Will Sacramento County adopt grand jury’s financial elder abuse recommendations?
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Over 97% of confirmed financial elder abuse cases in six years were not prosecuted.
- Sacramento County cannot reliably track cases sent to law enforcment for investigation.
- The grand jury said law enforcement agencies are often slow to assign detectives to these cases.
Sacramento County Adult Protective Services’ internal reporting systems do not require consistent data entry. That means the agency cannot reliably provide the number of financial elder abuse cases referred to law enforcement, track those referrals or follow-up to learn how those cases concluded.
A grand jury investigating how reports of financial elder abuse are documented, investigated and prosecuted in Sacramento County found that authorities aren’t doing enough to investigate and prosecute financial elder abuse in Sacramento County.
In a response approved by the county Board of Supervisors, the Adult Protective Services agency agreed with the grand jury’s finding. But the agency said it cannot adopt and implement a reliable procedure to collect data on elder abuse cases by Dec. 31, which was the grand jury’s recommendations in its June report. In addition to a handful of recommendations to address underlying issues the grand jury required a formal written response to its findings within 60 days from the county and law enforcements agencies.
Shelby Boston, director of the county’s Department of Child, Family and Adult Services, said at a Aug. 5 Board of Supervisors meeting, the department needs more time for additional analysis to implement “a more robust procedure for collecting data.”
The county department oversees the agency that refers financial elder abuse cases to law enforcement. In a response to the grand jury report, the county said it will need a minimum of a year of data to determine the extent of the problem and software capabilities. That would be followed by, if needed, the development of a written policy or practice protocol that has to be approved with a plan for training and implementation to ensure all staff complete necessary documentation and reporting to law enforcement.
Supervisor Phil Serna, who represents the county’s District 1 and serves as the board’s chairperson, said the working relationship between the grand jury and the county is “kind of blessed and cursed.” He said the grand jury is made up of residents willing to give up their time to review important subjects and offer their input, but a county this size has “a lot of moving parts.”
“I don’t think anyone can reasonably expect that in a relatively brief amount of time you’re going to be able to completely understand, circumnavigate some of these complex matters to the point where it’s completely understood,” Serna said moments before he and the rest of the board voted to approve county’s response to the grand jury’s 20-page report on financial elder abuse. “It is no poor reflection on the grand jury.”
The primary function of the grand jury, which is a 19-member panel selected annually, is to serve as an independent “watchdog” investigative body to review and investigate the performance of county, city and local governing entities including special districts.
What happened to 2,309 confirmed cases?
From 2019 through 2024, the county’s Adult Protective Services agency initiated 11,391 investigations into reported financial elder abuse, which was about 40% of all types of elder abuse reported in those six years. Out of those reports, the agency confirmed 3,987 cases of financial elder abuse, according to the grand jury report.
Out of the nearly 4,000 confirmed cases, the county agency referred 1,678 financial abuse cases to law enforcement for further investigation. The grand jury asked the agency why 2,309 confirmed cases were not referred to law enforcement.
The agency’s staff claimed that they report all confirmed cases to law enforcement, but they said how this information is recorded depends upon the practice of the individual social worker who conducted the intake and investigation, according to the grand jury’s report.
“The grand jury was therefore unable to verify the number of confirmed cases actually referred to law enforcement or determine whether APS is indeed complying with its reporting mandate,” the grand jury said in its report.
The Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office has management systems that enable internal tracking of all submitted reports and the status of cases referred for investigation. In his response to the grand jury’s report, Sheriff Jim Cooper said neither of these systems specifically tracks, categorizes or follows the status of cases referred by Adult Protective Services.
“The Sheriff’s Office would be open to maintaining a database to track APS referrals if given the adequate funding for such a project,” Cooper said in his response to the grand jury. “Absent these resources, the Sheriff’s Office will not be able to meet this recommendation.”
He said it would be more efficient for Adult Protective Services to maintain detailed records and update the status of each referred case instead of having each law enforcement agency maintain separate databases.
In its response to the grand jury, the Folsom Police Department said its officers have no problems collecting and tracking referrals from Adult Protective Services. Interim Police Chief Randy Randy Ulibarri said each referral is reviewed by a detective sergeant and assigned to a detective or patrol officers through its records management system.
“We have multiple detectives with expertise in this area of investigation who also teach other officers how to respond to reports of elder financial abuse,” Ulibarri said in his response to the grand jury.
Citrus Heights Mayor Jayna Karpinski-Costa also told the grand jury the city has no problems tracking reported financial elder abuse. She said the Citrus Heights Police Department maintains management systems that track all submitted reports and the status of cases referred for investigation, which were used to gather data requested by the grand jury.
