Page 7

APS
Adult protective Services In-Home Overview

The mission of Adult Protective Services is to protect the elderly and adults with disabilities from abuse, neglect, and exploitation by investigating and providing or arranging for services necessary to alleviate or prevent further maltreatment. APS serves persons who are reported to be abused, neglected, or exploited and age 65 or older or age 18-64 with a disability.

Total Average Filled Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff

Caseworkers
541.5
Supervisors
83.5
Other Staff
135.0
APS Program Support
76.4
Total APS In-Home Staff
836.4

Worker demographic

Demographic Subcategory Number or Percent
Turnover Rate
 n/a
17.8%
Agency Tenure
 Less than 1 Year
14.9%
1-3 Years
23.7%
Greater than 3 Years
61.4%
Entry Salary
 n/a
$29,932.92
Average Age
 n/a
41.5
Race/Ethnicity
 African-American
33.5%
Anglo
36.6%
Hispanic
28.5%
Other
1.5%

Supervisor Demographics

Demographic Subcategory Number or Percent
Turnover Rate
 n/a
11.5%
Tenure as Supervisor
 Less than 1 Year
20.9%
1-3 Years
20.9%
Greater than 3 Years
58.1%
Entry Salary
 n/a
$38,145.96
Average Age
 n/a
46.3
Race/Ethnicity
 African-American
33.7%
Anglo
43.0%
Hispanic
22.1%
Other
1.2%

APS Expenditures

APS In-Home Staff
$48,282,192
Purchased Client Services
$7,455,546
Total APS Expenditures
$55,737,738

Description of the Report Investigation Process

Step 1: Report Assigned for Investigation
Step 2: Investigation/Assessment Activities
  • 24 hour initiation
  • Immediate intervention
  • Initial face-to-face visit
  • Client risk assessment
  • Collateral contacts
  • Evidence collection
  • Referral to law enforcement
Step 3: Investigation Findings
  • Validity of allegations
  • Need for protective services
  • Referral for guardianship or legal services under Chapter 48, Human Resources Code
Step 4: Case Closed or
Step 5: Service Delivery
  • Rent/utility restoration
  • Health services
  • Legal services
  • Social services
  • Emergency Placement

Note: The chart is for reference only and does not necessarily represent the flow of a case.

Statistics FY 2013

  • Completed In-Home Investigations: 69,383
  • Validated In-Home Investigations: 48,392
  • Completed In-Home Service Delivery Stages 38,197

Most Common...

  • Person reporting abuse/neglect/exploitation: Medical Personnel (21.7%)
  • Allegation validated: Physical Neglect (67.3%)
  • Validated perpetrator:
    • Relationship: Adult Children (41.9%),
    • Gender: Male (51.3 %)
    • Age: Age Over 45 (46.1%)
  • Characteristic of client:
    • Gender: Female (59.9%)
    • Age: Over 65 (61.5%)

Back to top

Page 8

Legal Responsibility for Adult Protective Services

Statutory References

Federal: Title XX, Social Security Act
State: Human Resources Code, Chapters 40 and 48
Texas Family Code, Title V
Health and Safety Code, Chapter 532 and Chapters 591-595

Major Provisions

  • Mandatory reporting of abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation of adults who are age 65 or older or adults with disabilities
  • Receipt and investigation of all reports (unless patently false); initiation of investigations within 24 hours of receipt of report
  • Responsibility for referring reports to other state agencies when DFPS is not the appropriate investigating agency
  • Provision or arrangement of services needed to prevent or alleviate abuse, neglect, and/or financial exploitation
  • Enhancing and developing community resources in an effort to increase awareness of abuse, neglect and financial exploitation, and address increasing needs of APS clients
  • Responsibility for referring adult victims of abuse, neglect and/or financial exploitation to the Department of Aging and Disability Services (DADS) for guardianship services when these persons appear to lack the capacity to consent to services, there is no other potential guardian available and guardianship is the least restrictive alternative that will ensure the person's safety and well-being
  • Assessment of factors that may indicate an adult's possible lack of capacity to consent to services and pursuit of a medical or mental health evaluation, if indicated
  • Using the least restrictive alternative in the provision of protective services
  • Authority to seek court orders when necessary to gain access to the individual, to prevent interference with the provision of voluntary protective services, to access records or documents, and to initiate and provide emergency protective services (e.g., a removal), including after-hours and on holidays, without a court order
  • Requirement to notify law enforcement if APS removes a person from their home under a court order and their home will be left unattended
  • Requirement to notify law enforcement if APS suspects that a person, who has been abused, neglected, or financially exploited in a manner that constitutes a criminal offense
  • Confidentiality of case records
  • Requirement to make referrals to the Employee Misconduct Registry for certain validated perpetrators

