Transcript Document

San Francisco's Forensic Center:
Building PG and APS Collaboration
Talitha Guinn
Elder Abuse Prevention at IOA
Jill Nielsen, LCSW
Adult Protective Services, City and County of San Francisco
Mary Ann Warren, JD
Office of the Public Guardian, City and County of San Francisco
Goals of Presentation
..................................................................
 Explore APS and PG frameworks for protecting vulnerable
adults.
 Facilitate communication between APS and PG to improve
the quality of APS referrals for conservatorship and to
facilitate the investigation process for conservators.
 Learn how a multi-disciplinary forensic center model can
improve client outcomes and enhance coordination and
understanding between the PG and APS.
 Learn to build collaboration between the PG and APS.
Why we are here
To help those who help the vulnerable
How does the Forensic Center improve
APS/PG collaboration?
 Neuropsych evaluations as valuable tool
 Cross-training about roles of partner agencies
 Neutral communication forum
 Early intervention – allows PG to provide
feedback about information needed and
possible alternatives
 More appropriate and robust referrals from
APS
Our Model
..................................................................
We are a true public/private partnership
 Community-based
 No medical center or medical model (LA and UCI)
Our partners are representatives from the following agencies:
 DAAS
 APS
 Public Guardian (PG)






SFPD
District Attorney
City Attorney
Ombudsman
IOA – Coordinates FC
IOA contracts to provide
 Geriatrician
 Psychologist
Beginning
• Precursors to Forensic Center
– Multidiciplinary Team Meeting (MDT) Started at IOA in 1981
– Multidisciplinary Assessment Team (MAT) starts with vision from IOA,
Social Services, Law Enforcement and the DA’s Office
• DA Harris proposed new elder abuse center in SF late 2006
• Planning with all partner agencies
• Funding provided through Archstone Foundation and The City
and County of San Francisco
• Launched Jan 2008 – Five Year Anniversary 1/2013!
Forensic Centers
..................................................................
• Four Forensic Centers in California
–
–
–
–
San Francisco www.sfeafc.org
Orange County www.elderabuseforensiccenter.com
LA www.lacelderabuse.org
San Diego
http://www.sandiego.gov/sandiegofamilyjusticecenter/services
• Three similar models in US outside of CA
– Texas
www.uth.tmc.edu/schools/med/imed/divisions/geriatrics/teaminstitute.html
– New York http://nyceac.com/
– Hawaii http://www.elderjusticehonolulu.com/
Services
..................................................................
 Forensic Review meetings – Formal case
consultation by our multi-disciplinary team of
professionals
 Coordinated Homevisits – Two or more participating
FC team members go to the client’s home together
i.e. Police and an APS social worker, Geriatrician and
Geropsychologist
 Medical evaluations –
Geriatrician evaluates
medical/mental status at the
request of the team
Services Continued
..................................................................
 Medical record review – Geriatrician reviews to
determine medical status/standard of care inquiries
 Psychological/Neuropsychological Assessments –
Geropsychologist conducts per request of the team
 SFPD – Office Hours at APS
 Collaboration with
community partners and city
agencies on elder abuse
public awareness campaigns,
education to professionals,
and protocol.
Forensic Review Meetings
..................................................................
 Weekly 90 min. meetings at APS office 2-3 times a month
 Discuss ~2 new cases and 3 follow up cases on average
 Referrals of cases from any partner agency
 Most initially from APS
 Case Consultation
 Examine case from a multidisciplinary perspective
 Is this a crime? If so, what is needed for a successful
prosecution?
 What are our goals? Safety – Harm Reduction – Prosecution –
Referral to other agencies
 Discuss protocols, policy, and other “business”
Mission Statement
..................................................................
The San Francisco Elder Abuse Forensic Center will prevent and
combat the abuse, neglect and exploitation of elders and
dependent adults in San Francisco. This will be accomplished with
the following strategies:
 Improve communication and coordination among the legal, medical,
social services professionals who investigate and intervene in cases
of elder and dependent adult abuse.
 Increase access to potential remedies and justice for those who
have been victimized.
 Educate policy makers, professionals, caregivers, older adults and
their families about preventing, reporting, and stopping elder and
dependent adult abuse.
Benefit to APS and PG
..................................................................
 Consultation with Geriatrician – Benefit to PG
and APS for case planning purposes
 Targeted intervention for chronic self-neglect
cases
 Strategic planning with partner agencies to
manage involuntary aspect of service planning
 Relationship Building between all Partner
Agencies
Data Jan 2008 - Present
..................................................................
