ELDER JUSTICE

Federal Government Has 

Taken Some Steps but 

Could Do More to Combat 

Elder Financial Exploitation

Statement of Kay E. Brown, Director 

Education, Workforce, and Income Security

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on 

Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade, 

Committee on Energy and Commerce, 

House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 9:45 a.m. EDT

Thursday, May 16, 2013

GAO-13-626T

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-13-626T, a testimony

before the Subcommittee on Commerce, 

Manufacturing, and Trade, Committee on 

Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of 

Representatives

May 16, 2013

ELDER JUSTICE 

Federal Government Has Taken Some Steps but Could Do 

More to Combat Elder Financial Exploitation

Why GAO Did This Study

Elder financial exploitation is the illegal 

or improper use of an older adult’s 

funds or property. It has been 

described as an epidemic with societywide repercussions. While combating 

elder financial exploitation is largely the 

responsibility of state and local social 

service, criminal justice, and consumer 

protection agencies, the federal 

government has a role to play in this 

area. GAO was asked to testify on the 

different forms elder financial 

exploitation can take and the ways 

federal agencies can help combat it. 

This testimony is based on information 

in a report issued in November 2012

(see GAO-13-110). To obtain this 

information, GAO interviewed public

officials in California, Illinois, New York, 

and Pennsylvania—states that had

large elderly populations and initiatives 

to combat financial exploitation; 

officials from seven federal agencies; 

and experts in this field. GAO also 

reviewed federal strategic plans and 

other relevant documents, research, 

laws, and regulations. 

What GAO Recommends

In its November 2012 report, GAO 

made multiple recommendations to 

federal agencies, and the agencies 

generally agreed with the 

recommendations. 

What GAO Found

Older adults are being financially exploited by strangers who inundate them with 

mail, telephone, or Internet scams; unscrupulous financial services professionals; 

and untrustworthy in-home caregivers. Local law enforcement authorities in the 

four states GAO visited indicated that investigating and prosecuting the growing 

number of cases involving interstate and international mass marketing fraud—

such as “grandparent scams,” which persuade victims to wire money to bail 

“grandchildren” out of jail or pay their expenses—is particularly difficult. In 

addition, older adults, like other consumers, may lack the information needed to 

make sound decisions when choosing a financial services provider. As a result, 

they can unknowingly risk financial exploitation by those who use questionable 

tactics to market unsuitable or illegal financial products. Local officials also noted

that it is difficult to prevent exploitation by in-home caregivers, such as home 

health or personal care aides, individuals older adults must rely on. 

GAO identified several ways the federal government is, or could be, supporting 

state and local efforts to combat elder financial exploitation. 

• With regard to mass marketing scams, GAO has recommended that the 

Department of Justice reach out to law enforcement authorities in states 

to clarify how they can obtain the federal assistance needed to handle 

interstate or international mass marketing fraud. 

• To help prevent exploitation by financial services professionals, the

Securities and Exchange Commission links to a public website where the 

qualifications of individual financial services providers can be found, and 

the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has issued guidance on how 

best to convey this information to older adults. 

• To prevent exploitation by in-home caregivers, the Centers for Medicare 

and Medicaid Services provides grants that fund background checks for 

employees of agencies that provide these services. 

Other federal efforts are broader in scope and help combat all types of elder 

financial exploitation. For example, each of the seven federal agencies GAO 

reviewed has independently undertaken activities to increase public awareness 

of this exploitation; however, GAO has recommended that the federal 

government develop a more strategic approach to these efforts. Further, 

recognizing the importance of collaboration among those interacting with older 

adults, GAO has recommended measures to educate bank staff on how to 

identify potential exploitation and improve collaboration among social service and 

law enforcement agencies, among others, as they respond to reports of 

exploitation. GAO has also noted the need for more data on the extent and 

nature of elder financial exploitation, some of which can be collected from 

consumer complaints filed with federal agencies. Finally, preventing and 

responding to elder financial exploitation calls for a more cohesive and deliberate 