Other Programmatic Information:

Factors Contributing to Abuse, Neglect, and
Exploitation:
  • Rapidly growing population of older adults
  • Growing number of younger adults with disabilities
  • Alcohol and drug dependency
  • Poverty
  • Lack of affordable housing and high costs of utility bills
  • Inadequate access to health care and costly medications
  • Toxic family relationships
  • Dependence of family or others on the income of older
    adults and adults with disabilities
  • Violence as a coping mechanism in society
  • Physical and mental stress of caregiving in traditionally nonviolent,
    caring households
  • Denial of benefits, such as SSI and Medicaid, to some
    immigrants
Challenges:
  • Affordable and safe housing
  • Waiting lists and other limitations in the availability of in-home
    care and home health care
  • Shortage of resources to serve persons denied long-term
    care and other benefits
  • Gaps in surrogate decision-making processes for
    incapacitated persons in hospitals, nursing homes, and
    community-based settings
  • Inadequate community services for persons with a mental
    illness, including those discharged from state hospitals
  • Lack of statewide access to preventative or early
    intervention services such as long-term case management
    for older adults and adults with disabilities who are at risk,
    but not yet experiencing abuse, neglect, or exploitation
  • Hiring and maintaining skilled frontline caseworkers and
    supervisors
  • Specialized geriatric social work training is not keeping pace
    with the ever-increasing number of older Americans

Back to top

Page 9

Texas Adult Population Ages 65 and Over for Fiscal Year 2013

State Total: 2,954,572

Region Population Over 65
1 Lubbock
110,967
2 Abilene
91,801
3 Arlington
714,187
4 Tyler
190,196
5 Beaumont
121,992
6 Houston
615,181
7 Austin
338,225
8 San Antonio
349,101
9 Midland
76,544
10 El Paso
95,673
11 Edinburg
250,705
Grand Total
2,954,572

Population Data Source: Texas State Data Center, University of Texas (San Antonio) - based on Census 2010 data

Texas Adult Population Ages 65 and Over by County

Back to top

Page 10

Texas Adult Population with a disability
Ages 18 to 64 years
Fiscal Year 2013

State Total: 1,710,430

Region Population Ages 18-64 Years
1 Lubbock
61,384
2 Abilene
50,026
3 Arlington
381,486
4 Tyler
102,500
5 Beaumont
85,698
6 Houston
343,592
7 Austin
195,951
8 San Antonio
209,253
9 Midland
47,822
10 El Paso
55,109
11 Edinburg
177,609
Grand Total
1,710,430

Population Data Source: Texas State Data Center, University of Texas (San Antonio) - based on Census 2010 data

Texas Disabled Adult population ages 18 to 64 years by County

Back to top

Page 11

APS Intake* Reports by Priority
Fiscal Year 2013

Priority Intake Percent
Priority 1 10,000 11.5%
Priority 2 50,397 57.8%
Priority 3 20,950 24.0%
Priority 4 5,913 6.8%
Grand Total 87,260 100%

* Intakes included by the date intake closed.
Refer to the definitions section for priority definitions.

