U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Special Report

NOVEMBER 2014 NCJ 248339

Crimes Against the Elderly, 2003–2013

Rachel E. Morgan, Ph.D., BJS Statistician, and Britney J. Mason, BJS Intern

For the period 2003–13, elderly persons age 65 or older 

experienced nonfatal violent crime victimizations at 

lower rates (3.6 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 

65 or older) than younger persons ages 12 to 24 (49.9 per 

1,000), persons ages 25 to 49 (27.6 per 1,000), and persons 

ages 50 to 64 (15.2 per 1,000) (figure 1). Nonfatal violent 

crime includes rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated 

assault, and simple assault. Each year, the elderly accounted 

for approximately 2% of violence and 2% of serious violence, 

which equals 136,720 violent crimes and 47,640 serious 

violent crimes. However, the elderly made up about 21% 

of the population age 12 or older during this time period. 

The rate of property crime was also lower compared to 

younger persons.

This report uses data from the National Crime Victimization 

Survey (NCVS) to provide detailed information on nonfatal 

violent victimization and property victimization against 

the elderly, including victim and incident characteristics. 

Findings in this report are also supplemented by data from 

the 2012 Identity Theft Supplement (ITS) to the NCVS. In 

addition, the primary source of information on homicides 

was obtained from mortality data based on death certificates 

in the National Vital Statistics System of the National Center 

for Health Statistics (NCHS), Centers for Disease Control 

Figure 1

Rate of violent victimization, by type of crime and age of 

victim, 2003–2013

Note: See table 2 for estimates and appendix table 1 for standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

65 or 

older

50–64

25–49

12–24

Total violent crime Serious violent crime

Rate per 1,000 persons

Age

HIGHLIGHTS

This report describes crimes against persons age 65 or older, 

by victim and incident characteristics. Data are from the 

National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Web-based Injury 

Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS), and the 

U.S. Census Bureau. In 2003–13—

 The rates of nonfatal violent crime (3.6 per 1,000 persons) 

and property crime (72.3 per 1,000) against elderly persons 

were lower than those of younger persons. 

 The ratio of the estimates of property crime to violent crime 

was higher for the elderly (13 to 1) than for younger persons 

ages 25 to 49 (3 to 1) and persons ages 50 to 64 (5 to 1).

 Elderly homicide rates declined 44%, from 3.7 homicides 

per 100,000 persons in 1993 to 2.1 per 100,000 in 2011. 

 Persons age 65 or older experienced more incidents of 

identity theft (5.0%) than persons ages 16 to 24 (3.8%), but 

less than persons ages 25 to 49 (7.9%) and ages 50 to 64 

(7.8%). 

 Among elderly violent crime victims, about 59% reported 

being victimized at or near their home.

 A smaller percentage of elderly victims (18%) suffered an 

injury during the incident, compared to victims ages 12 to 

24 (30%) and ages 25 to 49 (25%). 

 The elderly (56%) reported incidents of violent crime 

to police more than persons ages 12 to 24 (38%). No 

differences were detected with the elderly and other age 

groups. 

 About 11% of elderly victims of violent crime received 

assistance from victim service agencies.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 2

and Prevention’s (CDC) Web-based Injury Statistics Query 

and Reporting System (WISQARS). These mortality data 

include causes of death reported by attending physicians, 

medical examiners, and coroners, and demographic 

information about decedents reported by funeral directors 

who obtain information from family members and other 

informants. The NCHS collects, compiles, verifies, and 

prepares these data for release to the public.

In this report, elderly persons are defined as persons age 

65 or older. This definition is consistent with definitions of 

elderly used by other federal governmental agencies, such 

as the U.S. Census Bureau (see figure 2). Comparison age 

groups include persons ages 12 to 24, 25 to 49, and 50 to 64. 

Trend estimates from the NCVS are based on 2-year rolling 

averages centered on the most recent year. For example, 

estimates reported for 1994 represent the average estimates 

for 1993 and 1994. For ease of discussion, the report refers 

to all 2-year estimates by the most recent year. Other data 

in this report focus on the most recent 11-year aggregate 

period from 2003 through 2013, referred to throughout 

the report as 2003–13. Both approaches—using rolling 

averages and aggregating years—increase the reliability and 

stability of estimates and facilitate comparisons of detailed 

victimization characteristics.

Growth of the elderly population in the United States

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the large 

increases in the elderly population that have 

occurred since 1990 are projected to continue 

through 2020. As many Baby Boomers are 

currently reaching age 65, the elderly population 

will continue to grow and remain an important 

part of the total U.S. population. In 2010, about 

40.3 million persons were age 65 or older, an 

increase of 5.3 million since 2000 when the elderly 

population totaled about 35 million (figure 2). 

Among the total U.S. population, the percentage 

of persons age 65 or older increased from 12.4% 

in 2000 to 13.0% in 2010, and is projected to reach 

16.8% by 2020.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

85 or older

75 to 84

65 to 74

1990 2000 2010 2020

Year

0

3

6

9

12

15

18

Number in millions Percent

65 or older as percent

of total population 

Figure 2

Distribution of the population age 65 or older, 1990–2020

Note: See appendix table 2 for estimates.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 65+ in the 

United States: 2010, 2014.
Elderly persons had lower rates of property crime than 

younger persons

Like violent crime, the elderly population had lower rates 

of property crime compared to younger persons from 2003 

to 2013. Households headed by persons age 65 or older 

(72.3 per 1,000 households) experienced property crime 

at a rate about a quarter of that for households headed 

by persons age 24 or younger (262.0 per 1,000) (table 1). 

Property crime includes household burglary, motor vehicle 

theft, and theft. The elderly experienced theft (51.8 per 1,000 

households) more than any other type of property crime.

During 2003–13, the elderly experienced 1,796,740 property 

crimes annually, compared to 136,720 violent crimes 

annually (table 2). About 93% of all crime experienced by 

the elderly was property crime. The ratio of property crime 

to violent crime for the elderly was higher than for younger 

persons. In 2003–13, 13 property crimes were committed 

against the elderly for every violent crime committed 

against the elderly. In comparison, persons ages 25 to 49 

experienced three property crimes for every violent crime, 

and persons ages 50 to 64 experienced five property crimes 

for every violent crime. 

Table 1

Number and rate of property victimization, by type of crime and age of head of household, 2003–2013

Average annual property victimizations Rate per 1,000 households

Type of crime Total 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older Total 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total property crime 18,060,340 2,031,930 9,924,460 4,307,210 1,796,740 149.7 262.0 177.1 134.6 72.3

Household burglary 3,545,610 433,410 1,823,110 846,700 442,390 29.4 55.9 32.5 26.4 17.8

Motor vehicle theft 833,920 108,780 468,220 189,590 67,330 6.9 14.0 8.4 5.9 2.7

Theft 13,680,810 1,489,740 7,633,140 3,270,920 1,287,020 113.4 192.1 136.2 102.2 51.8

Note: See appendix table 3 for standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2003–2013.

Table 2

Number and rate of violent victimization, by type of crime and age of victim, 2003–2013

Average annual violent victimizations Rate per 1,000 persons

Type of crime Total 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older Total 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total violent crime 6,579,800 2,709,260 2,899,310 834,510 136,720 26.1 49.9 27.6 15.2 3.6

Serious violent crime 2,170,980 912,640 947,510 263,190 47,640 8.6 16.8 9.0 4.8 1.3

Rape/sexual assault 301,430 138,480 125,940 29,740 7,260 ! 1.2 2.6 1.2 0.5 0.2

Robbery 693,630 281,860 298,620 90,850 22,310 2.8 5.2 2.8 1.7 0.6

Aggravated assault 1,175,920 492,300 522,950 142,600 18,070 4.7 9.1 5.0 2.6 0.5

Simple assault 4,408,820 1,796,620 1,951,790 571,320 89,090 17.5 33.1 18.6 10.4 2.4

Note: See appendix table 1 for standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2003–2013.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)

The NCVS collects information on nonfatal crimes reported and 

not reported to the police against persons age 12 or older from a 

nationally representative sample of U.S. households. It produces 

national rates and levels of violent and property victimization, as 

well as information on the characteristics of crimes and victims, 

and the consequences of victimization. The NCVS is based on 

interviews with victims, it does not measure homicide. 

This report examines violent crimes and property crimes. 