national strategy. To this end, GAO has recommended that the Elder Justice 

Coordinating Council—a group of federal agency heads charged with setting 

priorities and coordinating federal efforts to combat elder abuse nationwide—

develop a written national strategy for combating elder financial exploitation. View GAO-13-626T. For more information, 

contact Kay Brown at (202) 512-7215 or 

brownke@gao.gov.
Page 1 GAO-13-626T

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

Chairman Terry, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

Thank you for this opportunity to discuss our work on elder financial 

exploitation. According to experts, the illegal or improper use of older 

adults’ funds, property, or assets is reaching epidemic proportions in this 

country and has far-reaching effects on its victims and society, in general. 

One study estimated that financial exploitation cost older adults at least 

$2.9 billion in 2010.1 The money older adults lose in these cases is rarely 

recovered and this loss can undermine both the health of older adults and 

their ability to support and care for themselves. Victims of elder abuse—

including elder financial exploitation—can incur higher healthcare 

expenses, further straining already overtaxed Medicare2 and Medicaid3

resources and increasing the demand for a range of supportive services, 

and older adults left without the means to live independently may have to 

rely on publicly supported long-term care placements. As the U.S. 

population ages, growing numbers of older adults could be at risk of 

financial exploitation, so its potential impact on society is likely to 

increase.

Older adults are particularly attractive targets for financial exploitation by 

unscrupulous individuals. As a group, older adults tend to possess more 

wealth than those who are younger because they have had a longer time 

to acquire it. In addition, the incidence of Alzheimer’s disease and other 

dementias that undermine judgment increases with age.4 Moreover, 

financial capacity—the capacity to manage money and financial assets in 

 

1 MetLife Mature Market Institute et. al., The MetLife Study of Elder Financial Abuse: 

Crimes of Occasion, Desperation, and Predation against America’s Elders (2011). This 

estimate is based on a study of media reports from April to June 2010.

2 42 U.S.C. §§ 1395-1395kkk-1. Medicare is a federal health insurance program for 

people age 65 or older, people under age 65 with certain disabilities, and people of all 

ages with permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or a kidney transplant.

3 42 U.S.C. § 1396d(a)(7). Medicaid is a joint federal-state financing program for health 

care services for certain low-income individuals. State Medicaid programs may cover 

home-based care, such as personal care and homemaker services for Medicaid 

beneficiaries who need help with self-care due to disabilities or health conditions.

4 Herbert et al., “Alzheimer Disease in the US Population,” Archives of Neurology, 60 

(August 2003): 1119-1122.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-13-626T

ways that meet one’s needs—generally declines with age, and this 

decline may go unaddressed until it is too late.5

State and local agencies in the social services, criminal justice, and 

consumer protection systems in each state are at the forefront of efforts 

to prevent, detect, and respond to elder financial exploitation. Although 

combating elder financial abuse is explicitly included in the mission of 

only one federal agency, the relatively new Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) Office for the Financial Protection of Older 

Americans (Office for Older Americans), it is implicit in the mission of the

others that work to combat elder abuse, protect consumers or investors, 

or prevent fraud. Seven federal agencies whose missions correspond to 

the state and local social service, criminal justice, and consumer 

protection systems are positioned to contribute to or support state and 

local efforts in this area: the Administration on Aging (AoA) within the 

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), CFPB, the 

Department of Justice (Justice), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), 

the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Postal Inspection Service (see fig. 

1).

 

5 Agarwal et al., “The Age of Reason: Financial Decisions over the Life Cycle with 

Implications for Regulation,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2 (Washington, D.C.: 

2009): 51-117.
 

Page 3 GAO-13-626T

Figure 1: Federal Agencies with Missions That Involve Combating Elder Financial Exploitation

a

The Department of Justice also plays a consumer protection role.