APS In-Home Intake* Reports by Source
Fiscal Year 2013

Sources Number Percent
Medical Personnel
 19,242 21.7%
Relative
 15,279 17.2%
Community Agency
 11,507 13.0%
Victim
 10,165 11.5%
Other
 8,236 9.3%
Provider
 6,295 7.1%
Friend-Neighbor
 5,281 6.0%
Law Enforcement
 4,316 4.9%
Anonymous
 2,262 2.5%
Financial Institution
 1,535 1.7%
DFPS Staff
 1,213 1.4%
Parent
 1,035 1.2%
State Agency
 629 0.7%
School
 498 0.6%
Legal/Court
 373 0.4%
Unrelated Home Member
 302 0.3%
Institutional Personnel
 289 0.3%
Religious Entity
 137 0.2%
Day Care Provider
 114 0.1%
Parent's Paramour
 22 0.0%
24 Hour Care Provider
 16 0.0%
Blank/Unknown
 1 0.0%
Statewide
 88,747 100.0%

Note: A report of abuse/neglect/financial exploitation may come from multiple sources making the source total higher than the total number of intakes.
* Intakes included by date intake closed

APS In-home Intake Reports by Region
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Intakes
1 Lubbock
5,039
2 Abilene
4,931
3 Arlington
17,034
4 Tyler
5,470
5 Beaumont
4,452
6 Houston
15,507
7 Austin
9,384
8 San Antonio
11,027
9 Midland
2,936
10 El Paso
3,221
11 Edinburg
8,192
Unknown
67
State Total
87,260

Note: 67 reports did not have a region identified.

Back to top

Page 12

APS In-Home Intakes*, Completed Investigations and Validated Cases
Fiscal Years Fiscal Years 2011 - 2013

Priority Intakes* Completed Investigations Validated Cases
2011 108,580 87,741 58,068
2012 107,203 87,487 59,595
2013 87,260 69,383 48,392

* Intakes included by date intake closed

Incidence of Maltreatment per 1,000 Adults in Texas Adult Population by Region
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Incidence per 1,000 Adults
1 Lubbock 20.4
2 Abilene 22.7
3 Arlington 9.0
4 Tyler 10.4
5 Beaumont 11.1
6 Houston 9.1
7 Austin 8.0
8 San Antonio 9.2
9 Midland 14.5
10 El Paso 12.5
11 Edinburg 10.8
Grand Total 10.4

Note: Calculations are based on the percent of validated APS in-home investigations. Unreported incidences are not reflected.

Back to top

Page 13

Adult Protective Services Validated In-Home Investigations
Fiscal Year 2013

State Total:48,392

Region Validated In-Home Investigations
1 Lubbock
3,510
2 Abilene
3,219
3 Arlington
9,809
4 Tyler
3,052
5 Beaumont
2,297
6 Houston
8,766
7 Austin
4,261
8 San Antonio
5,120
9 Midland
1,802
10 El Paso
1,889
11 Edinburg
4,646
Blank/Unknown County
21
Total
48,392

Note: 19 validated investigations did not have a county designated.

Validated In-Home Investigations, Fiscal Year 2013 by County

Back to top

Page 14

Completed APS In-Home Investigations by Region
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Validated Invalid Unable to Determine Other* Total
1 Lubbock
3,510
627
230
81
4,448
2 Abilene
3,219
619
172
62
4,072
3 Arlington
9,809
2,085
1,290
271
13,455
4 Tyler
3,052
772
294
110
4,228
5 Beaumont
2,297
586
158
171
3,212
6 Houston
8,766
2,341
979
289
12,375
7 Austin
4,261
1,945
545
196
6,947
8 San Antonio
5,120
2,699
608
326
8,753
9 Midland
1,802
388
143
37
2,370
10 El Paso
1,889
572
236
84
2,781
11 Edinburg
4,646
1,438
449
179
6,712
Unknown
21
4
3
2
30
Total
48,392
14,076
5,107
1,808
69,383

* "Other" category refers to those investigations that workers could not complete for some reason, e.g. clients died or cases were misclassified.

Note: 30 investigations had an "unknown" region. Of those, 21 were Validated, 4 were Invalid, 3 were Unable to Determine and 2 were listed as Other.

