Page 7

APS
Adult protective Services In-Home Overview

The mission of Adult Protective Services is to protect people age 65 and older and adults with disabilities from abuse, neglect, and financial 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 financially exploited, and are age 65 or older or age 18-64 with a disability.

Total Average Filled Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff*

Caseworkers
538.7
Supervisors
85.5
Other Staff
135.6
APS Program Support
75.0
Total APS In-Home Staff
834.8

Worker demographic

Demographic Subcategory Number or Percent
Turnover Rate
n/a
25.2%
Agency Tenure
Less than 1 Year
21.6%
1-3 Years
19.0%
Greater than 3 Years
59.5%
Entry Salary*
n/a
$30,532.92
Average Age
n/a
41.0
Race/Ethnicity
African American
34.0%
Anglo
36.1%
Hispanic
28.3%
Other
1.7%

Supervisor Demographics

Demographic Subcategory Number or Percent
Turnover Rate
n/a
8.0%
Tenure as Supervisor
Less than 1 Year
21.2%
1-3 Years
23.5%
Greater than 3 Years
55.3%
Entry Salary*
n/a
$41,416.08
Average Age
n/a
46.6
Race/Ethnicity
African American
34.1%
Anglo
38.8%
Hispanic
25.9%
Other
1.2%

APS Expenditures*

APS In-Home Staff
$44,338,990
Purchased Client Services
$7,688,766
Total APS Expenditures
$52,027,756

*Source: DFPS Office of Finance and FY2016-17 LAR (plus benefit replacement pay)

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 2014

  • Completed In-Home Investigations: 81,681
  • Validated In-Home Investigations: 54,731
  • Completed In-Home Service Delivery Stages 41,496

Most Common...

Person reporting abuse/neglect/exploitation:

  • Medical Personnel (21.7%)
  • Allegation validated: Physical Neglect (69.0%)
  • Validated perpetrator:
    • Relationship: Adult Children (36.8%),
    • Gender: Female (52.8 %)
    • Age: Over 45 (58.0%)
  • Characteristic of client:
    • Gender: Female (59.8%)
    • Age: 65 and Older (60.4%)

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 2014

State Total: 3,086,103

Region Population Age 65 and Older
1 Lubbock
114,032
2 Abilene
93,914
3 Arlington
749,409
4 Tyler
196,272
5 Beaumont
125,426
6 Houston
647,612
7 Austin
355,649
8 San Antonio
364,653
9 Midland
78,781
10 El Paso
99,190
11 Edinburg
261,165
Grand Total
3,086,103

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 Disabled Adult Population Ages 18 to 64 years
Fiscal Year 2014

State Total: 1,724,408

Region Disabled Population
Ages 18-64 Years
1 Lubbock
58,231
2 Abilene
45,749
3 Arlington
387,728
4 Tyler
102,698
5 Beaumont
75,860
6 Houston
352,814
7 Austin
200,546
8 San Antonio
215,041
9 Midland
45,259
10 El Paso
59,566
11 Edinburg
180,916
Grand Total
1,724,408

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 2014

Priority Intake Percent
Priority 1
15,165
14.7%
Priority 2
60,185
58.4%
Priority 3
20,687
20.1%
Priority 4
6,987
6.8%
Grand Total
103,024
100%

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

Source of Report for APS In-Home Intake* Reports
Fiscal Year 2014

Sources County Percent
Medical Personnel (22,069)
22,069
21.0%
Relative (17,605)
17,605
16.8%
Community Agency (13,777)
13,777
13.1%
Victim (13,053)
13,053
12.4%
Other (9,765)
9,765
9.3%
Provider (6,684)
6,684
6.4%
Friend-Neighbor (6,075)
6,075
5.8%
Law Enforcement (5,126)
5,126
4.9%
Anonymous (2,863)
2,863
2.7%
Financial Institution (2,267)
2,267
2.2%
Parent (1,362)
1,362
1.3%
DFPS Staff (1,203)
1,203
1.1%
State Agency (817)
817
0.8%
School (612)
612
0.6%
Unrelated Home Member (430)
430
0.4%
Legal/Court (419)
419
0.4%
Institutional Personnel (342)
342
0.3%
Day Care Provider (181)
181
0.2%
Religious Entity (178)
178
0.2%
Parent's Paramour (26)
26
0.0%
24 Hour Care Provider (24)
24
0.0%
Blank/Unknown (5)
5
0.0%
Statewide
104,883
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 2014

Region Intakes*
1 Lubbock
6,073
2 Abilene
6,159
3 Arlington
20,826
4 Tyler
5,996
5 Beaumont
5,126
6 Houston
18,701
7 Austin
11,160
8 San Antonio
12,616
9 Midland
3,317
10 El Paso
3,672
11 Edinburg
9,301
Unknown
77
State Total
103,024

*Intakes included by date intake closed.