My testimony today describes the different forms elder financial 

exploitation can take and how the federal government can help state and 

local agencies combat this exploitation. It is based on findings from our 
 

Page 4 GAO-13-626T

November 2012 report on this topic.6 To obtain this information we 

interviewed state and local officials from social services, criminal justice, 

and consumer protection agencies in California, Illinois, New York, and 

Pennsylvania—states that vary geographically, and have large elderly 

populations and a number of initiatives that aim to combat elder financial 

exploitation. We also identified and assessed the activities aimed at 

preventing or responding to elder financial exploitation of seven federal 

agencies;7 conducted in-depth reviews of six prosecuted elder financial 

exploitation cases that are a non-generalizable sample of these types of 

cases; interviewed many experts in this subject area; and reviewed 

relevant laws, regulations, documents, and published research. We 

conducted this performance audit from November 2011 to November 

2012 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives. Our investigative activities 

were conducted in accordance with standards prescribed by the Council 

of the Inspectors General for Integrity and Efficiency.

Older adults are being financially exploited by strangers who inundate

them with mail, telephone, or Internet scams; unscrupulous financial 

services providers; and untrustworthy in-home caregivers (see table 1 for 

more details). For example:

• Mass marketing scams: Local law enforcement authorities in the four 

states we visited indicated that investigating and prosecuting the 

growing number of cases involving interstate and international mass 

marketing fraud, which often targets older adults, is particularly 

difficult for them. Interstate or international mass marketing scams 

include “grandparent scams,” which persuade victims to wire money 

to bail “grandchildren” out of jail or pay their expenses, and foreign 

 

6 GAO, Elder Justice: National Strategy Needed to Effectively Combat Elder Financial 

Exploitation, GAO-13-110 (Washington, D.C.: November 15, 2012).

7 We reviewed the activities of the Department of Health and Human Services’ 

Administration on Aging, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Department of Justice, 

Federal Trade Commission, Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement 

Network, Postal Inspection Service, and Securities and Exchange Commission.

Elder Financial 

Exploitation Can Take 

Many Forms
 

Page 5 GAO-13-626T

lottery scams that require victims to pay sizeable sums before they 

can receive their winnings. In 2011, the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation’s (FBI) Internet Crime Complaint Center received over 

300,000 complaints from victims of all ages about online fraud alone, 

with reported losses of about $485 million.

• Exploitation by financial services professionals: Older adults may 

consult with a variety of financial professionals, such as financial 

planners,8 broker-dealers,9 and insurance agents.10 However, older 

adults, similar to other consumers, may lack the information to make 

sound decisions about choosing a financial services provider and 

protecting their assets from exploitation. As a result, they may 

unknowingly put themselves at risk of financial exploitation. Older 

adults can be sold what they believe to be legitimate investments but 

are actually fraudulent products that hold little or no value, or may be

fooled by financial professionals who use questionable tactics to 

market financial products, such as “free lunch seminars” at which 

financial professionals seek to sell financial products to older adults 

during a free meal.

• Exploitation by in-home caregivers: Local officials cited exploitation by 

in-home caregivers—who range from personal care aides who 

provide non-medical assistance to home health aides who may check 

an older adult’s vital signs—as a type of abuse that is difficult to 

prevent, in part because these older adults may rely on and trust their 

caregivers. For example, a caregiver may be given access to an older 

adult’s ATM or credit card to help with banking or grocery shopping, 

 

8 Financial planners can provide a variety of services, including preparing financial plans 

for clients based on their financial circumstances and objectives and making 

recommendations for specific actions clients may take. In many cases, financial planners 

also help implement these recommendations by, for example, selling investment products, 

such as insurance, securities, or other investments. See GAO, Consumer Finance: 

Regulatory Coverage Generally Exists for Financial Planners, but Consumer Protection 

Issues Remain, GAO-11-235 (Washington, D.C.: January 18, 2011).

9

 Broker-dealers handle trades between the buyers and sellers of securities and charge a 

fee to do so. 