APS In-Home Daily Caseload Fiscal Year 2013

Region Caseload
1 Lubbock
21.5
2 Abilene
17.7
3 Arlington
25.8
4 Tyler
18.9
5 Beaumont
21.9
6 Houston
28.1
7 Austin
22.9
8 San Antonio
30.5
9 Midland
20.6
10 El Paso
28.2
11 Edinburg
36
State Average
25.7

Back to top

Page 15

Completed APS In-Home Investigations by Region and Disposition
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Average Length (Days) Invalid Valid Progressed* Valid Not Progressed Unable to Determine Other** Region Subtotal
1 Lubbock
30.8
627
3,225
285
230
81
4,448
2 Abilene
26.9
619
2,556
663
172
62
4,072
3 Arlington
39.3
2,085
7,380
2,429
1,290
271
13,455
4 Tyler
41.1
772
2,543
509
294
110
4,228
5 Beaumont
44.0
586
2,000
297
158
171
3,212
6 Houston
42.3
2,341
7,460
1,306
979
289
12,375
7 Austin
38.6
1,945
3,319
942
545
196
6,947
8 San Antonio
52.1
2,699
4,086
1035
608
325
8,753
9 Midland
33.3
388
1,504
298
143
37
2,370
10 El Paso
46.7
572
1,203
686
236
84
2,781
11 Edinburg
47.6
1,438
4,010
636
449
179
6,712
Unknown
43.5
4
8
13
3
2
30
Statewide
41.3
14,076
39,293
9,099
5,107
1,807
69,383

* Valid investigations in which the client requires services are "progressed" into the service delivery stage.

** "Other" category refers to those investigations that workers could not complete for some reason, e.g. clients died or cases were misclassified.

Recidivism* of APS In-Home Cases
Fiscal Years 2009-2013

Fiscal Year Percent
2009
14.2%
2010
15.2%
2011
15.8%
2012
16.3%
2013
15.2%

Recidivism* of APS In-Home Cases by Region
Fiscal Years 2013

Region Percent Recidivism
1 Lubbock
21.2%
2 Abilene
21.3%
3 Arlington
14.8%
4 Tyler
13.5%
5 Beaumont
14.9%
6 Houston
13.3%
7 Austin
15.6%
8 San Antonio
14.1%
9 Midland
18.0%
10 El Paso
12.6%
11 Edinburg
14.3%
State Average
15.2%

*Recidivism is a measure of the percentage of APS clients referred to the APS system more than once during the fiscal year, including clients who refused services and were re-returned.

Back to top

Page 16

Characteristics of Validated APS Victims in Completed In-Home Investigations
Fiscal Year 2013

Validated APS Victims Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Race/
Ethnicity		 Percent of Total
Anglo
15,137
31.3%
9,882
20.4%
28
0.1%
25,047
51.8%
African American
6,234
12.9%
3,738
7.7%
12
0.0%
9,984
20.6%
Hispanic
6,555
13.5%
5,071
10.5%
9
0.0%
11,635
24.0%
Native American
75
0.2%
40
0.1%
0
0.0%
115
0.2%
Asian
216
0.4%
126
0.3%
0
0.0%
342
0.7%
Other
754
1.6%
512
1.1%
3
0.0%
1,269
2.6%
Total
28,971
59.9%
19,369
40.0%
52
0.1%
48,392
100%

* As recommended by the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) to ensure consistency across all HHSC agencies, in 2012, the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) adopted the HHSC methodology on how to categorize race and ethnicity.   As a result, data broken down by race/ethnicity in 2012 and after is not directly comparable to race/ethnicity data in 2011 and before. 

In-Home Validated Victims in Completed Investigations
Fiscal Year 2013

Characteristic Count Percentage
Disabled
18,619
38.5%
Aged
29,773
61.5%
Total
48,392
100%
Characteristic Count Percentage
Female
28,971
59.9%
Male
19,369
40.0%
Unknown
52
0.1%
Total
48,392
100%

Back to top

Page 17

Perpetrator Characteristics In Validated APS In-Home Investigations (Characteristic as % of Total Validated Perpetrators*) Fiscal Year 2013

Perpetrator Characteristic: Age

Age Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Age Total Percent of Total
Under 18
61
1.6%
60
1.5%
1
0.0%
122
3.1%
18-25
171
4.3%
176
4.5%
1
0.0%
348
8.8%
26-35
299
7.6%
245
6.2%
0
0.0%
544
13.8%
36-45
442
11.2%
360
9.2%
6
0.2%
808
20.5%
Over 45
1,044
26.5%
1,060
26.9%
5
0.1%
2,109
53.6%
Unknown
0
0.0%
1
0.0%
2
0.1%
3
0.1%

