Sheriff’s Office. And numerous law 

enforcement agencies in the Gulf Coast region 

participate in activities of the SALT in St. 

Tammany, LA. 

Even those networks that reported consistent 

participation from some law enforcement agencies 

often had difficulties engaging other law 

enforcement in the area. Law enforcement officers 

sometimes were unable to attend meetings because of a lack of time, pressing workloads,

competing priorities, low staffing levels (especially in rural areas), and lack of buy-in by 

command or leadership that did not consider elder financial exploitation to be a priority or 

perceived it as a civil matter - especially in cases involving exploitation by family member or an 

agent under a power of attorney. 

In addition to law enforcement, some networks considered financial institutions to be key 

members because of their expertise and frequent opportunity to witness exploitation as it occurs

Some networks considered 

financial institutions to be key 

members because of their 

expertise and opportunity often 

to see evidence of the 

exploitation as it occurs.
34 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

or identify evidence through fraud detection mechanisms or other loss prevention measures.43

Some networks reported that local financial institutions were often interested in becoming 

involved. The OK-CAFEE had active representation from financial institutions. According to 

members, the Operational Security Officer for Oklahoma’s largest state-chartered bank attended 

meetings, as did the Oklahoma Bankers Association’s Vice President of Fraud Training. The 

association is unique as it has a Fraud Training division, which trains bankers and customers 

throughout the state. Representatives from the OK-CAFEE also expressed a desire to recruit 

more financial institutions to join the network and increase financial institution reporting.

The iFAST is another network that has developed relationships with financial institutions. It 

currently has several bank and credit union members. The iFAST invites financial institutions to 

join as volunteers in case reviews, and holds annual financial summits for training and to build 

its relationships with financial institutions. Bank and credit union attendance at these summits 

increased from 1 in 2013 to 34 in 2014.44

Networks often benefit from members who bring specialized expertise to financial exploitation 

situations. For example, the Oregon Attorney General’s Task Force on Elder Abuse works with 

AARP and the Oregon Bankers Association to engage retired financial professionals—bankers, 

accountants and people with financial forensic backgrounds—with their elder abuse MDTs. 

These volunteers help APS, law enforcement and prosecutors develop cases that these critical 

stakeholders would not have had the financial expertise to investigate and, ultimately, file 

otherwise. 

 

43 CFPB, Recommendations and report for financial institutions on preventing and responding to elder financial 

exploitation (Mar. 2016), available at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-issues-advisoryand-report-for-financial-institutions-on-preventing-elder-financial-abuse/

44 Illinois has a mandatory training law for financial institutions, which may be partially driving their involvement. 

Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation, Consumer Protection Training Completed at Illinois 

Banks and Credit Unions, http://www.idfpr.com/News/newsrls/030812ConsumerProtectionTraining.asp (last 

visited July 27, 2016).
35 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Many networks seek technical assistance 

and funding during their formation

While there were important variations in network origins—related in part to different objectives 

and operating environments—new networks benefited from passionate and enthusiastic

individuals who became aware of gaps in response to elder abuse through their own experiences 

or exposure to new training and ideas.

In addition to passion and enthusiasm, and the time required to act on it, seed money and 

expert mentoring can help launch a network. From 2007 to 2011, several networks, including 

five in our study, were created as a result of a 4-year project that was funded by the U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services Administration on Aging.45 The project, conducted 

by the National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse (NCPEA) and the National Center 

on Elder Abuse (NCEA), solicited grant proposals from Area Agencies on Aging (AAAs), Title VI 

grantees (Native American aging services agencies), and community organizations interested in 

developing new coalitions. At its core, this initiative combined seed funding with technical 

assistance. Successful applicants were awarded $10,000 in seed funding for one year.46 Trainers 

provided one-day on-site trainings to the grantees, which covered many of the key issues 

 

45 The five networks that were formed with funds from the National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse 

(NCPEA) in these years were: 1) New York City Elder Abuse Network; 2) Southern Crescent Coalition against Abuse 

and Neglect; 3) Collaboration Against Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation; 4) Northeast Kingdom Vulnerable Adult 

Action Coalition; and 5) St. Tammany Elder Abuse Support Team (formed with a grant to St. Tammany SALT 

Council). Also, Oregon’s Retiree Response Technical Team received $1,500 from the Archstone Foundation through 

the NCPEA during this time. 