10 Insurance agents sell products, such as life insurance or annuities. They must be 

licensed by the states to sell these products, and are subject to state insurance regulation. 

See GAO-11-235. 
 

Page 6 GAO-13-626T

and later be found withdrawing money or purchasing items for 

themselves.11

Table 1: Examples of Forms of Elder Financial Exploitation, by Type of Perpetrator 

Perpetrators Forms 

Strangers • Lottery, mail, telephone or Internet scams

• Door-to-door home repair scams

• Identity theft

Financial services providers 

(brokers, financial advisors, 

insurance agents, or others 

in the financial services 

industry) 

• Sale of fraudulent investments (Ponzi or pyramid 

schemes)

• Sale of financial products or services unsuitable for 

an older adult’s circumstances, such as long-term 

annuities 

Family members, friends, 

home care providers, legal 

guardians, representative 

payeesa

, etc.

• Theft of cash or other valuables

• Withdrawals from bank accounts or use of credit 

cards

• Transfer of deeds

• Misuse of an older adult’s power-of-attorney

• Misappropriation of an incapacitated older adult’s 

income or assets

• Identity theft

Source: GAO analysis of published research.

a Representative payees are persons who receive Social Security benefits on behalf of recipients who are determined to be incapable of 

managing their finances. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.601 and 416.2001. 

We identified a number of ways the federal government was supporting or 

could further support state and local efforts to combat elder financial 

exploitation.

Local law enforcement officials we met with indicated it is not clear how 

they should obtain the federal support they need to respond to interstate 

and international mass marketing fraud cases. Justice officials told us 

they believe that local officials know which federal employees to contact; 

 

11 We have also noted in past reports that guardians--who are granted authority by a state 

court to make decisions in the best interest of an incapacitated individual concerning his or 

her person or property--are only subject to limited safeguards and oversight that could 

protect the older adults they assist from financial exploitation. See GAO, Guardianships: 

Cases of Financial Exploitation, Abuse, and Neglect of Seniors, GAO-10-1046

(Washington, D.C.: September 30, 2010), and GAO, Incapacitated Adults: Oversight of 

Federal Fiduciaries and Court-Appointed Guardians Needs Improvement, GAO-11-678

(Washington, D.C.: July 22, 2011).

Federal Agencies Are 

Helping States 

Combat Exploitation 

in Various Ways
 

Page 7 GAO-13-626T

however, state and local law enforcement officials told us it would be 

helpful to have more specific information. Cases that local officials do not 

refer to a federal agency due to a lack of correct contact information may 

not be investigated or prosecuted by either federal or local authorities. In 

our November 2012 report, we recommended that the Attorney General 

conduct outreach to state and local law enforcement agencies to clarify 

the process for contacting the federal government in these cases and the 

ways in which the federal government could provide support. Justice 

agreed with this recommendation, and in December 2012 held a meeting 

to begin identifying points of contact both within and outside the 

Department, such as FBI field offices, US Attorneys’ offices, the Internet 

Crime Complaint Center, and FTC’s Consumer Sentinel database. 

Justice noted that it will develop an implementation plan and timeline to 

initiate outreach to the appropriate state and local agencies.

In addition to not knowing whom to contact, state and local law 

enforcement officials in the four states we visited told us that they are 

concerned that federal agencies do not take enough of the cases that are 

referred to them. For example, a law enforcement official from California 

described a case of widespread interstate check fraud, expressing 

frustration with federal agencies that would not provide any support when 

he requested it. Federal officials, on the other hand, told us that they 

cannot take all cases referred to them by state and local law enforcement 

and that they must prioritize their caseload to make the best use of their 

limited resources. Justice and FTC officials said they tend to focus on 

larger cases in which many victims were affected or a significant amount 

of money was lost, and Justice’s U.S. Attorneys also apply regional 

priorities, such as the vulnerability (including age) of the victim, when 

determining which cases to take. Even if federal agencies choose not to 

take a case a state or local agency refers to them, Justice officials told us 

that consistent referrals of cases by state and local authorities allow them 

to identify patterns or combine several complaints against the same 

individual into one case. 