Back to top

Page 12

APS In-Home Intakes, Completed and Validated Cases
Fiscal Years Fiscal Years 2012 - 2014

Priority Intakes* Completed Investigations Validated Cases
2012
107,203
87,487
59,595
2013
87,260
69,383
48,392
2014
103,024
81,681
54,731

* Intakes included by date intake closed

Incidence of Maltreatment per 1,000 Adults in Texas Adult Population by Region
Fiscal Year 2014

Region Incidence per 1,000 Adults
1 Lubbock
24.0
2 Abilene
27.5
3 Arlington
10.1
4 Tyler
11.3
5 Beaumont
13.7
6 Houston
10.2
7 Austin
9.1
8 San Antonio
8.9
9 Midland
16.6
10 El Paso
11.8
11 Edinburg
10.7
Statewide Total
11.4

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 2014

State Total: 48,392

Region Validated In-Home Investigations
1 Lubbock
4,138
2 Abilene
3,844
3 Arlington
11,507
4 Tyler
3,371
5 Beaumont
2,751
6 Houston
10,178
7 Austin
5,072
8 San Antonio
5,188
9 Midland
2,053
10 El Paso
1,869
11 Edinburg
4,734
Blank/Unknown County
26
Total
54,731

Note: 26 validated investigations did not have a county designated.

Validated In-Home Investigations, Fiscal Year 2014 by County

Back to top

Page 14

Completed APS In-Home Investigations by Region
Fiscal Year 2014

Region Validated Invalid Unable to Determine Other* Total
1 Lubbock
4,138
810
261
106
5,315
2 Abilene
3,844
735
219
88
4,886
3 Arlington
11,507
3,107
1,730
376
16,720
4 Tyler
3,371
908
378
104
4,761
5 Beaumont
2,751
716
212
208
3,887
6 Houston
10,178
3,193
1,295
379
15,045
7 Austin
5,072
2,288
692
302
8,354
8 San Antonio
5,188
2,916
623
463
9,190
9 Midland
2,053
487
148
33
2,721
10 El Paso
1,869
669
243
106
2,887
11 Edinburg
4,734
2,405
473
267
7,879
Unknown
26
5
3
2
36
Total
54,731
18,239
6,277
2,434
81,681

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

Note: 36 investigations had an "unknown" region. Of those, 26 were Validated, 5 were Invalid, 3 were Unable to Determine and 2 were listed as Other.

APS In-Home Daily Caseload Fiscal Year 2014

Region Caseload
1 Lubbock
22.9
2 Abilene
22.0
3 Arlington
28.5
4 Tyler
22.0
5 Beaumont
29.0
6 Houston
31.5
7 Austin
28.1
8 San Antonio
32.9
9 Midland
26.6
10 El Paso
33.6
11 Edinburg
40.1
State Average
29.4

Back to top

Page 15

Completed APS In-Home Investigations by Region and Disposition
Fiscal Year 2014

Region Average Length (Days) Invalid Valid Progressed* Valid Not Progressed Unable to Determine Other** Region Subtotal
1 Lubbock
28.7
810
3,714
424
261
106
5,315
2 Abilene
30.2
735
2,901
943
219
88
4,886
3 Arlington
37.6
3,107
7,781
3,726
1,730
376
16,720
4 Tyler
37.5
908
2,685
686
378
104
4,761
5 Beaumont
45.6
716
2,360
391
212
208
3,887
6 Houston
44.8
3,193
8,411
1,767
1295
379
15,045
7 Austin
42.9
2,288
3,665
1,407
692
302
8,354
8 San Antonio
52.0
2,916
3,864
1324
623
463
9,190
9 Midland
42.2
487
1,597
456
148
33
2,721
10 El Paso
43.6
669
1,045
824
243
106
2,887
11 Edinburg
51.8
2,405
3,633
1101
473
267
7,879
Unknown
40.4
5
6
20
3
2
36
Statewide
42.2
18,239
41,662
13,069
6,277
2,434
81,681