#
Men
Women
Group
138
217
5
360
%
38.33
60.28
1.39
100.00
Abandonment
8
Abduction
4
Isolation
17
Neglect
71
physical - assault/ battery
37
physical -Chem. Restraint
3
physical -Restraint or deprivation
3
Psychological
60
Self-Neglect
62
Sexual
5
Fin. Real estate
46 Total Financial Abuse
Fin. Other
119
Other/unknown
141 *Undue Influence
Total Meetings (FC
& MDT)
144
Psych Clients
FC Clients
Total Clients
127
360
487
AVG Age
Med Age
75
78
165
576 (multiple types of abuse per case)
Our next data project is mapping abuse by zip code and type!
What Is Adult Protective Services?
..................................................................
Adult Protective Services is a county-based
program that intervenes to remedy or reduce
danger to dependent adults and elders who
are at risk of physical, sexual, mental or
financial abuse, neglect or self-neglect.
Adult Protective Services Mission
..................................................................
To maintain the health and safety of dependent and elder adults
in the community, in the least restrictive environment.
Adult
Protective
Services
Goals
..................................................................
 Protect physical well-being of victims.
 Prevent or intervene to prevent financial
abuse.
 Prevention education and services.
 Delay or prevent institutionalization.
 Maintain independent living.
 Link community services to reduce
repeated referrals.
Types of Abuse
..................................................................







Physical Abuse
Neglect
Psychological
Financial Abuse
Abandonment
Isolation
Self Neglect/Inability to
Manage
APS
Interventions
..................................................................
 Conduct investigation and forward findings to local
law enforcement as appropriate
 Arrange for the immediate safety of the individual
 Develop a plan for the care and safety of the
individual and their property
 Initiate referral for conservatorship, when
necessary
 Refer to community agencies and support resources
 General advocacy
Guiding
Principles
..................................................................
 Respect for self-determination of the client
except when a crime has been committed
 A victim may refuse/withdraw consent at any
time to an investigation or to services by APS,
unless a Penal Code Section has been violated
 If an individual lacks capacity to give consent or
is under the influence of other(s) a petition for
temporary conservatorship may be initiated
 Least restrictive services
Public Guardian
..................................................................
Mission of the Department of
Aging and Adult Services
To assist older adults and adults with disabilities
and their families maximize self-sufficiency,
safety, health and independence so that they can
remain living in the community for as long as
possible and maintain the highest quality of life.
Probate Conservatorship: What is it?
..................................................................
To protect and care for the person and to
administer the estate of those who, without
assistance, cannot provide for the basic needs of
food, shelter, or clothing or are unable to resist
fraud or undue influence
Conservator
of
Person
..................................................................
 There must be evidence that the proposed
conservatee is unable to properly provide for
his personal needs for physical health, food,
clothing, or shelter
 There must be evidence of a correlation
between the deficit and the need for
conservatorship
Conservator of the Estate
..................................................................
There must be evidence that the proposed
conservatee is substantially unable to manage
his financial resources or resist fraud or undue
influence.
Temporary Conservatorship
..................................................................
 There must be evidence of an urgent need such as the need for a medical procedure or
the need to safeguard assets in imminent
danger of loss.
 The probate conservatorship is not renewed
automatically; it remains in place unless the
conservatee or conservator petitions the
Court for termination at any time
Obstacles for PG Conservators
..................................................................
 Limited number of placement opportunities.
 Greater number of clients requiring secure
placements.
 Increasingly complex financial abuse cases.
 T-Cons can only be carried out when there is
an urgent need.
 Changes in requirements about notification to
family members. Cases may be continued
without proper notice.
LPS Mental Health Conservatorship
..................................................................
 Individual is determined to be gravely
disabled secondary to mental illness and
is unable/unwilling to accept treatment
 Is going to be treated in a licensed locked
psychiatric setting following stabilization
of an acute episode
How to use LPS
..................................................................
 Process begins in acute psychiatric setting
 Petition is filed by MD after 5250 (14 day
hold) has been initiated
 This provides for a 30 day period to
investigate need for conservatorship and
alternatives
Obstacles for LPS Conservators
..................................................................
 Effort to use LPS as a means to provide
treatment to chronic substance users
 Limited availability of locked programs for
mental heath clients who have organic and
substance abuse problems concurrently
Differing Frameworks to Protection
..................................................................
Public Guardian
• Option of last resort
• Court driven and
highly regulated
• Involuntary service
Adult Protective Services
• Crisis Oriented
• Realigned and loosely
regulated
• Voluntary Service
Similar Frameworks to Protection
..................................................................
Public Guardian
Adult Protective Services
Protect clients from
exploitation and abuse
Protect clients from
exploitation and abuse
Least restrictive options
for care
Least restrictive options
for care
Promote client wellbeing
Right to selfdetermination
Collaborative Interventions through the
Forensic
Center
..................................................................