Violent crime includes rape or sexual assault, robbery, 

aggravated assault, and simple assault. The Bureau of Justice 

Statistics (BJS) classifies rape, sexual assault, robbery, and 

aggravated assault as serious violent crimes. Property crime 

includes burglary, motor vehicle theft, and other theft. 

The survey also measures personal larceny, which includes 

pickpocketing and purse snatching. For additional estimates 

not included in this report, see the NCVS Victimization 

Analysis Tool (NVAT) on the BJS website. 

Victimization is the basic unit of analysis used throughout 

this report. Victimization is a crime as it affects one person or 

household. For personal crimes, the number of victimizations 

is equal to the number of victims present during a criminal 

incident. The number of victimizations may be greater than 

the number of incidents because more than one person 

may be victimized during an incident. Each crime against a 

household is counted as having a single victim, the affected 

household. The victimization rate is a measure of the 

occurrence of victimizations among a specified population 

group. For personal crimes, this is based on the number 

of victimizations per 1,000 residents age 12 or older. For 

household crimes, the victimization rate is calculated using 

the number of incidents per 1,000 households.

The NCVS is administered to persons age 12 or older from a 

nationally representative sample of households in the United 

States. It excludes violence against children age 11 or younger. 

The sample includes persons living in group quarters, 

such as dormitories, rooming houses, and religious group 

dwellings, but excludes persons living in military barracks and 

institutional settings, such as correctional or hospital facilities, 

and persons who are homeless.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 4

Year

Rate per 1,000 persons

0

50

100

150

200

65 or older

50–64

25–49

12–24

'94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13

Figure 3

Rate of violent victimization, by age of victim, 1993–2013

Note: Data are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the most recent year 

beginning in 1993. See appendix table 4 for rates and standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

1993–2013.

Year

Rate per 100,000 persons

0

5

10

15

20

65 or older

50–64

25–49

12–24

'93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11

Figure 4

Rate of homicide, by age of victim, 1993–2011

Note: The homicide estimates that occurred as a result of the events of 

September 11, 2001, are included in the number of total homicides. Excludes 

homicides due to legal intervention and operations of war. See appendix table 5 

for rates.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting 

System (WISQARS), 1993–2011.

The nonfatal violent crime rate for the elderly declined 

41% from 1994 to 2013

From 1994 to 2013, the rate of nonfatal violent crime for all 

age groups decreased (figure 3). Overall, the rate of violent 

crime against persons age 65 or older declined 41%, from 

7.4 victimizations per 1,000 persons in 1994 to 4.4 per 

1,000 in 2013. Violent crime committed against the elderly 

declined at a slower rate than violent crime committed 

against persons ages 12 to 24 and ages 25 to 49. Since 2003, 

rates of violent crime have increased 27% for the elderly 

population and 9% for persons ages 50 to 64. Rates of 

nonfatal violent crime for persons ages 12 to 24 declined 

37% and persons ages 25 to 49 declined 9% from 2003 to 

2013. However, the elderly continue to have low violent 

crime rates compared to other age groups.

Elderly homicide rates were lower than homicide rates 

for all other ages from 1993 to 2011

From 1993 to 2011 (most recent data available), homicide 

rates decreased for all age groups (figure 4). The homicide 

rates for the elderly declined 44%, compared to a decline of 

55% for persons ages 12 to 24, 42% for persons ages 25 to 49, 

and 36% for persons ages 50 to 64. The elderly rate declined 

from about 3.7 homicides per 100,000 persons in 1993 to 2.1 

homicides per 100,000 persons in 2011. Similar to nonfatal 

violent crime, homicide rates for persons age 65 or older 

were consistently lower than all other age groups across 

this period.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 5

Similar to the overall decline in homicide, the firearm 

homicide rate for the elderly population decreased by 41% 

from 1993 to 2011 (figure 5). Persons ages 25 to 49 and ages 

50 to 64 also experienced a 41% decline in homicide. The 

firearm homicide rate for the elderly declined from about 

1.4 per 100,000 persons age 65 or older in 1993 to 0.8 per 

100,000 in 2011. Since 2003, the rates of firearm homicide 

increased for the elderly population (up 9%) and for persons 

ages 50 to 64 (up 1%). However, the elderly continued to 

have relatively low rates overall.

From 1993 to 2011, the rates of nonfirearm homicide 

decreased for all age groups. The rates for the elderly 

declined by 46%, compared to a decline of 51% for persons 

ages 12 to 24, 44% for persons ages 25 to 49, and 28% for 

persons ages 50 to 64 (figure 6). The rate for the elderly 

declined from about 2.2 per 100,000 in 1993 to 1.2 per 

100,000 in 2011. 

Year

Rate per 100,000 persons

0

5

10

15

20

65 or older

50–64

25–49

12–24

'93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11

Figure 5

Rate of firearm homicide, by age of victim, 1993–2011

Note: Excludes homicides due to legal interventions and operations of war. See 

appendix table 6 for rates.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting 

System (WISQARS), 1993–2011.

Year

Rate per 100,000 persons

0

1

2

3

4

5

65 or older

50–64

25–49

12–24

'93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11

Figure 6

Rate of nonfirearm homicide, by age of victim, 1993–2011

Note: The homicide estimates that occurred as a result of the events of 

September 11, 2001, are included in the number of nonfirearm homicides. 

Excludes homicides from legal intervention and operations of war. See appendix 

table 7 for rates.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting 

System (WISQARS), 1993–2011.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 6

Property crime committed against the elderly 

decreased by 48% from 1994 to 2013

Similar to violent crime, the rate of property crime for all 

age groups declined from 1994 to 2013 (figure 7). During 

this period, property crime decreased by 48% for the elderly, 

compared to declines of 55% for persons ages 12 to 24, 60% 

for persons ages 25 to 49, and 52% for persons ages 50 to 64. 

The elderly rate declined from about 141.0 victimizations per 

1,000 households in 1994 to 73.9 per 1,000 households in 

2013. The rates for the elderly were lower than all other age 

groups across this period. Property crime committed against 

the elderly declined by 50% from 2003 to 2013. 

Elderly victims of violent and property crimes most 

often lived in urban areas

Elderly victims of violent and property crimes most often 

resided in urban areas. In 2003–13, elderly persons living 

in urban areas experienced violent crime at a rate of 5.1 per 

1,000 persons age 65 or older, while elderly persons living 

in suburban (3.2 per 1,000) and rural (2.8 per 1,000) areas 

experienced violent crime at lower rates (table 3). Similarly, 

elderly victims living in urban areas had a higher rate of 

property crime (88.7 per 1,000 households) compared to 

those living in suburban areas (65.2 per 1,000 households) 

and rural areas (66.6 per 1,000 households) (table 4). 

In 2003–13, about 59% of nonfatal violent crime against 

persons age 65 or older occurred at or near their homes, 

6% occurred at or near a friend, neighbor, or relative’s 

home, and about 35% occurred at other locations, including 

commercial places, parking lots or garages, schools, open 

areas, and public transportation (table 5). A greater 

percentage of victimization against the elderly compared to 

all other age groups occurred at or near their homes. 

Year

Rate per 1,000 households

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

65 or older

50–64

25–49

Age 24 or younger

'94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 '13

Figure 7

Rate of property victimization, by age of head of household, 

1993–2013

Note: Data are based on 2-year rolling averages centered on the most recent year 

beginning in 1993. See appendix table 8 for rates and standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

1993–2013.

Table 3

Rate of violent victimization, by age of victim and location of 

residence, 2003–2013

Location of residence 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Urban 54.7 32.6 21.5 5.1

Suburban 46.0 24.1 13.0 3.2

Rural 51.9 28.7 12.3 2.8

Note: Victimization rates are per 1,000 persons age 12 or older. Violent crime 

includes rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. 

See appendix table 9 for standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Table 4

Rate of property victimization, by age of head of household 

and location of residence, 2003–2013

Location of residence 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Urban 281.9 211.3 168.4 88.7

Suburban 235.3 157.5 122.8 65.2

Rural 265.1 166.6 114.6 66.6

Note: Victimization rates are per 1,000 households. Property crime includes 

household burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft. See appendix table 10 for 

standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Table 5

Location of violent victimization, by age of victim, 

2003–2013

Location of crime 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

At or near victim’s home 25.4 41.1 43.5 59.3

At or near friend, neighbor, 

or relative’s home 11.3 5.9 5.5 6.0

Other location* 63.3 53.1 51.0 34.7

Average annual violent 

victimizations 2,709,260 2,899,310 834,510 136,720

*Includes commercial places, parking lots or garages, schools, open areas, public 

transportation, and other locations. See appendix table 11 for standard errors.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 7

About 2.1 million elderly persons were victims of identity theft in 2012

Identity theft victims are defined as persons age 16 or older who experienced one or more of the following incidents:

 Unauthorized use or attempted use of an existing account, such as credit or debit card, checking, savings, telephone, online, or 

insurance account (referred to as fraud or misuse of an existing account).