Perpetrator Characteristic: Race/Ethnicity**

Race/Ethnicity Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Race/
Ethnicity		 Percent of Total
Anglo
913
23.2%
927
23.6%
3
0.1%
1,843
46.8%
African American
384
9.8%
263
6.7%
3
0.1%
650
16.5%
Hispanic
563
14.3%
593
15.1%
2
0.1%
1,158
29.4%
Native American
8
0.2%
1
0.0%
0
0.0%
9
0.2%
Asian
14
0.4%
10
0.3%
0
0.0%
24
0.6%
Other
135
3.4%
108
2.7%
7
0.2%
250
6.4%

Perpetrator Characteristic: Marital Status

Marital Status Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Marital Status Total Percent of Total
Child, Not Applicable
63
1.6%
57
1.4%
0
0.0%
120
3.1%
Divorced
173
4.4%
123
3.1%
0
0.0%
296
7.5%
Married
485
12.3%
467
11.9%
0
0.0%
952
24.2%
Separated
56
1.4%
45
1.1%
0
0.0%
101
2.6%
Single, Never Married
223
5.7%
356
9.0%
1
0.0%
580
14.7%
Widowed
53
1.3%
18
0.5%
0
0.0%
71
1.8%
Unknown
964
24.5%
836
21.3%
14
0.4%
1,814
46.1%
Total Perpetrators
2,017
51.3%
1,902
48.3%
15
0.4%
3,934
100%

*Does not include self as perpetrator investigations (i.e. a finding of self-neglect).

** As recommended by the Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) to ensure consistency across all HHSC agencies, in 2012, the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) adopted the HHSC methodology on how to categorize race and ethnicity.   As a result, data broken down by race/ethnicity in 2012 and after is not directly comparable to race/ethnicity data in 2011 and before. 

Note: Each victim may have more than one perpetrator at the end of an investigation.

Back to top

Page 18

Perpetrators* in Validated In-Home Investigations
Fiscal Year 2013

Perpetrator Type Number Percent
Adult Children
1,650
41.9%
Spouse
533
13.5%
Grandchildren
414
10.5%
Parent
250
6.4%
Other
241
6.1%
Service Provider
231
5.9%
Other Relatives
196
5.0%
Sibling
191
4.9%
No Relationship
135
3.4%
Friend-Neighbor
74
1.9%
Unknown
13
0.3%
Facility-Institutional Staff
6
0.2%

*Does not include self as perpetrator investigations (i.e. a finding of self-neglect).
Note: Each victim may have more than one perpetrator at the end of an investigation.

Number of Referrals Made to Law Enforcement in Completed APS In-Home Cases by Region
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Referrals
1 Lubbock
235
2 Abilene
140
3 Arlington
1,328
4 Tyler
401
5 Beaumont
106
6 Houston
1,739
7 Austin
859
8 San Antonio
247
9 Midland
156
10 El Paso
221
11 Edinburg
208
Unknown
5
State Total
5,645

NOTE: Referral may have been made in previous fiscal year

APS Victims of Family Violence in Validated In-Home Investigations by Region
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Victims
1 Lubbock
165
2 Abilene
141
3 Arlington
608
4 Tyler
173
5 Beaumont
133
6 Houston
438
7 Austin
362
8 San Antonio
440
9 Midland
76
10 El Paso
206
11 Edinburg
323
State Total
3,065

Back to top

Page 19

Validated Allegations in APS In-Home Investigations by Type of Abuse/Neglect/Financial Exploitation
Fiscal Year 2013

Table Includes Abuse/Neglect Types:
Emotional/Verbal Abuse, Exploitation, Medical Neglect, Mental Health Neglect, Physical Abuse, and Physical Neglect.