46 Mary Lynn Kasunic, et al., Creating Effective Local Elder Abuse Prevention Networks: A Planning Guide, (2006), 

available at https://victimsofcrime.org/docs/Toolkit%20Bulletins/ncea-steps.pdf?sfvrsn=0 . 
36 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

confronting new networks. Each network also participated in four technical assistance 

mentoring teleconferences.47

Other networks in our study successfully secured multi-year start-up funding from other sources

including the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office for Victims of Crime, Office on Violence 

Against Women, and Justice Assistance Grant program,48 and private funding. The DC TROV, 

for example, won a multi-year federal grant from the Office on Violence Against Women that 

covered part of the network coordinator’s salary, network’s cross-trainings, and training of law 

enforcement personnel. 49 Finally, at least two networks secured start-up funds from the private 

sector, one of which was the iFAST.50 The formation of the iFAST was inspired by the APS 

Program Administrator in the Illinois Department of Aging’s Office of Elder Rights, who worked 

with the non-profit AgeOptions to launch the iFAST in 2013. The iFAST received a $45,000 

start-up grant from a bank. 

 

47 Id. at 2. 

48 Denver’s Communities Against Senior Exploitation (CASE) Partnership won several multi-year federal grants. 

Hawaii County’s Elder Abuse Team won a Justice Assistance Grant to support two collaborations, one being the 

Elder Abuse Law Enforcement Collaboration (EALEC).

49 The DC TROV coordinator previously managed Maryland’s Protect Elders Against Crime and Exploitation network, 

which was created through the NCPEA project. She learned about the Office on Violence Against Women grant 

while working at Elder Law of Michigan, a non-profit charitable organization.

50 The other network, the California Community Partnership for the Prevention of Financial Abuse, which later 

became the Elder Financial Protection Network, raised over $3 million over a 10 year period from financial 

institutions, financial trade associations, training revenues and corporate and foundation grants to fund staffing for 

professional training and public awareness campaigns. 
37 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Many networks obtain ongoing funding from 

different sources

Many network members interviewed stated that continued funding is necessary for long-term 

sustainability. As explained above, leveraging existing resources for use by the network reduces 

the amount needed, but the modest funding that most networks used was considered important 

for getting their work done. On the other hand, some networks did not find that external 

funding was necessary at all, because the network activities were already part of their members’ 

jobs.

Some of the networks used sponsors to raise funds. 

For instance, the Jefferson County Triad Board 

relied on sponsorships from businesses and 

nonprofits for its funding.51 Each sponsor provided 

$150 per year. In exchange, the sponsors introduced their organizations at the start of the 

Triad’s general meeting and had their names listed on monthly meeting announcements.

The coordinators of Ohio’s Collaboration Against Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation (CAANE) and 

Georgia’s Southern Crescent Coalition Against Abuse and Neglect (SCCAAN) networks, which 

were both recipients of NCPEA start-up funds, did not consider these funds to be essential for 

their formation. Both of these networks also expressed no need for further grant funding to 

sustain their network activities. To date, the CAANE has been able to raise funds from sources 

including local businesses and a credit union to support symposiums on elder abuse and 

marketing and printed materials. In fact, its coordinator identified factors other than funding as 

 

51 The sponsors were the AARP Foundation Elder Watch Denver, Home Instead Senior Care in Wheat Ridge, the 

Seniors’ Resource Center, and Ralston Valley Preferred Real Estate.

The modest funding that most 

networks used was considered 

important for getting their work 

done.
38 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

necessary to keeping the network energized.52 The SCCAAN said its members were all involved 

with fighting elder abuse in their regular jobs and so did not need outside funding. The 

network’s coordinator also believed the network was sustainable because it had been formed out 

of the AAA.

The ability to secure ongoing external funding seemed more critical for networks that used startup grant money to pay for staff time. Due to the work of the Elder Abuse Law Enforcement 

Collaboration’s (EALEC) investigator and other staff, the number of cases of elder abuse that 

were prosecuted in Hawaii County increased. However, after its multi-year federal grant ended, 

the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney reported that it did not have the funds to support the 

network’s investigator, a retired police captain, and could only cover 25 percent of the time of 

the coordinator, a paralegal. Without the investigator, the number of prosecuted cases of elder 

abuse declined. 