 Unauthorized use or attempted use of personal information to open a new account, such as a credit or debit card, telephone, 

checking, savings, loan, or mortgage account (referred to as fraud or misuse of a new account).

 Misuse of personal information for a fraudulent purpose, such as getting medical care, a job, or government benefits; renting 

an apartment or house; or providing false information to law enforcement when charged with a crime or traffic violation 

(referred to as fraud or misuse of personal information). 

Approximately 2.1 million persons age 65 or older (5%) were victims of one or more incidents of identity theft in 2012 (table 6). 

Among elderly identity theft victims, existing credit card (3.2%) or bank accounts (1.4%) were the most common types of misused 

information. This distribution was similar across age groups. Generally, persons age 65 or older experienced more incidents of 

identity theft (5.0%) than persons ages 16 to 24 (3.8%), but fewer than persons ages 25 to 49 (7.9%) and ages 50 to 64 (7.8%). 

Table 6

Persons age 16 or older who experienced at least one identity theft incident in the past 12 months, by type of theft and 

age of victim, 2012

Number of victims Percent of all persons

Type of theft 16–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older 16–24 25–69 50–64 65 or older

Total identity theft 1,501,630 8,208,300 4,739,430 2,131,120 3.8% 7.9% 7.8% 5.0%

Existing account 1,482,150 8,397,140 4,865,740 2,120,530 3.8% 8.1% 8.0% 5.0%

Credit card 335,670 3,399,560 2,590,400 1,372,830 0.9 3.3 4.2 3.2

Bank 953,640 4,062,720 1,853,250 601,080 2.4 3.9 3.0 1.4

Other 192,840 934,860 422,090 146,620 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.3

New account 126,930 520,310 315,660 162,250 0.3% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4%

Personal information 78,730 463,290 211,360 80,200 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2%

Multiple types 122,030 657,970 330,810 141,230 0.3% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3%

Existing accounta 86,800 433,670 211,580 92,610 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2

Otherb 35,220 224,300 119,230 48,620 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding and multiple responses. See appendix table 12 for standard errors.

aIncludes victims who experienced two or more of the following: unauthorized use of a credit card, bank account, or other existing account. 

bIncludes victims who experienced two or more of the following: unauthorized use of an existing account, misuse of personal information to open a new 

account, or misuse of personal information for other fraudulent purposes. 

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, Identity Theft Supplement, 2012.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 8

Domestic violence was a smaller percentage of violent 

crimes committed against elderly persons than against 

persons ages 25 to 49 and ages 50 to 64

From 2003–13, the elderly (49%) were equally likely to 

know their offenders as persons ages 25 to 49 and ages 50 

to 64, but were less likely than persons ages 12 to 24 (57%) 

(table 7). About 43% of violent victimizations against the 

elderly were committed by strangers. 

A smaller percentage of violent crimes committed against 

persons age 65 or older (14%) were crimes of domestic 

violence, compared to persons ages 25 to 49 (26%) and 

ages 50 to 64 (20%). Domestic violence includes rape, 

sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault 

committed by intimate partners, immediate family members, 

or other relatives. As with any source of information, 

there are limitations with the current data that should be 

recognized. Because the nature of the victim–offender 

relationship is defined by the victim, the characteristics of 

intimate partner violence in this report may differ based 

on how the respondent perceived their relationship with 

the offender. To some victims, intimate relationships with 

offenders may be primarily restricted to current or former 

boyfriends or girlfriends. Others may describe those 

offenders as friends or acquaintances rather than boyfriends 

or girlfriends. 

While 43% of violent crimes against the elderly were 

committed by a stranger, the elderly accounted for 2% of 

all stranger crime (table 8). The majority of stranger crime 

was committed against persons ages 12 to 24 (37%) and 

persons ages 25 to 49 (48%). From 2003–13, the percentage 

of victimizations that involved an intimate partner was lower 

for the elderly (1%) than for persons ages 12 to 24 (28%) and 

persons ages 25 to 49 (62%), and lower than persons ages 

50 to 64 (8%). The percentage of victimizations committed 

by immediate family members was lower for the elderly (2%) 

compared to all other age groups. Elderly victims accounted 

for 2.1% of violent crime, 2.4% of crime committed by 

strangers, and 1.4% of domestic violence that occurred 

each year.

Table 7

Violent victimization, by age of victim and victim–offender 

relationship, 2003–2013

Victim–offender relationship 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Known 57.2% 50.6% 52.1% 48.8%

Domestic 16.4 26.0 19.9 14.3

Intimate partnera 9.9 20.4 9.6 6.1

Immediate family 4.2 3.5 7.3 4.6

Other relative 2.2 2.1 3.0 3.6

Well-known/casual 

acquaintance 40.8 24.6 32.3 34.5

Stranger 34.0% 41.2% 39.8% 43.4%

Unknownb 8.8% 8.1% 8.1% 7.8%

Average annual violent 

victimizations 2,709,260 2,899,310 834,510 136,720

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. See appendix table 13 for 

standard errors.

aIncludes current or former spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends.

bIncludes unknown victim–offender relationships and unknown number of 

offenders.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Table 8

Percent of violent victimization, by victim–offender 

relationship and age of victim, 2003–2013

Victim–offender 

relationship Total 12–24 25–49 50–64

65 or 

older

Total 100% 41.2% 44.1% 12.7% 2.1%

Known 100% 44.0 41.7 12.4 1.9

Domestic 100% 32.1 54.5 12.0 1.4

Intimate partnera 100% 28.4 62.3 8.5 0.9

Immediate family 100% 40.4 36.0 21.3 2.2

Other relative 100% 39.8 40.7 16.2 3.2

Well-known/casual 

acquaintance 100% 51.8 33.4 12.6 2.2

Stranger 100% 36.7 47.7 13.2 2.4

Unknownb 100% 43.1 42.8 12.2 1.9

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. See appendix table 14 for 

standard errors.

aIncludes current or former spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends.

bIncludes unknown victim–offender relationships and unknown number of 

offenders.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 9

Single elderly persons living without children had 

higher rates of victimization compared to married 

elderly persons living without children

In 2003–13, the rate of violent victimizations against elderly 

males (4.2 per 1,000 males age 65 or older) was slightly 

higher than the rate for elderly females (3.2 per 1,000 

females) (table 9). There were no statistically significant 

differences in rates of violent crime among the elderly 

by race.

Among the elderly population and other age groups, rates 

of violent victimization varied by the victim’s marital status. 

Persons age 65 or older who were married (2.6 per 1,000 

persons) or widowed (2.3 per 1,000 persons) were the least 

likely to be victims of violent crime. Elderly persons who 

were separated (19.6 per 1,000 persons) or divorced (10.8 

per 1,000 persons) were the most likely to be victimized. 

Since the NCVS reflects a respondent’s marital status at 

the time of the interview, it is not possible to determine 

whether a person was separated or divorced at the time of 

the victimization or whether separation or divorce followed 

the violence. 

Single elderly victims living without children (5.2 

victimizations per 1,000 persons) were victimized at higher 

rates than married elderly victims living without children 

(2.4 per 1,000).

Elderly persons who rented their living quarters had more 

than double the rate of violent crime (7.3 victimizations per 

1,000 persons) than elderly persons who either owned or 

were buying their home (3.0 victimizations per 1,000). 

Table 9

Rate of violent victimization, by age of victim and victim 

characteristics, 2003–2013

Demographic characteristic 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Sex

Male 53.8 28.7 16.4 4.2

Female 45.8 26.5 14.2 3.2

Race/Hispanic origin

Whitea 53.4 28.9 15.1 3.4

Blacka 53.7 31.2 18.1 5.0

Hispanic/Latino 39.4 19.2 12.3 3.5

Other racea,b 24.0 19.4 10.8 3.6 !

Two or more racesa 99.0 92.7 53.4 11.4 !