Region Emotional/
Verbal Abuse		 Exploitation Medical Neglect Mental Health Neglect Physical Abuse Physical Neglect
1 Lubbock
70
45
967
434
62
3,259
2 Abilene
41
60
861
250
48
2,943
3 Arlington
212
199
2,570
1,208
228
8,924
4 Tyler
47
69
520
172
63
2,798
5 Beaumont
31
42
474
146
31
2,115
6 Houston
119
141
2,374
1,216
151
8,007
7 Austin
122
131
1,080
622
160
3,612
8 San Antonio
163
171
1,061
410
155
4,507
9 Midland
33
24
605
323
39
1,648
10 El Paso
59
73
661
278
49
1,584
11 Edinburg
101
90
996
695
108
4,126
Unknown
0
0
7
3
0
20
State Total
998
1,045
12,176
5,757
1,094
43,543

Table Includes Abuse/Neglect Validated Victims*:
Suicidal Threat, Sexual Abuse, Total of Types, Percent of Types by Region, Unduplicated Validated Victims*, and Percent of Unduplicated types by Region.

Region Suicidal Threat Sexual Abuse Total Percent of Types by Region Unduplicated Validated Victims* Percent of Unduplicated Validated Victims* by Region
1 Lubbock
2
0
4,839
7.5%
3,510
7.3%
2 Abilene
2
1
4,206
6.5%
3,219
6.7%
3 Arlington
5
5
13,351
20.6%
9,809
20.3%
4 Tyler
2
1
3,672
5.7%
3,052
6.3%
5 Beaumont
3
0
2,842
4.4%
2,297
4.7%
6 Houston
9
6
12,023
18.6%
8,766
18.1%
7 Austin
8
0
5,735
8.9%
4,261
8.8%
8 San Antonio
5
4
6,476
10.0%
5,120
10.6%
9 Midland
2
0
2,674
4.1%
1,802
3.7%
10 El Paso
6
0
2,710
4.2%
1,889
3.9%
11 Edinburg
7
1
6,124
9.5%
4,646
9.6%
Unknown
0
0
30
0.0%
21
0.0%
State Total
51
18
64,682
100%
48,392
100%

*Victims have been unduplicated by investigation stage.

Duration of Service Delivery Stages for APS In-Home Cases,
During Fiscal Year 2013

Days Cases %
Under 30
20,014
52.4%
31-60
10,038
26.3%
61-90
4,299
11.3%
91-120
1,984
5.2%
121-180
1,244
3.3%
181-365
566
1.5%
Over 1 Year
52
0.1%
Total
38,197
100%

Back to top

Page 20

Completed Service Delivery Stages in APS In-Home Cases
During Fiscal Year 2013

Region Cases %
1 Lubbock
2,937
7.7%
2 Abilene
2,472
6.5%
3 Arlington
7,236
18.9%
4 Tyler
2,654
6.9%
5 Beaumont
1,992
5.2%
6 Houston
7,040
18.4%
7 Austin
3,247
8.5%
8 San Antonio
4,144
10.8%
9 Midland
1,466
3.8%
10 El Paso
1,113
2.9%
11 Edinburg
3,866
10.1%
Unknown
30
0.1%
State Total
38,197
100%

Non-Purchased Client Services Delivered for APS In-Home Cases by Region
Fiscal Year 2013

Region Social Casework Other Government Agency Legal Total
1 Lubbock
3,764
111
6
3,881
2 Abilene
2,740
81
9
2,830
3 Arlington
8,106
152
16
8,274
4 Tyler
3,189
115
1
3,305
5 Beaumont
2,124
122
2
2,248
6 Houston
8,911
185
4
9,100
7 Austin
3,493
218
10
3,721
8 San Antonio
5,215
167
18
5,400
9 Midland
1,502
42
2
1,546
10 El Paso
1,603
34
12
1,649
11 Edinburg
4,624
171
21
4,816
Unknown
9
0
0
9
State Total
45,280
1,398
101
46,779

Note: Clients in validated cases may receive more than one service.

Social Casework - Actions taken by the caseworker to provide assistance to a victim of abuse, neglect or exploitation, in such areas as counseling/education, assistance with benefits, and mediation. These actions may include referrals to community organizations that provide direct services to the client.

Other Government Agency - This term is used to describe services that were provided by another government agency. For example, the client was referred to the Social Security Administration, or the Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services in order to resolve abuse, neglect or exploitation.

Legal - Legal actions that are taken as a result of Adult Protective Services involvement. An example would be Emergency Order for Protective Services.

Back to top

Previous Section | Back to top | Next Section