[Senate Report 114-430]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                      Calendar No. 635
114th Congress }                                              { Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session    }                                              { 114-430

======================================================================
 
           ELDER ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROSECUTION ACT OF 2016

                                _______
                                

               December 20, 2016.--Ordered to be printed

   Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of December 10 
                  (legislative day, December 9), 2016

                                _______
                                

          Mr. Grassley, from the Committee on the Judiciary, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 3270]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the 
bill (S. 3270), a bill to prevent elder abuse and exploitation 
and improve the justice system's response to victims in elder 
abuse and exploitation cases, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon, with an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
  I. Background and Purpose of the Elder Abuse Prevention and 
     Prosecution Act of 2016..........................................2
 II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration..................6
III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill...........................7
 IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.......................10
  V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation....................................12
 VI. Conclusion......................................................12
VII. Changes to Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........13

I. Background and Purpose of the Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution 
                              Act of 2016


               A. BACKGROUND AND THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    For a nation that prides itself on institutionalized care 
and financial support for its older population--with the 
enactment of the Medicare and Social Security programs, for 
example--the United States continues to fall short in efforts 
to end the abuse and exploitation of our nation's elderly 
population. Congress identified elder abuse as a serious 
problem decades ago,\1\ but eliminating the problem is 
difficult, research suggests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\See Subcomm. on Health and Long-Term Care, U.S. House Select 
Comm. on Aging, Elder Abuse: A National Disgrace, Comm. Pub. No. 99-502 
(1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Elder abuse encompasses physical abuse, neglect, financial 
exploitation, sexual abuse, and emotional or psychological 
abuse. It can be perpetrated over the phone by a scammer 
located thousands of miles away (even overseas). It also can be 
perpetrated at home by a caretaker or family member who is 
entrusted with a victim's assets or life savings. In all of its 
various forms, elder abuse can negatively impact victims' 
health and well-being, increasing the likelihood of their 
experiencing injuries and developing chronic health 
conditions.\2\ These costs also burden our nation's health care 
and justice systems at every level of government. Perhaps most 
troubling, elder abuse robs older Americans of their dignity 
and quality of life: victims reportedly have a 300 percent 
higher mortality rate than their peers who were not abused.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Id.
    \3\Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At this time, we lack a complete picture of the problem's 
full impact, not only because data collection is limited, but 
also because elder abuse in all its forms is believed to be 
significantly underreported. Some have argued that elder abuse 
directly impacts at least 10 percent (roughly 5 million) of 
older Americans each year.\4\ Many older Americans are 
reluctant to report abuse or exploitation due to feelings of 
embarrassment, a refusal to acknowledge that they were 
victimized, or, as is often the case, a reliance on the 
perpetrator as their caretaker. Some estimates indicate that 
only one in 14 cases of abuse are reported to adult protective 
services or law enforcement agencies.\5\ In the case of elder 
financial exploitation, underreporting is likely to be even 
more significant: only one in 44 cases is brought to the 
attention of authorities, victim advocates maintain.\6\ Many 
victims likely are not receiving adequate help and their 
abusers are escaping justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Elder Justice Coordinating Council, U.S. Dept. of Health and 
Human Services, Report of the Secretary Detailing the Activities of the 
Elder Justice Coordinating Council for 2012-2014, 1 (June 2015) 
available at http://www.aoa.acl.gov/AoA_Programs/Elder_Rights/EJCC/
docs/EJCC-2012-2014-report-to-congress.pdf.
    \5\Id. at 1.
    \6\Elder Justice Initiative, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Financial 
Exploitation Frequently Asked Questions, available at https://
www.justice.gov/elderjustice/support/faq#is-elder-abuse-underreported 
(last visited December 15, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Compounding these issues, America's elderly population is 
steadily growing. The U.S. Census Bureau projects that by 2025, 
more than 62 million Americans will have reached the age of 65 
or older, an increase of 78 percent from 2001.\7\ By the same 
time, more than 7.4 million Americans will be age 85 or older, 
an increase of nearly 68 percent from 2001.\8\ As the 
population of older Americans increases, it is likely that--
absent strong, effective, and targeted intervention--the scope 
and prevalence of elder abuse also will increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\National Institute of Justice, ``Elder Abuse,'' available at 
http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/elder-abuse/pages/welcome.aspx.
    \8\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Of all the forms of elder abuse, financial exploitation 
probably is the most widespread, costing seniors in the United 
States an estimated $2.9 billion annually.\9\ Another recent 
study suggests that the cost may, in fact, be considerably 
higher than previously thought, up to $36 billion annually.\10\ 
Due to its scope and persistently low reporting rates, elder 
financial exploitation has been dubbed the crime of the 21st 
century.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\MetLife Mature Market Institute et al., The MetLife Study of 
Elder Financial Abuse: Crimes of Occasion, Desperation, and Predation 
against America's Elders, 2 (June 2011) available at https://
www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/2011/mmi-elder-
financial-abuse.pdf.
    \10\True Link, The True Link Report on Elder Financial Abuse 2015 