Marital status

Never married 49.7 35.7 24.1 6.6

Married 34.9 16.2 9.4 2.6

Widowed 31.9 ! 48.5 18.8 2.3

Divorced 208.5 54.7 30.6 10.8

Separated 219.5 101.1 40.8 19.6

Household composition

Single, no children 63.6 43.6 29.2 5.2

Married, no children 31.6 15.0 8.4 2.4

With childrenc 50.2 22.6 18.3 1.0 !

Otherd 49.4 32.6 14.9 4.0

Household ownership status

Owned 41.3 20.0 11.6 3.0

Rented 61.8 41.8 31.4 7.3

No cash rent 83.9 44.7 33.2 3.3 !

Note: Victimization rates are per 1,000 persons age 12 or older. See appendix 

table 15 for standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

aExcludes persons of Hispanic or Latino origin.

bIncludes American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian, and other 

Pacific Islander. 

cSingle or married with children. 

dBoth single and married adults living with other adults (relatives or 

nonrelatives), both with and without children. This includes grandparents and 

grandchildren living in the same household.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 10

Elderly persons who were not employed were more 

likely to experience violent and property crime 

victimization than elderly persons who were employed

Employment status affects both nonfatal violent and 

property crime rates for persons age 65 or older. For both 

types of crime, persons who were not employed were more 

likely to be victimized than employed persons. In 2003–13, 

the rate of violent crime against elderly persons who were 

not employed or were retired (2.8 per 1,000) was 9 times 

higher than the rate for elderly persons who were employed 

(0.3 per 1,000) (table 11). The rate of property crime against 

persons age 65 or older who were not employed or were 

retired (53.5 per 1,000 persons) was 12 times higher than the 

rate for persons age 65 or older who were employed (4.3 per 

1,000). 

There were no statistically significant differences between violent crime rates for 

elderly persons with a disability and elderly persons without a disability

The NCVS defines disability as the product of interactions among individual’s bodies; their physical, emotional, and mental 

health; and the physical and social environment in which they live, work, or play. Disability exists where this interaction results in 

limitations of activities and restrictions to full participation at school, work, home, or in the community. Disabilities are classified 

according to six limitations: hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living.*

Over the 5-year period from 2008 to 2012, persons age 65 or older who had disabilities experienced 284,040 nonfatal violent 

crimes (table 10). However, there were no differences in the rate of violence for persons age 65 or older with a disability 

compared to persons age 65 or older without a disability.

*Crimes Against Persons with Disabilities, 2009-2012 – Statistical Tables, NCJ 244525, BJS web, February 2014.

Table 10

Number and rate of violent victimization for persons age 65 or older, by type of crime and victim’s disability status, 

2008–2012

Number of violent victimizations Rate per 1,000 persons

Type of crime With disabilities Without disabilities With disabilities Without disabilities

Total violent crime 284,040 512,920 3.9 4.1

Serious violent crime 109,220 125,410 1.5 1.0

Rape/sexual assault 52,370 ! 11,500 ! 0.7 ! 0.1 !

Robbery 32,230 62,120 0.4 0.5

Aggravated assault 24,620 51,790 0.3 0.4

Simple assault 174,830 387,500 2.4 3.1

Note: Based on the noninstitutionalized U.S. residential population age 65 or older. Numbers rounded to the nearest hundred. See appendix table 16 for 

standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2008–2012.

Table 11

Rates of violent and property victimization, by employment 

status and age, 2003–2013

Employment status and age Violent crimea Property crimeb

Employed

12–64 6.0 24.7

65 or older 0.3 4.3

Not employed/retired

12–64 12.9 54.9

65 or older 2.8 53.5

Note: Victimization rates are per 1,000 persons for violent crime and per 

1,000 households for property crime. See appendix table 17 for standard errors.

aIncludes rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. 

Age is by victim for violent crime.

bIncludes household burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft. Age is by head of 

household for property crime.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 11

Elderly violent crime victims were as likely to 

encounter a weapon as persons of other ages

Though the elderly were victimized at a lower rate, when 

victimized they were as likely to encounter a weapon and a 

firearm as persons of other ages. About 1 in 5 (20%) violent 

victimizations against the elderly involved a weapon (i.e., 

a firearm, knife, or other object) (table 12). A firearm was 

used in about 8% of violent crimes against elderly victims. 

Knives were used in about 4% of violent victimizations 

against persons 65 or older, while about 6% involved other 

types of weapons.

Of the elderly who were injured during violent crime 

incidents, most reported bruises or cuts

A smaller percentage of elderly victims suffered an injury 

(18%), compared to younger victims ages 12 to 24 (30%) 

and ages 25 to 49 (25%) (table 13). Among the elderly who 

were injured, most reported bruises or cuts. Approximately 

45% of elderly victims who were injured received some type 

of treatment. Of those treated, about 55% of persons age 

65 or older received treatment in a doctor’s office, hospital 

emergency room, or overnight in a hospital. About 45% of 

injured elderly victims were treated at the scene of the crime, 

in their home, the home of a neighbor or friend, or other 

location. No statistically significant differences were detected 

among age groups in the percentage treated for injury or 

location of treatment.

Table 13

Percent of violent victimizations resulting in injury and 

medical treatment, by age of victim, 2003–2013

Type of injury and treatment 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Not injured 70.5 74.9 79.6 82.1

Injured 29.5 25.1 20.4 17.9

Serious injuriesa 5.8 5.2 4.4 2.9

Bruises or cuts 24.7 21.1 16.3 14.2

Other injuries 3.4 2.5 2.5 3.7

Treatment for injuryb 100% 100% 100% 100%

No treatment 62.1 56.4 59.0 54.6

Any treatment 37.8 43.4 40.1 45.4

Treatment settingc 100% 100% 100% 100%

At the scene/home of 

victim, neighbor, or friend/

other location 38.7 44.5 36.8 45.4

In doctor’s office/hospital 

emergency room/

overnight at hospital 61.3 55.5 63.2 54.6

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. See appendix table 19 for 

standard errors.

aIncludes sexual violence injuries, gunshot wounds, knife wounds, internal 

injuries, unconsciousness, and broken bones.

bIncludes only victims who were injured.

cIncludes only victims who were injured and received treatment.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Table 12

Percent of violent victimizations involving a weapon, by age 

of victim, 2003–2013

Type of weapon 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

No weapon 72.6% 70.2% 69.9% 69.3%

Weapon 21.5% 22.4% 21.0% 19.5%

Firearm 6.2 7.7 7.0 7.6

Knife 6.4 5.9 5.6 4.3

Other 7.2 7.1 6.9 6.2

Type unknown 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.4 !

Don’t know 5.9% 7.5% 9.0% 11.1%

Average annual 

violent victimizations 2,709,260 2,899,310 834,510 136,720

Note: Detail may not sum to total due to rounding. See appendix table 18 for 

standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 12

The elderly reported 56% of violent crime and 38% of 

property crime to police

In 2003–13, the elderly (56%) were more likely to report 

violent crime to the police than persons ages 12 to 24 

(38%) (table 14). There were no differences in reporting 

between the elderly and persons of other ages. A slightly 

higher percentage of elderly serious violent crime victims 

(64%) reported the incident to the police, compared to 

elderly victims of simple assault (52%). Persons age 65 or 

older reported about 38% of property crime to police. In 

comparison to household burglary (50%) and motor vehicle 

theft (83%), theft (32%) was the property crime least likely 

to be reported to police by persons age 65 or older. This was 

also true for the other age groups.

About 21% of elderly victims of serious violent crime 

sought assistance from victim service agencies

Victim service agencies are publicly or privately funded 

organizations that provide victims with support and services 

to aid their physical and emotional recovery, offer protection 

from future victimizations, guide them through the 

criminal justice system process, and assist them in obtaining 

restitution. Similar to other age groups, about 1 in 10 (11%) 

elderly violent crime victims received assistance from victim 

service agencies (table 15). Serious violent crime victims 

age 65 or older received more assistance (21%), compared 

to persons ages 12 to 24 (10%) and ages 50 to 64 (10%) and 

slightly more assistance than persons ages 25 to 49 (13%).

Table 14

Percentage of victimizations reported to police, by type of 

crime and age of victim, 2003–2013

Type of crime 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older 

Violent crimea 38.0% 53.5% 50.5% 56.2%

Serious violent crimeb 48.0 63.9 58.2 64.3

Rape/sexual assault 30.9 43.5 25.4 28.0 !