Some agencies began the networks with multi-year start-up federal funds that covered staff 

posts and later brought those positions in-house. In Denver, for example, the CASE 

(Communities Against Senior Exploitation) Partnership considered institutionalizing the 

coordinator’s position to be an important factor contributing to the network’s sustainability. A 

person involved in the network emphasized the importance of staffing, telling us: “There’s 

turnover. To keep the mutual responsibility/accountability philosophy alive, you must staff it.”

 

52 Patrick M. Bailey, MDT’s: What They Are, What They Do and How to Make Them Thrive, (2012), available at 

http://www.napsa-now.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/508.pdf.
39 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Many networks seek opportunities for 

replication

One of the primary ways that elder protection networks are started in places where they do not 

exist is through replication activities by existing networks. Many of the networks we studied are

involved or interested in becoming involved in providing similar services beyond their original 

service area. 

We found two successful state-wide replication strategies. In Virginia, the Attorney General’s 

Office provides organizational support to Triads and distributes mini-grants of $2,200 or less to 

Triads around the state. In addition to the AG’s involvement, Virginia also has a State SALT 

Council, comprised mostly of elected members from local Triads and state agencies that provide

administrative and financial support to Triads. Today Virginia has 40-45 active Triads, covering 

a large portion of the state.

We also found networks in their initial stages of replication. In Oklahoma, OK-CAFEE proposed

developing or expanding FAST teams throughout the state.53 Although the network has 

encountered challenges, as of the end of 2015, FAST teams were established in Tulsa and other 

communities, and it is estimated that a large portion of the state now has access to a financial 

protection network. 

 

53 Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Strategic Plan SFY 2014–2015 Adult Protective Services, (2015), 

available at http://www.okdhs.org/OKDHS%20Publication%20Library/S14045.pdf.
40 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

7. Conclusion and 

recommendations

We found that networks–whether focused exclusively on financial exploitation or more broadly 

on elder abuse–benefit older adults and the network’s members. Networks increase 

coordination and improve collaboration between responders, service providers and other 

relevant stakeholders. Networks improve the prevention, detection, reporting of and response to 

elder financial exploitation.

Networks now exist in hundreds of communities across the country, and there is considerable 

opportunity to create new networks in the many communities where they do not exist. For this 

reason, the Bureau has developed a set of recommendations for existing networks and key 

stakeholders to develop and enhance their community collaborative efforts to fight financial 

exploitation. Among these recommendations, the Bureau encourages the creation of networks 

where they do not exist. In areas with a network that does not include a financial exploitation 

component, the Bureau recommends networks to add activities designed to protect older 

community members from financial exploitation. For networks that are successfully combatting 

elder abuse, including financial exploitation, the Bureau urges them to seek to replicate their 

success and share their innovations and success stories with others. The Resource Guide issued 

with this report provides useful information and materials to help achieve these goals. 

Recommendations

 Professionals working with or serving older adults should create networks in 

communities where they do not currently exist, especially in communities with a large 

number of older people. 

 Members of existing networks should seek to expand resources and capacity as needed.
41 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

 Elder abuse networks that do not focus on financial exploitation should develop activities 

and the capacity to respond to elder financial exploitation by seeking to include as 

network members professionals with financial expertise, such as forensic accountants. 

Also, they should implement educational programs for older adults, caregivers, and 

professionals on how to prevent, detect and respond to financial exploitation. 

 Elder financial exploitation networks should seek to include law enforcement as network 

members and to encourage their meaningful participation in network activities, 

including but not limited to educational or case review efforts. 

 Because financial institutions are uniquely positioned to detect that an elder account 

holder has been targeted or victimized and to take action, elder financial exploitation 

networks should seek to include financial institutions, large and small, as network 

members. Similarly, financial institutions should seek to join and participate in local 

networks. 

 To help ensure the network’s long-term sustainability, financial exploitation networks 

should implement strategies to institutionalize the coordinator role as a permanent staff 

position.

 Networks in areas with older Americans of diverse linguistic, ethnic and racial 

backgrounds should seek to engage stakeholders that serve these populations and deliver 

educational and case review services relevant and appropriate to these populations.

 Networks should seek to expand coverage into rural areas by creating regional networks 

through which resources can be shared and by using teleconferencing and 

videoconferencing in lieu of travel when necessary.

 Networks engaging in educational activities, especially those networks with limited 

resources, should use existing federal, state and local educational resources. 
42 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

APPENDIX A: METHODOLOGY

This report is based on a multiple-phased qualitative research effort carried out by the Library of 

Congress Federal Research Division (FRD) under the direction of the CFPB Office for Older 

Americans.54 In addition, it includes quantitative analysis performed by the CFPB.