(January 2015), available at http://bit.ly/28JhDBS.
    \11\MetLife Mature Market Institute et al., The MetLife Study of 
Elder Financial Abuse: Crimes of Occasion, Desperation, and Predation 
against America's Elders 5 (June 2011) available at https://
www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/studies/2011/mmi-elder-
financial-abuse.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Elder financial exploitation encompasses a range of 
deceitful and criminal acts, including, but not limited to, 
mail-, telephone-, and Internet-based scams, fraudulent 
manipulation of wills and other testamentary instruments, the 
use (or even liquidation) of property or possessions without 
permission, theft of government benefits, and abuse of powers 
under a guardianship, conservatorship, or power of attorney. In 
some cases, it may result in the loss of a lifetime of savings 
or a family's home.
    To date, multiple Federal agencies have taken steps to 
combat elder abuse and exploitation, yet gaps remain in our 
understanding of this problem:
    Lack of Training. According to a report by the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO), ``effectively investigating and 
prosecuting elder financial exploitation requires special 
skills and knowledge, which [adult protective services 
agencies'] workers, law enforcement officers, and district 
attorneys sometimes lack.''\12\ Law enforcement officials at 
the local level reported receiving little or no training on 
elder financial exploitation and indicated such training is 
necessary to build expertise, GAO noted.\13\ GAO also indicated 
that some prosecutors may hesitate to pursue cases of suspected 
elder financial exploitation ``because of competing priorities 
and limited resources, a continuing belief that elder financial 
exploitation is primarily a civil issue, or a view of older 
adult victims as unreliable witnesses.''\14\ According to the 
Department of Justice (DOJ), law enforcement personnel who 
encounter elder financial exploitation may misclassify it as a 
civil matter and not respond, if they lack expertise or 
training in this area.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\U.S. Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-13-110, Elder Justice: 
National Strategy Needed to Effectively Combat Elder Financial 
Exploitation, 23 (November 2012) available at http://gao.gov/assets/
660/650074.pdf.
    \13\Id.
    \14\Id.
    \15\Elder Justice Initiative, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Society's 
Response to Financial Exploitation, available at https://
www.justice.gov/elderjustice/research/societys-response-to-financial-
exploitation.html (last visited September 19, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lack of Necessary Data. Prosecutors, law enforcement, and 
other practitioners at every level of government continue to be 
hamstrung by a scarcity of data. According to the Federal Elder 
Justice Coordinating Council, there is a ``significant lack of 
evidence and data about effective methods and practices to 
prevent elder abuse,'' despite a growing body of evidence about 
the scope of such abuse and its negative impacts.\16\ The 
National Center on Elder Abuse maintains that knowledge about 
elder abuse and exploitation lags as much as two decades behind 
the fields of child abuse and domestic violence.\17\ Agencies 
collect some pertinent data (e.g., in some communities, elder 
abuse incidents are routinely reported to adult protective 
services agencies), but sizeable gaps remain.\18\ If the United 
States is to effectively fight back against the ``silent 
epidemic'' of elder abuse and exploitation, it must arm itself 
with the tools to do so by closing these knowledge gaps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\EJCC 2014 Report, supra note 2 at 2.
    \17\National Center on Elder Abuse, Statistics/Data, available at 
https://ncea.acl.gov/whatwedo/research/statistics.html#01.
    \18\The Justice Department, for example, currently ``does not 
collect data on the prevalence of elder financial exploitation 
nationwide.'' U.S. Dept. of Justice response to Chairman Grassley (June 
21, 2016) available at https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/
2016-06-21%20DOJ%20to%20CEG%20-%20Elder%20Justice%20Initiative.pdf. 
Also see ``Elder Financial Exploitation Letter to Department of 
Justice'' (May 9, 2016) available at http://1.usa.gov/28JV5PF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lack of Coordination among Federal Agencies and with 
States. Effectively combating elder abuse requires coordinated 
efforts. The complex nature of financial crimes against elders, 
in particular, necessitates a multidisciplinary approach--
drawing upon the resources and expertise of multiple agencies 
and entities at the State and Federal levels. The Elder Justice 
Act of 2009 (EJA)\19\ called for the formation of an Elder 
Justice Coordinating Council (EJCC), the purpose of which is to 
make recommendations for the coordination of activities between 
Federal, State, local, and private agencies and entities 
relating to elder abuse and exploitation. (Members of the 
Council include representatives of DOJ, the Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS), and other agencies.) Despite 
this ongoing effort at collaboration, however, GAO has found 
that the United States lacks a clearly articulated national 
strategy to prevent and respond to elder financial 
exploitation.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\See 42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1320b-25, 1395i-3a, and 1397j-1397m-5.
    \20\U.S. Gov't Accountability Office, GAO-11-208, Elder Justice: 
Stronger Federal Leadership Could Enhance National Response to Elder 
Abuse, 38 (March 2011) available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/
d11208.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Coordination efforts also are hampered by breakdowns in 
coordination and communication. As noted by GAO, some State and 
local law enforcement officials reported feeling uncertain 
about how to seek Federal support to respond to interstate and 
international cases of financial exploitation. (Some reported a 
lack of contacts at the Federal level for purposes of elder 
abuse case referrals, while others indicated that the lines of 
communication between local and Federal agencies tend to be 
informal, based simply on whom local law enforcement officers 
know in a Federal agency.\21\) Others voiced concerns to GAO 
that Federal agencies do not pursue enough of the cases that 
are referred to them.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\GAO-13-110, supra note 12 at 29.
    \22\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In sum, as the nation's elderly population grows, our 
families and communities need appropriate tools and resources 
to prevent further instances of elder abuse and exploitation. 
Federal resources must be more effectively focused, to better 
prevent and respond to these incidents.