Robbery 52.8 64.8 61.2 76.1

Aggravated assault 50.0 68.2 63.1 64.3

Simple assault 32.9 48.5 47.0 51.8

Property crimec 36.9% 38.2% 36.6% 38.3%

Household burglary 52.3 56.2 51.7 50.1

Motor vehicle theft 78.6 82.8 79.0 83.5

Theft 29.3 31.1 30.3 31.9

Note: See appendix table 20 for standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases or 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

aIncludes rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. 

Age is by victim for violent crime. 

bIncludes rape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault.

cIncludes household burglary, motor vehicle theft, and theft. Age is by head of 

household for property crime.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Table 15

Violent crime victims who received assistance from a victim 

service agency, by age of victim, 2003–2013

Type of crime 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 7.7% 11.2% 7.9% 10.8%

Serious violent crime* 9.7 13.4 10.1 21.5

Simple assault 6.6 10.2 6.9 5.1 !

Note: See appendix table 21 for standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases or 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

*Includes rape or sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 13

Methodology

Estimates in this report are based primarily on data from 

the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCVS), including data from the 

Identity Theft Supplement (ITS). Additional data come from 

the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) 

Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System 

(WISQARS).

Survey coverage

The NCVS is an annual data collection conducted by the U.S. 

Census Bureau for BJS. The NCVS is a self-report survey 

in which interviewed persons are asked about the number 

and characteristics of victimizations experienced during 

the prior 6 months. The NCVS collects information on 

nonfatal personal crimes (rape or sexual assault, robbery, 

aggravated and simple assault, and personal larceny) 

and household property crimes (burglary, motor vehicle 

theft, and other theft) both reported and not reported to 

police. In addition to providing annual level and change 

estimates on criminal victimization, the NCVS is the 

primary source of information on the nature of criminal 

victimization incidents.

Survey respondents provide information about themselves 

(e.g., age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, marital status, 

education level, and income) and whether they experienced 

a victimization. For each victimization incident, information 

is collected about the offender (e.g., age, sex, race and 

Hispanic origin, and victim–offender relationship), 

characteristics of the crime (including time and place of 

occurrence, use of weapons, nature of injury, and economic 

consequences), whether the crime was reported to police, 

reasons the crime was or was not reported, and experiences 

with the criminal justice system.

The NCVS is administered to persons age 12 or older from 

a nationally representative sample of households in the 

United States. The NCVS defines a household as a group of 

members who all reside at a sampled address. Persons are 

considered household members when the sampled address is 

their usual place of residence at the time of the interview and 

when they have no usual place of residence elsewhere. Once 

selected, households remain in the sample for 3 years, and 

eligible persons in these households are interviewed every 

6 months either in person or over the phone for a total of 

seven interviews. 

Generally, all first interviews are conducted in person. New 

households rotate into the sample on an ongoing basis to 

replace outgoing households that have been in the sample 

for the 3-year period. The sample includes persons living 

in group quarters, such as dormitories, rooming houses, 

and religious group dwellings, and excludes persons 

living in military barracks and institutional settings, such 

as correctional or hospital facilities, and persons who 

are homeless. (For more information, see the Survey 

Methodology for Criminal Victimization in the United States, 

2008, NCJ 231173, BJS web, May 2011.)

Limitations of the estimates

The NCVS was designed to measure the incidence of 

criminal victimization against the U.S. civilian household 

population, excluding persons who live in institutions 

and the homeless. In this report, institutions refer to adult 

correctional facilities, juvenile facilities, nursing facilities 

or skilled nursing facilities, in-patient hospice facilities, 

residential schools for people with disabilities, and hospitals 

with patients who have no usual home elsewhere. The 

measures of crime against persons age 65 or older cover only 

elderly persons who are living among the general population 

in household settings. Subsequently, there is some coverage 

error in using just the noninstitutionalized population. For 

example, according to the U.S. Census, about 3.1% of the 

elderly population were living in nursing homes in 2010. 

Because persons in these facilities would not be covered in 

the NCVS, estimates of violence against these persons are 

not counted. The lack of information from the institutions 

will result in an undercount of violence against persons age 

65 or older. Additionally, some care should be taken when 

comparing victimization rates within the elderly population. 

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau indicate that an estimated 

0.9% of the U.S. population ages 65 to 74 lived in a nursing 

home in 2010, compared to 3.2% of the population ages 75 

to 84 and 11.2% of the population age 85 or older.

Weighting adjustments for estimating personal 

victimization

In 2013, 90,630 households and about 160,040 persons age 

12 or older were interviewed for the NCVS. Each household 

was interviewed twice during the year. The response rate 

was 84% for households and 88% for eligible persons. 

Victimizations that occurred outside of the United States 

were excluded from this report. In 2013, less than 1% of the 

unweighted victimizations occurred outside of the United 

States and were excluded from the analyses.

Estimates in this report use data primarily from the 1993 to 

2013 NCVS data files weighted to produce annual estimates 

for persons age 12 or older living in U.S. households. Because 

the NCVS relies on a sample rather than a census of the entire 

U.S. population, weights are designed to inflate sample point 

estimates to known population totals and to compensate for 

survey nonresponse and other aspects of the sample design.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 14

The NCVS data files include both household and person 

weights. The household weight is commonly used to 

calculate estimates of property crimes, such as motor vehicle 

theft or burglary, which are identified with the household. 

Person weights provide an estimate of the population 

represented by each person in the sample. Person weights 

are most frequently used to compute estimates of crime 

victimizations of persons in the total population. After 

proper adjustment, both household and person weights 

are also used to form the denominator in calculations of 

crime rates.

The victimization weights used in this analysis account 

for the number of persons present during an incident and 

for repeat victims of series incidents. The weight counts 

series incidents as the actual number of incidents reported 

by the victim, up to a maximum of 10 incidents. Series 

victimizations are victimizations that are similar in type but 

occur with such frequency that a victim is unable to recall 

each individual event or to describe each event in detail. 

Survey procedures allow NCVS interviewers to identify and 

classify these similar victimizations as series victimizations 

and collect detailed information on only the most recent 

incident in the series. In 2013, about 1% of all victimizations 

and 4% of all violent victimizations were series incidents. 

Weighting series incidents as the number of incidents up 

to a maximum of 10 produces more reliable estimates of 

crime levels, while the cap at 10 minimizes the effect of 

extreme outliers on the rates. Additional information on 

the series enumeration is detailed in Methods for Counting 

High Frequency Repeat Victimizations in the National Crime 

Victimization Survey (NCJ 237308, BJS website) April 2012.

Standard error computations

When national estimates are derived from a sample, as with 

the NCVS, caution must be taken when comparing one 

estimate to another estimate or when comparing estimates 

over time. Although one estimate may be larger than 

another, estimates based on a sample have some degree of 

sampling error. The sampling error of an estimate depends 

on several factors, including the amount of variation in the 

responses, and the size of the sample. When the sampling 

error around an estimate is taken into account, the estimates 

that appear different may not be statistically different. 

One measure of the sampling error associated with an 

estimate is the standard error. The standard error can vary 

from one estimate to the next. Generally, an estimate with a 

small standard error provides a more reliable approximation 

of the true value than an estimate with a large standard error. 

Estimates with relatively large standard errors are associated 

with less precision and reliability and should be interpreted 

with caution. 

To generate standard errors around numbers and estimates 

from the NCVS, the Census Bureau produced generalized 

variance function (GVF) parameters for BJS. The GVFs 

take into account aspects of the NCVS complex sample 

design and represent the curve fitted to a selection of 

individual standard errors based on the Jackknife Repeated 

Replication technique. The GVF parameters were used to 

generate standard errors for each point estimate (i.e., counts, 

percentages, and rates) in this report. 

BJS conducted tests to determine whether differences in 

estimated numbers and percentages in this report were 

statistically significant once sampling error was taken into 

account. Using statistical programs developed specifically 

for the NCVS, all comparisons in the text were tested 

for significance. The Student’s t-statistic was the primary 

test procedure, which tests the difference between two 

sample estimates.

Data users can use the estimates and the standard errors of 

the estimates provided in this report to generate a confidence 

interval around the estimate as a measure of the margin of 

error. The following example illustrates how standard errors 

can be used to generate confidence intervals:

In 2003–13, according to the NCVS, the rate of nonfatal 

violent crime against persons age 65 or older was 3.6 per 

1,000 (see table 2). Using the GVFs, it was determined 

that the estimate has a standard error of 0.3 (see appendix 

table 1). A confidence interval around the estimate 

was generated by multiplying +/- 1.96 (the t-score of 

a normal, two-tailed distribution that excludes 2.5% 

at either end of the distribution). Therefore, the 95% 

confidence interval around the 3.6 estimate from 2013 

is 3.6 +/- (0.3 X 1.96) or (3.0 to 4.3). In other words, if 

different samples using the same procedure were taken 

from the U.S. population in 2003–13, 95% of the time the 

rate of nonfatal violent crime against persons age 65 or 

older would be between 3.0 and 4.3 per 1,000 persons age 

65 or older.