Criminal remedies
Civil (Probate Conservatorship + referrals)
Enhancing safety
Medical
Psychological Services
Expert recommendations
Expert witness (med and psych)
Outreach
Case
Vignette
..................................................................
 Abused by daughter
“I wish she would die”
 Left in bed without blankets,
windows open in winter
 Fell ill and hospitalized, but not for over 5 days
 FC meeting
 Emergency psych evaluation
 Emergency conservatorship
 Restraining order
 Placed safely and anonymously
Building Collaboration through the
Forensic Center
..................................................................
 Interdisciplinary Education
 Learning about the limits of APS authority
 Role of the probate court for PG cases
 Medical, social work education for partners such as law
enforcement
 Common understanding that conservatorship is not
the quick-fix that we all wish it would be.
Building Collaboration through the
Forensic Center
..................................................................
 Relationships are created and maintained.
 Increased contact between APS/PG staff.
 Common focus on helping vulnerable clients.
 Enhanced understanding about challenges of
each program.
Positive Outcomes from Collaboration
..................................................................
 Improved referral packets from APS
 APS workers have context for the information
required.
 Requests for further information made in
neutral setting and APS willing to cooperate.
 Tools and resources are brought forward during
Forensic Center meetings to assist with referral
process.
Positive Outcomes from Collaboration
..................................................................
 Avoiding Conservatorship
 Creative problem-solving happens during Forensic Center
meetings.
 Conservatorship seen by all as measure of last resort.
Geriatrician provides increased access to SF General
Hospital to enhance safety
Use of 2900 to protect assets
Contacting regulatory boards for follow up on
abusers
Added Benefits
..................................................................
Efficiency
 More direct contact between agencies with
less run around
 Medical consultations
 Psychological evaluations eases
conservatorship process and better care
plans.
Added Benefits
..................................................................
Advocacy Informed by Collaboration
Recognized need for caregiver training
End of life care education
Developed a newsletter to raise awareness about
scams
Police education
Bus Shelter Ads
Challenges
..................................................................
• On-going Education Needed
-Rotation of Forensic Center partners
-Refreshers needed for APS/PG staff
• Demonstrating the Efficiency Aspect of the
Forensic Center to all partners
• Arriving at Consensus about Client Interventions
Challenges
..................................................................
• Lacking Necessary Tools
- Depending on “Watchful Waiting”
• Challenging Client Portraits
• Building a Team
-Engaging assigned representatives and
maintaining their engagement.
Case
Study
..................................................................
Mr. W. thought he won the
lottery. All he had to do was send
$40,000 overseas so that the taxes and handling fees would be covered.
He mentioned this to the bank teller as he exited the bank with a money
order in hand. The bank teller called APS. APS knew who to call at SFPD,
the PG, and the DA’s office. That same day, the police were able to
intercept the payment at FedEX before it went out, and saved Mr. W’s life
savings. The PG prepared and served a “2900” on the bank to marshal
his assets. The PG then petitioned for conservatorship after obtaining a
psychological evaluation through the Forensic Center.
Elder Abuse Prevention
..................................................................
There’s an App for that!
Go to your app store and search ‘368’
App update. Over 2150 downloads!
Boulder County Area Agency on Aging and
William Mitchell College of Law in Minnesota
Are creating an app based on our model.
IOA exploring funding for app updates and developing an app
for the general public.
http://www.centeronelderabuse.org/368ElderAbuseCA.asp
Civil/Criminal
Elder
Financial
Abuse
Guide
..................................................................
Elder financial abuse can be both a civil wrong and a crime. Civil remedies primarily seek
to help victims recover from the consequences of exploitation; criminal sanctions seek to
punish and deter such wrongful conduct. both serve important public policy objectives
and promote the legislature’s goal of reducing or eliminating elder financial abuse. While
the same wrongful conduct can create both civil and criminal liability, the legal
requirements and the practical considerations of each differ significantly. Generally, civil
lawyers are unaware of the requirements for a successful criminal prosecution; similarly,
prosecutors are often unaware of the requirements for a successful civil action. both may
be frustrated that the other lacks greater interest or insight. The purpose of this
publication is to bridge this gap by providing an overview of the law, issues, and practical
concerns of elder financial abuse from both a civil and criminal perspective. its goal is to
promote understanding between prosecutors and victim’s lawyers with the expectation
that this will lead to greater cooperation and thereby help reduce elder financial abuse
Hard copies available at the IOA table
Download the PDF here:
http://www.ioaging.org/File%20Library/Abuse/CivilCriminalResourceGuide_0512.pdf
The Journey Continues. We have grown as a
team and we continue to re-evaluate our
structure, and services, in an effort to improve
outcomes for our clients.