       B. THE ELDER ABUSE PREVENTION AND PROSECUTION ACT OF 2016

    The Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act of 2016 
(``EAPPA'') would help combat elder abuse and financial 
exploitation in the United States. The legislation promotes the 
investigation and prosecution of perpetrators who prey upon 
seniors, enhanced data collection, and robust elder abuse 
prevention programs.
    The legislation calls for the designation of at least one 
Assistant United States Attorney (``AUSA'') to serve as Elder 
Justice Coordinator in each Federal judicial district. Each 
such Coordinator would not only prosecute elder abuse cases but 
also would serve as a point-person on these cases in each 
judicial district. This individual is encouraged to engage in 
public outreach to help raise awareness about abuse and 
exploitation, ensure the collection of accurate data in elder 
abuse cases, and serve as an accessible subject matter expert 
or resource.
    This legislation also calls for training for Federal Bureau 
of Investigation (``FBI'') agents on the investigation of elder 
abuse cases. DOJ would have to establish an elder abuse 
resource group to facilitate information sharing among Federal 
prosecutors and, more broadly, to support the prosecution of 
elder abuse cases. The purpose of such requirements is to 
ensure that each district's Elder Justice Coordinator has the 
necessary investigative and institutional support.
    The bill also calls for the influential Attorney General's 
Advisory Committee (``AGAC''), which is comprised of leading 
U.S. Attorneys from across the country, to establish an elder 
abuse working group for the purpose of providing advice to the 
Attorney General on DOJ's elder abuse policies and strategies.
    Under this legislation, the Attorney General must designate 
an Elder Justice Coordinator for the entire Justice Department 
within sixty days of the bill's enactment. Among other 
responsibilities, the Coordinator would be charged with 
enhancing DOJ's understanding, prevention, detection of, and 
response to, elder abuse. By establishing individual Elder 
Justice Coordinators in each district that have the support of 
the FBI, EOUSA, the AGAC, and the DOJ Elder Justice 
Coordinator, the legislation thus ensures that elder abuse 
investigations and prosecutions will be accorded high priority.
    In addition, this bill requires the Chairman of the Federal 
Trade Commission (``FTC'') to designate an Elder Justice 
Coordinator within the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. 
This individual will be responsible for coordinating and 
supporting the enforcement and consumer education efforts and 
policy activities of the FTC on matters related to elder abuse 
and exploitation. The FTC's Elder Justice Coordinator also will 
serve as a central point of contact for victims, State and 
local government personnel, and others on these matters.
    The bill also beefs up criminal penalties for those 
convicted of financially exploiting seniors through e-mail 
marketing. Mandatory forfeiture and restitution provisions also 
are included in the legislation. These enhanced penalties 
reflect the Committee's concerns about the harms posed by elder 
financial exploitation.
    Because successful prevention and prosecution of elder 
abuse also require the collection of more complete and accurate 
data on elder abuse offenses, the bill tasks the Attorney 
General, in consultation with State and local agencies, with 
developing best practices for data collection. The Attorney 
General also must furnish technical assistance to State and 
local partners on the proper implementation of those best 
practices. Data collection also is promoted at the Federal 
level, as the bill directs HHS to provide DOJ with its annual 
statistical data regarding adult protective services 
investigations and findings on elder abuse cases.
    This legislation also calls for training and technical 
assistance for State investigative, prosecutorial, and 
prevention personnel. Specifically, the Attorney General is 
charged with creating, compiling, and disseminating materials 
to State and local agencies regarding the investigation, 
prosecution, and prevention of elder abuse. The bill also 
authorizes and encourages States to enter into interstate 
agreements and compacts to collaborate and share resources and 
expertise in the fight against elder abuse and exploitation.