* 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 2010-2014

Fiscal Year Percent
2010
15.2%
2011
15.8%
2012
16.3%
2013
15.2%
2014
16.5%

Recidivism* of APS In-Home Cases by Region
Fiscal Years 2014

Region Percent Recidivism
1 Lubbock
25.5%
2 Abilene
22.1%
3 Arlington
15.8%
4 Tyler
15.1%
5 Beaumont
15.5%
6 Houston
15.0%
7 Austin
16.2%
8 San Antonio
14.7%
9 Midland
18.8%
10 El Paso
14.4%
11 Edinburg
14.8%
State Average
16.5%

*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 2014

Validated APS Victims Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Race/
Ethnicity		 Percent of Total
Anglo
17,338
31.7%
11,438
20.9%
48
0.1%
28,824
52.7%
African American
7,209
13.2%
4,400
8.1%
12
0.0%
11,621
21.3%
Hispanic
7,049
12.9%
5,377
9.8%
17
0.0%
12,443
22.7%
Native American
78
0.1%
47
0.1%
0
0.0%
125
0.2%
Asian
220
0.4%
124
0.2%
1
0.0%
345
0.6%
Other
823
1.5%
535
1.0%
14
0.0%
1,372
2.5%
Total
32,717
59.8%
21,921
40.1%
92
0.1%
54,730
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 2014

Characteristic Count Percentage
Disabled
21,657
39.6%
Aged
33,073
60.4%
Total
54,730
100%
Characteristic Count Percentage
Female
32,717
59.8%
Male
21,921
40.1%
Unknown
92
0.1%
Total
54,730
100%

Back to top

Page 17

Perpetrator Characteristics In Validated APS In-Home Investigations (Characteristic as % of Total Validated Perpetrators*) Fiscal Year 2014

Perpetrator Characteristic: Age

Age Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Age Total Percent of Total
Under 18
63
1.4%
90
2.0%
0
0.0%
153
3.4%
18-25
152
3.4%
176
4.0%
1
0.0%
329
7.4%
26-35
337
7.6%
269
6.0%
2
0.1%
608
13.7%
36-45
443
9.9%
334
7.5%
3
0.1%
780
17.5%
Over 45
1,358
30.5%
1,217
27.3%
11
0.2%
2,586
58.0%
Unknown
2
0.0%
2
0.0%
1
0.0%
5
0.0%

Perpetrator Characteristic: Race/Ethnicity**

Race/Ethnicity Female Percent of Total Male Percent of Total Unknown Percent of Total Race/
Ethnicity		 Percent of Total
Anglo
1,082
24.2%
1,037
23.2%
5
0.1%
2,124
47.5%
African American
462
10.3%
332
7.4%
3
0.1%
797
17.8%
Hispanic
624
14.0%
565
12.7%
3
0.1%
1,192
26.8%
Native American
3
0.1%
3
0.1%
0
0.0%
6
0.2%
Asian
25
0.6%
14
0.3%
0
0.0%
39
0.9%
Other
159
3.6%
137
3.1%
7
0.1%
303
6.8%

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
58
1.3%
85
1.9%
0
0.0%
143
3.2%
Divorced
204
4.6%
129
2.9%
0
0.0%
333
7.5%
Married
568
12.7%
506
11.3%
2
0.0%
1,076
24.0%
Separated
69
1.5%
49
1.1%
0
0.0%
118
2.6%
Single, Never Married
295
6.6%
372
8.3%
0
0.0%
667
14.9%
Widowed
132
3.0%
35
0.8%
0
0.0%
167
3.8%
Unknown
1,029
23.1%
912
20.5%
16
0.4%
1,957
44.0%
Total Perpetrators
2,355
52.8%
2,088
46.8%
18
0.4%
4,461
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 2014

Perpetrator Type Number Percent
Adult Children
1,644
36.8%
Spouse
592
13.3%
Other
444
10.0%
Grandchildren
430
9.6%
Parent
386
8.7%
Sibling
268
6.0%
Other Relatives
247
5.5%
Service Provider
222
5.0%
No Relationship
124
2.8%
Friend-Neighbor
76
1.7%
Unknown
17
0.4%
Facility-Institutional Staff
11
0.2%
State Total
4,461
100.0%