In this report, BJS also calculated a coefficient of variation 

(CV) for all estimates, representing the ratio of the standard 

error to the estimate. CVs provide a measure of reliability 

and a means to compare the precision of estimates across 

measures with differing levels or metrics. In cases where the 

CV was greater than 50%, or the unweighted sample had 

10 or fewer cases, the estimate was noted with a “!” symbol. 

(Interpret data with caution. Estimate based on 10 or 

fewer sample cases, or the coefficient of variation is greater 

than 50%.)
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 15

Data Collection for Disability Statistics 

In 2007, the NCVS adopted questions from the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) to measure 

the rate of victimization against people with disabilities. The 

NCVS does not identify persons in the general population 

with disabilities. The ACS Subcommittee on Disability 

Questions developed the disability questions based on 

questions used in the 2000 Decennial Census and earlier 

versions of the ACS. The questions identify persons who 

may require assistance to maintain their independence, be 

at risk for discrimination, or lack opportunities available to 

the general population because of limitations related to a 

prolonged (6 months or longer) sensory, physical, mental, 

or emotional condition. More information about the ACS 

and the disability questions is available on the U.S. Census 

Bureau website at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/.

Changes to the disability questions in the NCVS and 

ACS in 2008

In 2008, the U.S. Census Bureau changed some of the 

disability questions on the ACS. The question about sensory 

disability was separated into two questions about blindness 

and deafness, and the questions about physical disability 

were asked only about serious difficulty walking or climbing 

stairs. Also, questions on employment disability and going 

outside of the home were eliminated in 2008. Census Bureau 

analysis of 2007 and 2008 ACS disability data revealed 

significant conceptual and measurement differences between 

the 2007 and 2008 disability questions. The Census Bureau 

concluded that data users should not compare the 2007 

estimates of the population with disabilities and those of 

later years. Because the 2007 and 2008 NCVS disability 

questions mirrored the ACS, estimates of victimization 

of people with disabilities from the 2007 and 2008 NCVS 

should not be compared. As a result, the 2007 disability data 

are not presented in this report. Further explanation about 

incomparability of the 2007 and 2008 ACS disability data is 

available at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/

methodology/content_test/P4_Disability.pdf.

Definitions of disability types

Disabilities are classified according to six limitations: 

hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and 

independent living.

 Hearing limitation entails deafness or serious difficulty 

hearing.

 Vision limitation is blindness or serious difficulty seeing, 

even when wearing glasses.

 Cognitive limitation includes serious difficulty in 

concentrating, remembering, or making decisions 

because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition.

 Ambulatory limitation is difficulty walking or climbing 

stairs.

 Self-care limitation is a condition that causes difficulty 

dressing or bathing.

 Independent living limitation is a physical, mental, or 

emotional condition that impedes doing errands alone, 

such as visiting a doctor or shopping.

Data Collection for Identity Theft Statistics

From January 1, 2012, through June 30, 2012, the Identity 

Theft Supplement (ITS) was administered at the end of 

the NCVS interview to persons age 16 or older in sampled 

NCVS households. Proxy responders and those who 

completed the NCVS interview in a language other than 

English were not eligible to receive the ITS. All NCVS and 

ITS interviews were conducted in a computer-assisted 

personal interviewing (CAPI) environment. Interviews 

were conducted by telephone or by personal visit. A 

final sample size of 69,814 of the original NCVS-eligible 

respondents completed the ITS questionnaire, resulting 

in a response rate of 91.9%. The combined overall NCVSITS unit response rate for NCVS households, NCVS 

persons, and ITS persons was 68.2%. Because of the level of 

nonresponse, a bias analysis was conducted. To the extent 

that those who responded to the survey and those who did 

not differ in important ways, there is potential for bias in 

estimates from the survey data. However, the result of the 

nonresponse bias analysis suggested that there was little or 

no bias of substantive importance due to nonresponse in the 

ITS estimates.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 16

The ITS collected individual data on the prevalence of and 

victim response to the attempted or successful misuse of an 

existing account, misuse of personal information to open a 

new account, or misuse of personal information for other 

fraudulent purposes. Respondents were asked whether 

they had experienced any of these types of misuse during 

the 12 months prior to the interview. For example, persons 

interviewed in July 2012 were asked about identity theft 

incidents that occurred between July 2011 and June 2012. To 

simplify the discussion of the findings, this report refers to 

all identity theft experienced during the 12 months prior to 

the interviews as occurring in 2012.

Persons who reported one or more incidents of identity 

theft during 2012 were then asked more detailed questions 

about the incident and response to the incident, such as 

how the identity theft was discovered; financial, credit, and 

other problems resulting from the incident; time spent 

resolving problems associated with the theft; and reporting 

to police and credit bureaus. For most sections of the 

survey instrument, victims who experienced more than one 

incident during the 12-month reference period were asked to 

think about only the most recent incident when answering 

questions. Victims who experienced multiple incidents of 

identity theft during the year were asked to report on the 

total financial losses suffered as a result of all incidents. 

Both victims and nonvictims were also asked a series of 

questions about experiences with identity theft outside of 

the 12-month reference period and about measures taken 

to avoid or minimize the risk of becoming an identity 

theft victim.

For more information on crimes against the elderly, see 

previous BJS publications: 

 Crimes Against Persons Age 65 or Older, 1992–1997, 

NCJ 176352, January 2000

 Crimes Against Persons Age 65 or Older, 1993–2002, 

NCJ 206154, January 2005

 Violent Crimes Against the Elderly Reported by Law 

Enforcement in Michigan, 2005–2009, NCJ 238546, 

June 2012
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 17

Appendix table 1

Standard errors for figure 1 and table 2: Number and rate of violent victimization, by type of crime and age of victim, 

2003–2013

Average annual violent victimizations Rate per 1,000 persons age 12 or older

Type of crime Total 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older Total 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total violent crime 369,424 203,451 212,820 94,794 31,657 0.7 1.6 0.9 0.7 0.3

Serious violent crime 175,752 100,327 102,747 46,578 17,404 0.3 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.2

Rape/sexual assault 39,769 25,099 23,755 10,569 4,973 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0

Robbery 76,903 44,237 45,801 22,808 10,470 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1

Aggravated assault 86,600 50,041 51,945 23,816 7,528 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1

Simple assault 271,615 149,665 158,004 72,063 23,857 0.5 1.2 0.7 0.6 0.2

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2003–2013.

Appendix table 2

Estimates for figure 2: Distribution of the population age 65 

or older, 1990–2020

Age 1990 2000 2010 2020

Total (in millions) 31.2 35.0 40.3 56.0

65–74 18.1 18.4 21.7 32.8

75–84 10.1 12.4 13.1 16.5

85 or older 3.1 4.2 5.5 6.7

65 or older as percent 

of total population 12.6% 12.4% 13.0% 16.8%

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 

65+ in the United States: 2010, 2014.