Qualitative research

The qualitative research was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 consisted of an extensive 

literature review of peer-reviewed articles, reports, and other resources such as resource guides 

and manuals related to multidisciplinary collaboration in elder abuse. In addition, the Library 

of Congress staff interviewed a number of researchers and experts including staff from the 

National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse (NCPEA) and the National Center on 

Elder Abuse.55 These experts provided a historical perspective of the evolution of networks and 

other forms of collaboration in the field, the existing state of research and best practices, and 

provided feedback on the questionnaire and the selection of case studies used in Phase 2. 

Phase 2 of the project consisted of an in-depth qualitative study of 23 networks that included the 

three primary collaborative models/structures in the field: Triads, MDTs and other forms of 

collaboration. 

To select the networks, the CFPB and FRD gathered information from publicly available lists of 

existing community efforts working on elder abuse and/or senior safety issues from the U.S. 

 

54 CFPB contracted with the Library of Congress through an Inter-Agency Agreement to conduct the qualitative 

portion of this study. CFPB staff participated in some of the interviews and case studies. Additionally, CFPB assisted 

FRD in compiling resources and analyzing the data. CFPB drafted the final report and Resource Guide using 

materials provided by FRD.

55 These two organizations serve as technical assistance resource centers to many networks, and repositories of 

research and information on community interventions and multidisciplinary approaches.
43 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Administration on Aging, NCPEA, and the National Sheriffs Association.56 The CFPB and FRD 

then selected a “quasi-representative” sample of networks based on three criteria: (1) network

type; (2) activities conducted; and (3) state. We selected triads and MDTs, as well as other 

networks that do not follow these two models. We also selected networks engaging in 

educational activities, case review, advocacy, and support services to victims. Lastly, we selected 

networks that would provide geographic diversity, and those ultimately selected operate in 15 

different states. We validated our selections using the existing literature, brief conversations 

with some networks, web searches and the expert advice of researchers and other professionals 

in the field.

In order to capture the variety of forms of collaboration, the wide range of activities and 

membership, as well as the challenges faced and opportunities for creating or enhancing 

networks, we conducted two different types of case studies:

 Full case studies: a total of nine cases selected based on their publicly known work on 

financial exploitation issues, their geographic location, years of operation, and members’ 

and experts’ perceived level of engagement and effectiveness.57 Each case involved site 

visits, observation of and participation in a group meeting, and one-hour long interviews 

with up to five professionals representing the members of the network. Additionally, for 

each case study, we reviewed materials and other documents such as bylaws, brochures, 

meeting agendas, etc. 

 

56 U.S. Administration on Aging, Local Coalitions, https://ncea.acl.gov/whatwedo/practice/Teams-local.html (last 

visited July 27, 2016); National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse, Coalitions,

http://www.preventelderabuse.org/coalitions/ (last visited July 27, 2016); National Sheriffs' Association, Locate a 

Triad, http://www.sheriffs.org/programs/locate-triad (last visited July 27, 2016). While these lists do not specify 

whether a network works on financial exploitation, they represent the best available data for identifying existing 

networks that may do so.

57 Information collection was conducted under CFPB’s Generic Clearance for Qualitative Consumer Education, 

Engagement, and Experience Information Collections (OMB# 3170-0036) (approved July 23, 2014).
44 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

TABLE 3: FULL CASE STUDIES

Triad MDT/FAST Other type

Broward County Triad, 

Florida

Houston FAST, Texas New York City Elder Abuse 

Network, New York

Jefferson County Triad, 

Colorado

Los Angeles FAST, 

California

Illinois Older Americans 

Protection Network, Illinois*

Pickaway County Triad, 

Ohio

Orange County EDRT, 

California

Oklahoma County Coalition 

Against Financial 

Exploitation of the Elderly, 

Oklahoma*

*These networks also have a sub-team that operates as a FAST.

 Abbreviated case studies: a total of 14 cases provided additional information about 

each type of network and allowed us to examine specific issues that were not covered 

sufficiently in the nine case studies. The networks studied included, among other things, 

networks with known involvement of financial institutions, networks with known 

involvement of faith-based organizations and consumers, newly formed networks, 

networks operating in rural communities, networks operating as part of a statewide 

system, and networks that have been in existence for 10 years or more. For each 

abbreviated case study the Library of Congress Federal Research Division (FRD)

conducted a two-hour long interview with the network coordinator, and reviewed 

materials and documents such as bylaws, brochures and meeting agendas. 

