Elder financial exploitation, one type of elder abuse, can occur in conjunction with, and might lead to other types of elder abuse.exploitation of older adults can take many forms and perpetrators can include family members, friends, legal guardians, paid caregivers, and strangers. Table 1 provides some examples. 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. Moreover, financial capacity—the capacity to manage money and financial assets in ways that meet one’s needs—generally declines with age, and this decline may go unaddressed until it is too late. 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. Seven federal agencies whose missions correspond to the state and local social service, criminal justice, and consumer protection systems are positioned to contribute to state and local efforts in this area: AoA, CFPB, Justice, FTC, FinCEN, SEC, and the Postal Inspection Service (see fig. 1). At the state and local level, APS agencies investigate and substantiate reports of suspected elder abuse, including financial exploitation and, if the client agrees to accept help, can arrange for services to secure their safety and meet their basic needs. APS can also refer cases to law enforcement agencies or district attorneys for criminal investigation and prosecution. Whether an elder financial exploitation case comes to the attention of criminal justice authorities through referral from APS or some other means, law enforcement agencies and district attorneys can exercise broad discretion when deciding if a case warrants any action on their part. State-level consumer protection agencies—such as banking, securities, and insurance regulators—conduct examinations to ensure that rules to protect consumers are followed and take enforcement actions against institutions that break the rules. State attorneys general may also prosecute cases or respond to consumer protection inquiries. Although combating elder financial abuse is explicitly included in the mission of only one federal agency, CFPB’s Office for the Financial Protection of Older Americans (Office for Older Americans), it is implicit in the mission of others that work to combat elder abuse, protect consumers or investors, or prevent fraud (see fig. 2). Federal legislation has established a foundation for the federal government to assume a leadership role in combating elder abuse, including elder financial exploitation, and basis for greater coordination across federal agencies in this area. The Older Americans Act of 1965 (OAA) requires AoA to develop objectives, priorities, policy, and a long- term plan for facilitating the development, implementation, and continuous improvement of a coordinated, multidisciplinary elder justice system in the United States; promoting collaborative efforts and diminishing duplicative efforts in the development and carrying out of elder justice programs at the federal, state, and local levels; establishing an information clearinghouse to collect, maintain, and disseminate information concerning best practices and resources for training, technical assistance, and other activities to assist states and communities to carry out evidence-based programs to prevent and address elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation; working with states, Justice, and other federal agencies to annually collect, maintain, and disseminate data on elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation, to the extent practicable; establishing federal guidelines and disseminating best practices for uniform data collection and reporting by states; conducting research on elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation; and carrying out a study to determine the extent of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation in all settings. Pub. L. No. 111-148, tit. VI, subtit. H, 124 Stat. 119, 782-804 (2010) (codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 1320b-25, 1395i-3a, and 1397j-1397m-5). The EJA was enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was signed into law on March 23, 2010. o annually collect and disseminate data regarding elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation of elders in coordination with Justice;o develop and disseminate information on best practices and provide training for carrying out adult protective services; o conduct research related to the provision of adult protective o provide technical assistance to states and others that provide or fund the provision of adult protective services; o establish 10 elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation forensic centers, in consultation with Justice, that would (1) conduct research on forensic markers for elder abuse, neglect, or exploitation, and methodologies for determining when and how health care, emergency, social and protective, and legal service providers should intervene and when these cases should be reported to law enforcement; (2) develop forensic expertise regarding elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation; and (3) use the data they have collected to develop, in coordination with Justice, the capacity of geriatric health care professionals and law enforcement authorities to collect forensic evidence, including evidence needed to determine if elder abuse, neglect, or exploitation has occurred. § 2042(a)(1)(C), 124 Stat. 794 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1397m-1(a)(1)(C)). § 2042(a)(1)(D), 124 Stat. 794 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1397m-1(a)(1)(D)). § 2042(a)(1)(E), 124 Stat. 794 (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1397m-1(a)(1)(E)). Grants to state and local governments for demonstration projects that test methods and training to detect or prevent elder abuse or financial exploitation; and An Elder Justice Coordinating Council and an Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation to develop priorities for the elder justice field, coordinate federal activities, and provide recommendations to Congress. Currently, the Elder Justice Coordinating Council consists of the following federal agencies: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Corporation for National and Community Service, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Justice, Department of Labor, Department of the Treasury, Department of Veterans Affairs, Federal Trade Commission, Postal Inspection Service, and Social Security Administration. Coordination among federal agencies is also a feature of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which established CFPB, requiring it to coordinate its consumer protection efforts of older CFPB’s Office for Older Americans is adults with other federal agencies. charged with facilitating the financial literacy of seniors on protection from unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices and on current and future financial choices. According to officials in the four states we visited, financial exploitation of older adults by financial services providers, power of attorney agents, and in-home caregivers is particularly difficult to prevent. Older adults may consult with a variety of financial professionals, such as financial planners, broker-dealers, and insurance agents. 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. Individuals who present themselves as financial planners may adopt a variety of titles and designations. In some cases, privately conferred designations—such as Certified Financial Planner®—require formal certification procedures, including examinations and continuing professional education credits, while other designations may merely signify that membership dues have been paid. Designations that imply expertise in advising older adults have been a source of particular concern among state securities regulators, according to the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA). Older adults may lack information to distinguish among the various senior specific designations. Indeed, in 2011, we reported that there is some confusion about what these titles mean and the level of skill required to obtain them. Exploitation by “Senior Specialist” Calling himself a senior financial advisor, an insurance agent licensed in California met an 89-year-old partially blind, intermittently confused man at a senior center. The agent persuaded him to invest about $250,000 in a flexible premium deferred annuity, warning him not to let anyone talk him out of it. As a result, the man was left with no penalty-free access to his entire life savings for the next 11 years, while the agent earned a commission on this transaction. To earn about $16,000 more in commissions, the agent then convinced the man to move half the amount invested in the annuity into unregistered stock, which cost the man a surrender fee of about $10,000. The stock turned out to be worthless, leaving the man with a fraction of what he had when he met the agent. Attempts by the man’s nephew to retrieve his uncle’s money were unsuccessful. The nephew reported the insurance agent to the California Department of Insurance, which eventually revoked the agent’s license, but local police did not pursue the older adult’s case. While the insurance agent faced no criminal charges in this case, he was later sentenced to 3 years in prison for defrauding another older adult. Another concern is that older adults may be fooled by investment 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. SEC, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), and NASAA examined 110 firms that sponsored free lunch seminars from April 2006 to June 2007 offered in seven states and found that 63 seminars used misleading advertising and sales materials, 25 seminars resulted in unsuitable recommendations, and in 14 seminars there were fraudulent practices used, such as selling fictitious investments.