Appendix table 3

Standard errors for table 1: Number and rate of property victimization, by type of crime and age of head of household, 

2003–2013

Average annual property victimizations Rate per 1,000 households

Type of crime Total 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older Total 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total property crime 438,364 122,129 306,298 187,619 113,963 1.4 4.7 2.0 2.1 1.6

Household burglary 151,881 47,337 104,068 68,033 47,861 0.5 2.0 0.7 0.7 0.7

Motor vehicle theft 57,807 19,558 42,276 26,150 15,254 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.2

Theft 341,242 94,391 241,152 147,258 87,015 1.1 3.8 1.6 1.6 1.2

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 18

Appendix table 4

Rates and standard errors for figure 3: Rate of violent victimization, by age of victim, 1993–2013

Rate per 1,000 persons Standard errors

Year 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

1994 163.4 80.9 24.7 7.4 7.4 3.9 2.7 1.3

1995 155.4 75.1 26.1 7.1 6.2 3.2 2.3 1.1

1996 139.9 67.4 24.3 6.7 6.1 3.2 2.3 1.0

1997 128.3 63.7 22.8 6.0 6.5 3.4 2.4 1.1

1998 118.9 57.2 24.1 4.4 7.5 3.9 3.0 1.1

1999 106.9 48.6 23.1 4.1 6.7 3.3 2.7 1.0

2000 86.1 41.0 21.6 4.3 6.0 3.0 2.6 1.0

2001 70.2 34.4 17.3 4.7 5.0 2.6 2.1 1.0

2002 66.1 32.0 13.6 4.7 5.3 2.7 2.0 1.1

2003 68.3 30.3 15.5 3.4 5.4 2.6 2.2 0.9

2004 61.7 29.1 15.9 2.8 4.7 2.4 2.0 0.8

2005 56.6 27.9 15.2 3.1 4.2 2.2 1.9 0.8

2006 61.1 31.8 17.6 3.8 4.1 2.2 1.9 0.8

2007 57.8 32.7 17.1 3.5 4.0 2.3 1.8 0.7

2008 51.0 28.0 13.8 3.2 4.0 2.2 1.7 0.8

2009 44.4 25.8 13.7 3.6 4.3 2.5 2.0 1.0

2010 35.9 23.4 13.4 3.4 3.7 2.3 1.9 0.9

2011 37.6 23.3 12.9 3.7 3.5 2.1 1.6 0.8

2012 44.2 27.5 14.0 5.1 3.3 2.0 1.5 0.9

2013 43.2 27.6 16.8 4.4 2.4 1.5 1.3 0.7

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013.

Appendix table 5

Rates for figure 4: Rate of homicide, by age of victim, 

1993–2011

Year 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

1993 18.3 12.9 5.2 3.7

1994 17.5 12.2 4.8 3.4

1995 15.7 11.0 4.8 3.2

1996 13.9 9.9 4.4 2.9

1997 12.9 9.3 4.0 3.0

1998 11.3 8.5 3.6 2.5

1999 10.2 8.0 3.4 2.5

2000 10.0 8.0 3.4 2.4

2001 10.3 10.4 4.6 2.7

2002 10.1 8.4 3.5 2.3

2003 10.2 8.4 3.4 2.4

2004 9.6 8.2 3.5 2.3

2005 10.2 8.6 3.4 2.3

2006 10.6 8.6 3.7 2.1

2007 10.2 8.6 3.5 2.0

2008 9.7 8.3 3.4 2.1

2009 8.9 7.8 3.3 2.2

2010 8.6 7.5 3.4 2.0

2011 8.3 7.5 3.3 2.1

Note: Rates are per 100,000 persons.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting 

System (WISQARS), 1993–2011.

Appendix table 6

Rates for figure 5: Rate of firearm homicide, by age of victim, 

1993–2011

Year 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

1993 15.6 9.1 3.0 1.4

1994 15.0 8.7 2.9 1.2

1995 13.1 7.5 2.7 1.2

1996 11.6 6.7 2.5 1.1

1997 10.8 6.3 2.2 1.0

1998 9.3 5.6 2.0 0.9

1999 8.2 5.2 1.8 0.9

2000 8.0 5.3 1.8 0.8

2001 8.2 5.6 1.7 0.9

2002 8.3 5.8 1.8 0.8

2003 8.3 5.9 1.7 0.8

2004 7.7 5.7 1.8 0.9

2005 8.3 6.2 1.6 0.9

2006 8.9 6.1 1.8 0.7

2007 8.6 6.2 1.7 0.8

2008 8.1 6.0 1.7 0.8

2009 7.4 5.6 1.8 0.9

2010 7.1 5.4 1.7 0.8

2011 7.0 5.4 1.8 0.8

Note: Rates are per 100,000 persons.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting 

System (WISQARS), 1993–2011.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 19

Appendix table 7

Rates for figure 6: Rate of nonfirearm homicide, by age of 

victim, 1993–2011

Year 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

1993 2.7 3.8 2.2 2.2

1994 2.5 3.6 1.9 2.2

1995 2.6 3.5 2.1 2.0

1996 2.3 3.2 2.0 1.8

1997 2.1 3.0 1.8 1.9

1998 2.0 2.9 1.6 1.7

1999 2.0 2.8 1.7 1.6

2000 2.0 2.7 1.7 1.6

2001 2.2 4.8 2.9 1.8

2002 1.8 2.6 1.7 1.5

2003 1.8 2.6 1.6 1.6

2004 1.8 2.5 1.7 1.4

2005 1.8 2.5 1.7 1.4

2006 1.7 2.4 1.9 1.4

2007 1.7 2.4 1.8 1.2

2008 1.7 2.4 1.7 1.3

2009 1.5 2.2 1.6 1.3

2010 1.5 2.1 1.7 1.2

2011 1.3 2.1 1.6 1.2

Note: Rates are per 100,000 persons.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, based on data from the National Center for 

Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting 

System (WISQARS), 1993–2011.

Appendix table 8

Rates and standard errors for figure 7: Rate of property victimization, by age of head of household, 1993–2013

Rate per 1,000 households Standard errors

Year 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older

1994 541.4 424.4 289.5 141.0 15.7 7.6 9.2 6.4

1995 563.1 400.1 260.0 138.1 12.2 5.8 6.8 4.9

1996 537.4 365.9 240.4 128.6 13.6 6.0 7.1 5.2

1997 475.9 336.0 235.0 114.0 13.4 5.9 7.0 4.8

1998 437.5 302.2 217.7 103.3 17.4 7.7 8.9 6.1

1999 409.7 265.6 192.5 92.9 17.3 7.2 8.3 5.8

2000 385.6 240.3 162.7 81.6 16.7 7.3 7.7 5.3

2001 343.6 223.0 142.4 79.3 13.0 5.7 5.8 4.3

2002 311.9 209.4 138.2 74.5 11.9 4.8 5.1 3.9

2003 313.6 205.2 144.3 70.1 14.8 6.3 6.7 4.7

2004 315.8 203.2 146.4 71.7 14.8 6.3 6.6 4.8

2005 294.0 193.7 140.3 75.0 11.3 4.3 4.8 3.8

2006 277.1 195.5 146.0 75.0 10.8 3.9 4.5 3.7

2007 286.4 191.1 143.8 75.8 13.5 5.2 5.7 4.5

2008 266.5 173.9 132.4 73.9 13.2 5.2 5.6 4.5

2009 237.3 162.8 125.2 65.4 12.5 4.9 5.3 4.1

2010 214.5 153.0 119.0 62.6 11.9 4.6 4.9 4.0

2011 224.5 153.7 120.6 72.4 12.1 4.8 5.1 4.3

2012 254.8 169.7 138.1 81.5 13.1 5.3 5.6 4.7

2013 244.7 167.7 137.9 73.9 8.2 3.2 3.5 2.8

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 20

Appendix table 9

Standard errors for table 3: Rate of violent victimization, by 

age of victim and location of residence, 2003–2013

Location of residence 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Urban 2.4 1.4 1.4 0.6

Suburban 1.9 1.0 0.8 0.4

Rural 2.9 1.7 1.1 0.5

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 10

Standard errors for table 4: Rate of property victimization, 

by age of head of household and location of residence, 

2003–2013

Location of residence 24 or younger 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Urban 6.6 3.1 3.6 2.9

Suburban 6.8 2.3 2.5 2.0

Rural 10.1 3.8 3.6 2.9

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 11

Standard errors for table 5: Location of violent victimization, 

by age of victim, 2003–2013

Location of crime 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

At or near victim's home 1.0% 1.2% 1.8% 3.7%

At or near friend, neighbor, 

 or relative's home 0.7 0.5 0.7 1.6

Other location 1.3 1.3 1.9 3.4

Average annual violent 

victimizations 203,451 212,820 94,794 31,657

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 12

Standard errors for table 6: Persons age 16 or older who experienced at least one identity theft incident in the past 12 months, 

by type of theft and age of victim, 2012

Estimate Percent

Type of theft 16–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older 16–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total identity theft 154,243 475,443 330,527 194,365 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4%

Existing account 152,923 482,612 336,354 193,724 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4%

Credit card 58,768 265,013 221,219 145,410 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3

Bank 114,581 298,354 177,204 85,034 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2

Other 41,688 113,107 67,888 35,289 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

New account 32,352 77,538 56,549 37,521 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

Personal information 24,361 72,017 44,100 24,629 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

Multiple types 31,596 90,119 58,232 34,500 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