*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 2014

Region Referrals
1 Lubbock
190
2 Abilene
160
3 Arlington
1,581
4 Tyler
449
5 Beaumont
152
6 Houston
1,980
7 Austin
894
8 San Antonio
175
9 Midland
153
10 El Paso
209
11 Edinburg
212
Unknown
4
State Total
6,159

NOTE: Referral may have been made in previous fiscal year

APS Victims of Family Violence in Validated In-Home Investigations by Region
Fiscal Year 2014

Region Victims
1 Lubbock
134
2 Abilene
143
3 Arlington
717
4 Tyler
159
5 Beaumont
106
6 Houston
506
7 Austin
350
8 San Antonio
379
9 Midland
53
10 El Paso
145
11 Edinburg
317
State Total
3,009

Back to top

Page 19

Validated Allegations in APS In-Home Investigations by Type of Abuse/Neglect/Financial Exploitation
Fiscal Year 2014

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
22
53
1,063
479
66
3,891
2 Abilene
43
63
974
268
72
3,553
3 Arlington
282
239
2,959
1,326
293
10,473
4 Tyler
63
58
552
187
42
3,123
5 Beaumont
33
45
542
164
34
2,571
6 Houston
133
200
2,313
1,037
192
9,432
7 Austin
115
123
1,299
756
160
4,417
8 San Antonio
138
182
1,027
330
157
4,646
9 Midland
16
20
681
356
16
1,899
10 El Paso
44
35
594
309
52
1,641
11 Edinburg
96
89
1,020
790
135
4,211
Unknown
1
1
9
8
0
24
State Total
986
1,108
13,033
6,010
1,219
49,881

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
0
1
5,575
7.7%
4,137
7.6%
2 Abilene
0
1
4,974
6.9%
3,844
7.0%
3 Arlington
0
7
15,579
21.5%
11,507
21.0%
4 Tyler
0
1
4,026
5.6%
3,371
6.2%
5 Beaumont
0
3
3,392
4.7%
2,751
5.0%
6 Houston
0
5
13,312
18.4%
10,178
18.6%
7 Austin
0
5
6,875
9.5%
5,072
9.3%
8 San Antonio
0
7
6,487
9.0%
5,188
9.5%
9 Midland
0
1
2,989
4.1%
2,053
3.8%
10 El Paso
0
3
2,678
3.7%
1,869
3.4%
11 Edinburg
0
7
6,348
8.8%
4,734
8.6%
Unknown
0
0
43
0.1%
26
0.0%
State Total
0
41
72,278
100%
54,730
100%

*Victims have been unduplicated by investigation stage.

Duration of Service Delivery Stages for APS In-Home Cases,
During Fiscal Year 2014

Days Cases %
Under 30
22,910
55.2%
31-60
10,236
24.7%
61-90
4,340
10.4%
91-120
2,017
4.9%
121-180
1,360
3.3%
181-365
571
1.4%
Over 1 Year
62
0.1%
Total
41,496
100%

Back to top

Page 20

Completed Service Delivery Stages in APS In-Home Cases
During Fiscal Year 2014

Region Cases %
1 Lubbock
3,621
8.7%
2 Abilene
3,012
7.3%
3 Arlington
7,821
18.8%
4 Tyler
2,725
6.6%
5 Beaumont
2,333
5.6%
6 Houston
8,052
19.4%
7 Austin
3,656
8.8%
8 San Antonio
3,842
9.3%
9 Midland
1,454
3.5%
10 El Paso
1,078
2.6%
11 Edinburg
3,882
9.4%
Unknown
20
0.0%
State Total
41,496
100%

Non-Purchased Client Services Delivered for APS In-Home Cases by Region
Fiscal Year 2014

Region Social Casework Other Government Agency Legal Total
1 Lubbock
4,263
79
3
4,345
2 Abilene
2,916
89
5
3,010
3 Arlington
8,830
195
58
9,083
4 Tyler
3,351
110
1
3,462
5 Beaumont
2,598
147
0
2,745
6 Houston
10,027
309
9
10,345
7 Austin
3,861
177
10
4,048
8 San Antonio
4,892
151
10
5,053
9 Midland
1,639
27
2
1,668
10 El Paso
1,489
29
29
1,547
11 Edinburg
4,365
88
17
4,470
Unknown
11
1
0
12
State Total
48,242
1,402
144
49,788

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