Executive Function Impairment and Recidivism in Adult Protective Services Clients Referred for a Decision Making Capacity Assessment

Effect of an elder abuse and self-neglect intervention on repeat investigations by adult protective services: RISE project

BACKGROUND

Adult Protective Services (APS) is the primary agency responsible for investigating elder abuse and self-neglect (EASN) allegations in the United States. The harms of EASN are well established; however, APS lacks a conceptually derived evidenced-based intervention phase. RISE is a community-based intervention designed to complement APS that provides enhanced services and a longer intervention phase. The objective of this study was to test whether exposure to the RISE/APS collaboration was associated with reducing the case outcome of recurrence (repeat investigations) compared to usual care APS only services.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study (n = 1947) of two counties in Maine where RISE was available to provide enhanced services to persons referred from APS. An extended regression endogenous treatment Probit model using APS administrative data was used to predict case recurrence.

RESULTS

Between July 2019 and October 2021, 154 cases participated in RISE and 1793 received usual APS only services. 49% of cases in RISE had 2 or more prior substantiated allegations versus 6% for those receiving usual APS care, and 46% of cases in RISE had a recurrence during the observation period versus 6% for usual care group. However, after accounting for the non-random treatment assignment, RISE was associated with a significantly lowered likelihood of recurrence compared to persons receiving usual care provided by APS (probability of recurrence reduced by 0.55 for the Average Treatment Effect on the Treated and 0.26 for the Average Treatment Effect).

CONCLUSIONS

A reduction in recurrence carries important implications for APS clients, costs, resources, and workflow. It may also serve as a proxy indicating a reduction in revictimization and harm for EASN victims.

Who is in the revolving door? Policy and practice implications of recurrent reports to adult protective services

Repeat referral to adult protective services APS (recurrence) is a much-discussed topic among APS agencies as it may indicate ongoing harm, yet there is limited research examining prevalence or causes. This paper provides a foundational investigation of recurrence within a California APS county program. Drawing from thirty-three months of de-identified reports, we used logistic regression to examine the impact of intake report characteristics on repeat referral within one year after baseline case closure. One-fifth of the sample was recurrent (19.9%, n=987/4,958), with self-neglect being the most common type of report to recur (14.3%, n=307/2,141). Overall recurrence was predicted by female gender, older age, living alone, and multiple elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation (ANE) types reported at baseline, and report placed by social service provider, friends, family, landlords, and victim self-reports. Reporters personally related to the victim and social service providers are potential partners in identifying ANE, and alternate intervention approaches may be necessary.

Relationships Among Executive Dysfunction, Constructive Worrying, and Worry Responses in Older Adults

Worry is a ubiquitous human experience and core symptom of anxiety. The present study examined the extent to which specific aspects of worry are related to perceived executive dysfunction in older adults. A total of 100 older adult participants (M age = 68.82 years; range = 65-79 years) completed the Worry Behaviors Inventory, the Coolidge Axis II Inventory Executive Dysfunctions Scale, and the Constructive and Unconstructive Worry Questionnaire. Multiple regression analyses found that worry constructiveness and response behaviors were predictive of executive dysfunction. Specifically, greater avoidance behaviors and unconstructive worry were uniquely predictive of greater executive dysfunctions. Thus, findings indicate that worry constructiveness and approaches to worry management are significantly related to cognitive functioning in older adults. These findings imply a need to assess both worry and executive dysfunction to more accurately determine causal factors regarding anxiety and cognitive decline in older adults.

Decisional Capacity and Personality Disorders: Substantially Unable or Substantially Unwilling?

Capacity assessments are performed when there is suspicion that a person is unable to adequately care for their physical, medical, or financial well-being. The purpose of these assessments is to inform the legal system as to whether or not guardianship may be necessary. It is well established that certain mental illnesses, such as neurocognitive disorders (dementia) or psychotic disorders (like schizophrenia), may diminish capacity and, in some cases, lead to the need for establishment of a legal guardian. However, personality disorders are another common category of mental illness which may impair decision-making. There is very little information in the literature about how or why these disorders could impair capacity, and thus, it can often be difficult to discern whether clients with personality disorders are substantially unable to care for themselves-versus unwilling to act in a way contrary to their ingrained habits. We present a series of three cases in which clients are determined to lack capacity primarily mediated by a personality disorder diagnosis. They are demonstrated to have mild deficits in cognitive functioning, but they show impaired decision-making out of proportion to these deficits. In all three cases, it is apparent that the personality disorder is substantially impairing their ability to care for themselves. Discussion includes consideration for ways to incorporate evaluations of cognitive function, activities of daily living, and personality considerations into capacity assessments, and how to approach recommendations (such as guardianship vs. less restrictive option) based on both level and scope of impairment.