Existing account 25,803 69,062 44,128 26,810 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Other 15,316 45,742 31,161 18,412 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, Identity Theft Supplement, 2012.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 21

Appendix table 13

Standard errors for table 7: Violent victimization, by age of 

victim and victim–offender relationship, 2003–2013

Victim–offender relationship 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Known 1.3% 1.3% 1.9% 3.7%

Domestic 0.8 1.0 1.4 2.4

Intimate partner 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.6

Immediate family 0.4 0.3 0.8 1.4

Other relative 0.3 0.3 0.5 1.2

Well-known/casual 

acquaintance 1.2 1.0 1.7 3.4

Stranger 1.2% 1.2% 1.8% 3.6%

Unknown 0.6% 0.6% 0.9% 1.8%

Average annual violent 

victimizations 203,451 212,820 94,794 31,657

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 14

Standard errors for table 8: Percent of violent victimization, 

by victim–offender relationship and age of victim, 

2003–2013

Victim–offender relationship 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 0.9% 1.0% 0.5% 0.2%

Known 1.2% 1.1% 0.7% 0.2%

Domestic 1.4 1.6 0.9 0.3

Intimate partner 1.5 1.8 0.8 0.2

Immediate family 2.7 2.6 2.1 0.7

Other relative 3.4 3.4 2.4 1.1

Well-known/casual 

acquaintance 1.4 1.2 0.8 0.3

Stranger 1.2% 1.3% 0.8% 0.3%

Unknown 2.1% 2.1% 1.3% 0.5%

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 15

Standard errors for table 9: Rate of violent victimization, by 

age of victim and victim characteristics, 2003–2013

Demographic characteristic 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Sex

Male 2.1 1.2 1.0 0.5

Female 1.9 1.1 0.9 0.4

Race/Hispanic origin

White 2.0 1.1 0.8 0.3

Black 3.1 1.9 1.8 1.0

Hispanic/Latino 2.3 1.3 1.5 1.0

Other race 2.7 1.8 1.8 1.3

Two or more races 9.3 9.1 9.4 5.1

Marital status

Never married 1.7 1.6 2.3 1.7

Married 3.1 0.7 0.6 0.3

Widowed 21.3 6.9 2.5 0.4

Divorced 23.5 2.8 2.1 1.6

Separated 25.8 6.3 5.0 5.3

Household composition

Single, no children 5.2 2.3 2.0 0.6

Married, no children 4.4 1.2 0.7 0.3

With children 2.2 1.0 1.9 1.4

Other 2.0 1.4 1.1 0.6

Household ownership status

Owned 1.7 0.8 0.7 0.3

Rented 2.5 1.7 2.1 1.0

No cash rent 9.2 5.3 6.5 1.9

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 22

Appendix table 16

Standard errors for table 10: Number and rate of violent victimization for persons age 65 or older, by type of crime and victim’s 

disability status, 2008–2012

Number of violent victimizations Rate per 1,000 persons

Type of crime With disabilities Without disabilities With disabilities Without disabilities

Total violent crime 47,909 69,450 0.7 0.6

Serious violent crime 26,853 29,152 0.4 0.2

Rape/sexual assault 16,552 7,135 0.2 0.1

Robbery 13,301 19,314 0.2 0.2

Aggravated assault 11,344 17,243 0.2 0.1

Simple assault 33,645 54,982 0.5 0.4

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 2008–2012.

Appendix table 17

Standard errors for table 11: Rates of violent and property 

victimization, by employment status and age, 2003–2013

Employment status and age Violent crime Property crime

Employed

12–64 0.3 0.5

65 or older 0.1 0.3

Not employed/retired

12–64 0.4 0.8

65 or older 0.3 1.4

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 18

Standard errors for table 12: Percent of violent victimizations 

involving a weapon, by age of victim, 2003–2013

Type of weapon 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

No weapon 1.2% 1.2% 1.8% 3.5%

Weapon 1.0% 1.0% 1.4% 2.8%

Firearm 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.8

Knife 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.3

Other 0.5 0.5 0.8 1.6

Type unknown 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7

Don’t know 0.5% 0.5% 0.9% 2.1%

Average annual 

violent victimizations 203,451 212,820 94,794 31,657

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 19

Standard errors for table 13: Percent of violent victimizations 

resulting in injury and medical treatment, by age of victim, 

2003–2013

Type of injury and treatment 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Not injured 1.2% 1.1% 1.6% 2.9%

Injured 1.1% 1.0% 1.4% 2.7%

Serious injuries 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.1

Bruises or cuts 1.0 0.9 1.3 2.4

Other injuries 0.3 0.3 0.4 1.2

Treatment for injury

No treatment 1.9% 2.0% 3.4% 7.7%

Any treatment 1.8 1.9 3.3 7.6

Treatment setting

At the scene/home of victim,

neighbor, or friend/other 

location 2.6% 2.6% 4.7% 10.9%

In doctor’s office/hospital 

emergency room/overnight 

at hospital 2.7 2.7 4.8 10.9

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
CRIMES AGAINST THE ELDERLY, 2003–2013 | NOVEMBER 2014 23

Appendix table 20

Standard errors for table 14: Percentage of victimizations 

reported to police, by type of crime and age, 2003–2013

Type of crime 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Violent crime 1.2% 1.3% 1.9% 3.7%

Serious violent crime 1.8 1.8 2.9 5.6

Rape/sexual assault 2.6 3.0 4.7 9.3

Robbery 2.6 2.4 3.9 6.3

Aggravated assault 1.7 1.6 2.6 6.2

Simple assault 1.3 1.4 2.1 4.3

Property crime 0.9% 0.5% 0.7% 1.0%

Household burglary 1.7 0.9 1.3 1.7

Motor vehicle theft 2.3 1.1 1.7 2.6

Theft 0.9 0.5 0.6 1.0

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 21

Standard errors for table 15: Violent crime victims who 

received assistance from a victim service agency, by age of 

victim, 2003–2013

Type of crime 12–24 25–49 50–64 65 or older

Total 0.5% 0.7% 0.9% 2.1%

Serious violent crime 0.9 1.1 1.5 4.6

Simple assault 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.7

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 22

Rate of violent and property victimization against the 

elderly, by type of crime and age, 2003–2013

Type of crime 65–74 75–84 85 or older

Total violent crime 5.1 2.2 1.1

Serious violent crime 1.6 0.9 0.7

Rape/sexual assault 0.3 0.0 ! 0.1 !

Robbery 0.7 0.5 0.4!

Aggravated assault 0.6 0.3 0.2 !

Simple assault 3.5 1.3 0.3!

Total property crime 84.3 61.7 51.5

Household burglary 19.6 15.4 16.9

Motor vehicle theft 3.7 1.8 1.1

Theft 61.0 44.5 33.4

Note: Victimization rates are per 1,000 persons age 65 or older for violent 

crimes and per 1,000 households for property crimes. See appendix table 23 for 

standard errors.

! Interpret with caution. Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or 

coefficient of variation is greater than 50%.

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.

Appendix table 23

Standard errors for appendix table 22: Rate of violent and 

property victimization against the elderly, by type of crime 

and age, 2003–2013

Type of crime 65–74 75–84 85 or older

Total violent crime 0.5 0.4 0.4

Serious violent crime 0.2 0.2 0.3

Rape/sexual assault 0.1 0.0 0.1

Robbery 0.1 0.1 0.2

Aggravated assault 0.1 0.1 0.1

Simple assault 0.4 0.3 0.2

Total property crime 2.2 2.2 3.1

Household burglary 0.9 1.0 1.6

Motor vehicle theft 0.3 0.3 0.3

Theft 1.7 1.7 2.3

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 

2003–2013.
Office of Justice Programs

Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

The Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice is the principal federal 

agency responsible for measuring crime, criminal victimization, criminal offenders, victims 

of crime, correlates of crime, and the operation of criminal and civil justice systems at the 

federal, state, tribal, and local levels. BJS collects, analyzes, and disseminates reliable and 

valid statistics on crime and justice systems in the United States, supports improvements 

to state and local criminal justice information systems, and participates with national 

and international organizations to develop and recommend national standards for justice 

statistics. William J. Sabol is acting director.

This report was written by Rachel E. Morgan, Ph.D., and Britney J. Mason, BJS intern. 

Barbara A. Oudekerk, Ph.D., verified the report.

Jill Thomas and Lynne McConnell edited the report. Barbara Quinn and Tina Dorsey 

produced the report.

November 2014, NCJ 248339