Over 97% of cases were not prosecuted
The grand jury also learned that law enforcement agencies in those same six years referred 123 cases to the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office for potential prosecution, and the DA’s Office filed criminal charges in 99 cases. That means that over 97% of confirmed cases of financial elder abuse of victims 65 and older were not prosecuted.
In his response to the grand jury report, District Attorney Thien Ho said his office filed criminal charges in 81% of the financial elder abuse cases submitted for review. He said that is more than the filing rate for all criminal cases, which is about 66%.
“Not every case submitted by law enforcement is filed because prosecutors must evaluate each case individually and file only when supported by sufficient admissable evidence,” Ho said in the written response to the grand jury. “Elder financial abuse cases are not rejected for lack of prosecuting staff.”
The District Attorney’s Office and law enforcement agencies in the county do not have dedicated staff specifically trained to investigate and prosecute financial elder abuse, Elizabeth TenPas, grand jury foreperson for 2024-2025, said in a news release.
The DA’s Office has an Elder Abuse Unit with two attorneys. But its website makes its clear that it does not prosecute elder financial abuse, “except in some rare occasions.” The Elder Abuse Unit handles felony cases of elder and dependent adult physical and mental abuse, neglect and cases in which an elder or dependent adult is a victim of a crime.
Ho agrees with the grand jury that his elder abuse prosecutors have not received specific training for financial elder abuse cases, but he said a prosecutor with 28 years of experience is assigned as a supervisor of that unit. He also said his office has prosecutors in its Special Investigations and Real Estate units who receive extensive and ongoing training in financial abuse crimes and are available as a resource in elder abuse cases.
The grand jury report provided some examples of elder financial abuse which include:
- Stealing an elder person’s money or possessions that may have taken a lifetime to accumulate.
- Coercing or deceiving an elder person into signing a legal document, such as a will, trust or trust deed, that did not reflect the victim’s wishes or while the victim lacked the ability to recognize what was happening;
- Breaching a fiduciary duty as a conservator or under a power of attorney.
Financial elder abuse a low priority
In interviews with local law enforcement, the grand jury learned these agencies are often slow to assign detectives to investigate financial abuse cases referred by Adult Protective Services.
Those interviewed also told the grand jury that the lack of resources, both personnel and funding, was the reason why elder financial abuse isn’t given a higher priority, stressing that cases involving physical abuse take precedence over financial abuse.
“It stands to reason if the DA is rarely prosecuting elder financial abuse, law enforcement agencies are going to assign a low priority to investigating such crimes,” the grand jury said in its report. “As explained to the Grand Jury, it is up to the DA to take the lead in creating a culture in which all financial crimes against elderly victims are aggressively investigated and prosecuted.”
Folsom police disagreed with this finding, saying the department places a priority on all forms of elder abuse. The department in 2024 received 16 reports of elder abuse, which resulted in five arrests or citations, seven referrals to the DA’s Office for arrest warrants, according to the department’s response to the grand jury. Two police investigations were suspended for lack of evidence or other investigative reasons.
Both the DA’s Office and the Sheriff’s Office said they have asked the Board of Supervisors for additional funding to hire needed prosecutors and investigators, but the majority of those requests have been denied.
The sheriff said his office will continue to prioritize investigations of murder, violent crimes and sexual abuse, and they are willing to dedicate more resources to financial elder abuse with more funding and personnel.
“Assigning a detective exclusively to investigate financial elder abuse cases would require reassigning personnel from areas currently deemed higher priority,” Cooper said in his response.
Citrus Heights’s mayor somewhat agreed with the grand jury. She said in her response that police have to prioritize elder violent crimes over financial elder abuse. In 2024, Citrus Heights police investigated 73 financial else abuse cases, including 11 referred by Adult Protective Services, and 17 cases were sent to the DA’s Office for potential prosecution.
“The Citrus Heights Police Department prioritizes violent crimes including murder and sexual abuse,” Karpinski-Costa said in her city’s response to the grand jury. “All other crimes are prioritized based on solvability factors and the likelihood of seeking prosecution against the perpetrator.”
The grand jury found the county has no Financial Abuse Specialist Team, so there is no adequate coordination between agencies to combat elder financial abuse. The DA’s Office and the Sheriff’s Office agreed with this finding.
The district attorney said the team was started in 2004 has been paused due the COVID-19 pandemic, staffing changes and limited resources. Ho said his office, Adult Protective Services and local nonprofit group WEAVE formed a financial elder abuse working group earlier this year.
The Sheriff’s Office would be open to participating in a countywide Financial Abuse Specialist Team.
“However, at this time, we do not have the resources or personnel to establish such a team, so it would be necessary for another agency to take the lead,” Cooper said in his response to the grand jury. “Our level of participation would depend on the financial and personnel requirements involved.