Federal agencies have made some efforts to provide safeguards to 

prevent exploitation by financial services professionals, which was cited 

as a challenge by public officials in all four states we visited. When it 

comes to preventing the sale to older adults of unsuitable or fraudulent 

investments, SEC and CFPB have each taken steps to help older adults 

avoid being exploited. SEC and CFPB have conducted research related 

to investment fraud that targets older adults, and in August 2012, SEC 

released a study on financial literacy among investors and stated the 

agency’s desire to develop a strategy for increasing the financial literacy 
 

Page 8 GAO-13-626T

of certain groups, including older adults. Further, there is a link on SEC’s 

website to Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA),

12 information 

consumers can use to check a financial services provider’s qualifications 

and to understand the many designations used by securities 

professionals. CFPB also issued a report in 2013 addressing how 

information about financial advisors and their credentials should be 

provided to older adults.13

To prevent exploitation by in-home caregivers—also identified as a 

challenge by officials in the four states we visited— the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act of 201014 required the Centers for Medicare and 

Medicaid Services to implement the National Background Check 

Program, which encourages but does not require states to adopt 

safeguards to protect clients of in-home caregivers. This program 

provides grants to states to conduct background checks for employees of 

long-term care facilities and providers, such as home health agencies and 

personal care service providers. As of November 2012, 19 states were 

participating. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 

many states require agencies to conduct background checks before 

employing in-home caregivers who are paid by Medicaid or with other 

state funds. These laws, however, vary greatly in their breadth and scope 

and in the amount of flexibility afforded the agencies when they use the 

checks to make hiring decisions.15 For example, Napa County, California, 

has initiated an innovative paid in-home caregiver screening initiative. 

Before in-home caregivers can work in that county, they must submit to a 

background check and obtain a permit annually.

Other federal efforts are broader in scope rather than focusing on a 

particular type of elder financial exploitation, such as those covering 

public awareness, banks, collaboration among agencies, and data 

collection.

 

12 FINRA is a self-regulatory organization that writes and enforces rules for brokers and 

brokerage firms.

13 CFPB (2013) Senior Designations for Financial Advisers: Reducing Consumer 

Confusion and Risks.

14 Pub. L. No. 111-148, tit. VI, subtit. C, § 6201, 124 Stat. 119, 721.

15 National Conference of State Legislatures, State Policies on Criminal Background 

Checks for Medicaid-Supported In-Home Direct Care Workers (December 18, 2008).
 

Page 9 GAO-13-626T

State and local officials told us that older adults need more information 

about what constitutes elder financial exploitation in order to know how to 

avoid it. At the state level, the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office has 

published a guide on how seniors can avoid scams and fraud, and in 

Cook County, Illinois, the Senior Law Enforcement Academy within the 

Sheriff’s Department instructs older adults in how to prevent elder 

financial exploitation. At the federal level, each of the seven federal 

agencies we reviewed independently produces educational materials that 

could help prevent elder financial exploitation. However, these seven 

agencies do not conduct their activities as part of a broader coordinated 

approach. In previous work, we found that agencies can use limited 

funding more efficiently by coordinating their activities and can strengthen 

their collaboration by establishing joint strategies.16 The need to increase 

coordination of efforts to promote public awareness in this area was 

discussed in 2012 at a high-level multi-agency meeting on elder justice. 

One participant observed that federal efforts to promote awareness are 

unorganized and uncoordinated, and one expert noted that there is a 

clear need for a strategic, multifaceted public awareness campaign. In our 

November 2012 report, we recommended that the federal government 

take a more strategic approach to its efforts to increase public awareness 

of elder financial exploitation. HHS has begun to act on this 

recommendation, as described below.