FRD conducted and transcribed the interviews. These notes were subsequently analyzed in 

conjunction with the CFPB. When necessary, follow-up interviews were conducted to clarify 

statements and findings, and to fill gaps in the information gathered. Besides forming the basis 

of this report, the literature review, expert interviews and case studies were used to gather 

information to develop a resource guide for the creation, enhancement and replication of 

networks.
45 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

TABLE 4: ABBREVIATED CASE STUDIES

Network Area(s) of special focus in the 

interviews

Collaboration Against Abuse, Neglect and 

Exploitation, Ohio

Mature network, adaptation and 

sustainability

Colorado Coalition for Elder Rights and Abuse 

Prevention Mature network

Communities Against Senior Exploitation Partnership, 

Denver, Colorado

Involvement of faith-based 

community

The District’s Collaborative Training and Response for 

Older Victims, Washington, D.C.

Sustainability, involvement of 

prosecutors

Department of Aging and Adult Services Collaboration 

with the State Employees Credit Union (SECU), North 

Carolina

Involvement of financial institutions

Elder Abuse Law Enforcement Collaboration, Hawaii Rural communities, meetings

Elder Financial Protection Network, California58 Involvement of financial institutions, 

sustainability

Fairfield County Elder Abuse Interdisciplinary Team, 

Ohio

Involvement of Adult Protective 

Services

Massachusetts Bank Reporting Project Involvement of financial institutions

Northeast Kingdom Vulnerable Adult Action Coalition, 

Vermont Rural populations and needs

Retiree Response Technical Team, Oregon Consumer involvement

Southern Crescent Coalition Against Abuse and 

Neglect, Georgia Development of a new network

 

58 A Senior Program Analyst in CFPB’s Office for Older Americans and member of the study team served as EFPN’s 

CEO from 2001 to 2011.
46 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Quantitative analysis 

CFPB analyzed publicly available lists of existing networks working on elder abuse and/or senior 

safety issues from the U.S. Administration on Aging, NCPEA, and the National Sheriffs 

Association.59 Using these lists, networks were classified as being focused on elder financial

exploitation if they were a Financial Abuse Specialist Team or other network that lists financial 

exploitation, fraud and abuse in its name or mission. Networks that operate at the state level 

and networks focused exclusively on domestic violence or sexual abuse were excluded from the 

analysis.60

To examine the presence of networks by county, we combined these lists with Census data on 

the number and percent of individuals age 65 and older by county.61 To account for networks 

that operate in multiple counties, the geographical analysis attributes their presence to all 

counties where they operate regardless of the physical location of their offices or meetings. 

Because the analysis was conducted at the county level, networks that operate in subdivisions of

a county, but not throughout the entire county, are counted as having countywide coverage. 

 

59 U.S. Administration on Aging, Local Coalitions, https://ncea.acl.gov/whatwedo/practice/Teams-local.html (last 

visited July 27, 2016); National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse, Coalitions,

http://www.preventelderabuse.org/coalitions/ (last visited July 27, 2016); National Sheriffs' Association, Locate a 

Triad, http://www.sheriffs.org/programs/locate-triad (last visited July 27, 2016). Additional research was 

conducted by CFPB to merge and remove duplicates from the networks on these lists. 

60 Because this report focuses on local communities’ ability to prevent and respond to financial exploitation, we did 

not include networks that operate at the state level. We found that all states have at least one network that operates 

statewide.

61 Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Table S0103, 5-Year Estimates Population 65 years and over in the 

United States 2010-2014, http://factfinder.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/ACS/14_5YR/S0103 (last visited July 

27, 2016).
47 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

Lastly, because the lists of networks were created at different points in time and maintained by 

different organizations, some of the networks used in the analysis may no longer be operating,

and recently formed networks may not be accounted for in the analysis.
48 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU 

APPENDIX B: COMMON ACRONYMS

TERMS

AAA Area agency on aging

APS Adult protective services

EDRT/EFRT Elder death review team/ Elder fatality review team

FAST Financial abuse specialist team

FC Forensic center

MDT Multi-disciplinary team

NCEA National Center on Elder Abuse

NCPEA National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse

SALT Seniors and Law Enforcement Working Together