In our November 2012 report, we could identify no federal requirements 

for banks to train employees to recognize or report elder financial 

exploitation, even though they are well-positioned to identify and report it 

because they are able to observe it firsthand. For example, a bank teller 

who sees an older adult regularly is likely to notice if that individual is 

accompanied by someone new and seems pressured to withdraw money 

or if the older adult suddenly begins to wire large sums of money 

internationally. However, many social services and law enforcement 

officials we spoke with indicated banks do not always recognize or report 

exploitation or provide the evidence needed to investigate it.17 AoA is 

considering collaborating with one large national bank on a project to 

 

16 See GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices that Can Help Enhance and 

Sustain Collaboration Among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: October 

21, 2005).

17 The Financial Services Roundtable, a trade association with members from the 

banking, securities, investment, and insurance sectors, aims to protect and promote the 

economic vitality and integrity of its members and the U.S. financial system.
 

Page 10 GAO-13-626T

develop bank training on elder financial exploitation. In addition, financial 

institutions are required to file Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) of 

potentially illegal bank transactions that involve, individually or in the 

aggregate, at least $5,000 with FinCEN,18 which has issued an advisory

to banks that describes elder financial exploitation and its potential 

indicators. Our November 2012 report recommended that CFPB develop 

a plan to educate bank staff on elder financial exploitation. CFPB 

concurred with our recommendation and has begun to share information 

on currently available training programs with banks and industry 

associations.

Federal agencies have taken some steps to promote and inform 

collaboration between the social services and criminal justice systems in 

states, which officials in three of the four states we contacted for our 

November 2012 report identified as a challenge. These two systems do 

not respond to exploitation or carry out their work in the same way. The 

social services system protects and supports victims and the criminal 

justice system investigates and prosecutes crimes. As a result, there can 

be difficulties communicating across disciplines and different views 

regarding limits on information-sharing.19 Yet due to the nature of elder 

financial exploitation, collaboration can be an effective means to facilitate 

case investigation and prosecution. We identified a number of local 

initiatives to help bridge the gap between social services and criminal 

justice agencies. For example, in some Pennsylvania and New York 

counties, multidisciplinary groups meet to discuss and help resolve all 

types of elder abuse cases. The Philadelphia Financial Exploitation Task 

Force and financial abuse specialist teams in some California counties, 

on the other hand, concentrate only on elder financial exploitation cases. 

At the federal level, a few grants from AoA and Justice to combat elder 

abuse or other crimes have required or encouraged collaboration, such 

as the use of multi-disciplinary teams, in states. In our November 2012 

report, we recommended that the federal government take steps to help 

state and local agencies collaborate. HHS has begun to act on this 

recommendation, as described below.

A number of experts have called for more data on the cost of elder 

financial exploitation to public programs and for trend data on its extent, 

 

1812 C.F.R. § 21.11 (2013).

19 Brandl et al, Elder Abuse Detection and Intervention (New York: 2007).
 

Page 11 GAO-13-626T

and several federal agencies collect administrative data on the number of 

complaints submitted by consumers or criminal cases that sometimes 

involve elder financial exploitation. These data could help determine what 

government resources to allocate and how to best prevent and respond to 

elder financial exploitation. However, according to our analysis, as of 

November 2012, only one state had undertaken a study quantifying the 

cost of elder financial exploitation in that state.20 At the federal level, FTC 

publishes statistics from its Consumer Sentinel Network database 

(Consumer Sentinel) on the number and types of complaints, amount of 

losses, and characteristics of victims.21, 22 Data from the Consumer 

Sentinel could be of particular interest to state and local APS and law 

enforcement authorities, because over half of the consumer complaints 

reported to this system involve financial exploitation through fraud. 

Currently, however, the Consumer Sentinel does not receive any of the 

complaints reported to any of the law enforcement or consumer protection 

agencies in 38 states. Moreover, less than half of the complaints in the 

Consumer Sentinel contain the age of the victim because FTC does not 

require complaints to include this information or other indicators of 

whether the case involved elder financial exploitation. FTC officials told us 

the agency does not require complaints to include the age of the victim 

because of concerns regarding privacy and the potential burden this 

might place on individual complainants. In contrast, FinCEN requires 

institutions filing SARs to indicate whether or not the report involves 

suspected elder financial exploitation. In our November 2012 report, we 

recommended that FTC study the feasibility of requiring that all 

complaints to the Consumer Sentinel include either the victim’s age or an 

indication of whether the complaint involves elder financial exploitation 

and take additional steps to encourage reporting from more state and 

local law enforcement agencies. In its response, FTC said that it will 

consider our second recommendation. Regarding the first 

recommendation, FTC cited concerns that requiring personal data could 

 

20 Gunther, Jilenne, The 2010 Utah Cost of Financial Exploitation, Utah Division of Aging 

and Adult Services (2012). 

21 FTC’s Consumer Sentinel Network is an online database that houses millions of 

consumer complaints available to law enforcement. Sentinel’s roster of 28 current data 

contributors includes 12 state attorneys general, the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint 

Center, and the Council of Better Business Bureaus. More than 2,600 users from over 

2,000 law enforcement agencies worldwide use the system to share information, 

prosecute cases, and pursue leads. 

22 FTC (2012) Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January - December 2011. 
 

Page 12 GAO-13-626T

decrease the numbers of people who submit complaints. It additionally 

said that it may be possible to determine if a complaint involves elder 

fraud using other information in the complaint. We maintain the 

importance of our recommendation to FTC.

Elder financial exploitation is a complex, nationwide problem, and 

combating it effectively requires a concerted, ongoing effort on the part of 

states and localities. It also requires support and leadership at the federal 

level. Each of the seven federal agencies we reviewed is working to 

address this problem in ways that are consistent with its mission. 

However, preventing and responding to elder financial exploitation also 

calls for a more cohesive and deliberate national strategy. This is an 

opportune time for the federal government to be looking at elder financial 

exploitation, because the Elder Justice Act of 2009 has established the 

Elder Justice Coordinating Council (EJCC)—a group of federal agency 

heads charged with setting priorities, coordinating federal efforts, and 

recommending actions to ensure elder justice nationwide—which has 

recently begun to examine these issues.23 The EJCC can be the vehicle 

for defining and implementing such a national strategy. To this end, in our 

November 2012 report we recommended that the EJCC develop a written 

national strategy for combating elder financial exploitation. Among other 

things, this strategy should ensure coordination of public awareness 

activities across federal agencies; promote agency collaboration; and 

promote investigation and prosecution of elder financial exploitation. The 

EJCC held an official meeting on May 13, 2013. Its working group 

presented a number of recommendations, including ones that focused on 

enhancing interagency collaboration, strategically promoting public 

awareness, and combating financial exploitation. Next steps will include 

receiving public comments and drafting a federal agenda for elder justice 

activities for EJCC consideration.

Chairman Terry, Ranking Member Schakowsky, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer 

any questions you might have.

 

23 Pub. L. No. 11-148, tit. VI, subtit. H, § 6703(a), 124 Stat. 782, 786 (2010) (codified at 42 

U.S.C. § 1397k).
 

Page 13 GAO-13-626T

For questions about this testimony, please contact Kay Brown at (202) 

512-7215 or brownke@gao.gov. Contacts from our Office of 

Congressional Relations and Office of Public Affairs are on the last page 

of this statement. Individuals who made key contributions to this 

testimony include Clarita Mrena, Eve Weisberg, Monika Gomez, Brittni 

Milam, and James Bennett. Contributing to our November 2012 report 

were Andrea Dawson, Gary Bianchi, Jessica Botsford, Jason Bromberg, 

Alicia Cackley, Paul Desaulniers, Holly Dye, Eileen Larence, Jean 

McSween, Chris Morehouse, Claudine Pauselli, Almeta Spencer, Kate 

Van Gelder, and Craig Winslow.

Contacts and 

Acknowledgments 

(131257)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information. 

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.