          II. History of the Bill and Committee Consideration


                               A. HEARING

    On June 29, 2016, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a 
hearing entitled ``Protecting Older Americans from Financial 
Exploitation.'' The hearing examined the growing threat of 
elder financial exploitation and the adequacy of the Federal 
government's response. The hearing consisted of two panels of 
witnesses.
    Witnesses on the first panel included Mr. John A. Horn, 
Acting United States Attorney, Northern District of Georgia, 
U.S. Department of Justice and Ms. Lois C. Greisman, Associate 
Director, Division of Marketing Practices, Bureau of Consumer 
Protection, U.S. Federal Trade Commission. Witnesses on the 
second panel included Mr. Joseph Marquart, Member, AARP Iowa 
Executive Council and AARP Fraud Watch Network Volunteer; Ms. 
Nancy Shaffer, State Ombudsman, Connecticut State Department on 
Aging; and Ms. Donna K. Harvey, Director, Iowa Department on 
Aging.
    Federal government witnesses on the first panel testified 
to the recent efforts by DOJ and the FTC to combat elder 
financial exploitation. DOJ's witness described the 
Department's recent efforts to break up international schemes 
or scams that target and defraud seniors and summarized the 
work of DOJ's Elder Justice Initiative as well as its Elder 
Justice Task Forces. The Committee also heard testimony about 
the FTC's elder abuse enforcement and consumer education 
efforts, including FTC's prosecution of MoneyGram, whose money 
transfer service was used in multiple scams that targeted older 
Americans. Their testimony shed more light on the scope of the 
problem of elder abuse and exploitation in the United States 
and the need for an improved Federal response.
    Witnesses on the second panel testified to their direct 
experiences with elder abuse and exploitation in Iowa and 
Connecticut. They described examples of exploitative 
guardianships, so-called ``sweetheart'' scams, and lottery 
scams. They emphasized the widespread nature of elder abuse and 
financial exploitation and the need to improve public 
awareness, prevention, prosecution, and victim services. Their 
testimony highlights the need for improved training, including 
of judges and law enforcement. Their testimony also reveals 
that the abuse of guardianships, conservatorships, and powers 
of attorney--often by those related to the victim--is a 
problem.

                      B. INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL

    Chairman Grassley (R-IA) introduced the Elder Abuse 
Prevention and Prosecution Act of 2016, S. 3270, on July 14, 
2016. Original cosponsors included Senators Richard Blumenthal 
(D-CT), John Cornyn (R-TX), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Marco Rubio 
(R-FL), and Michael Bennet (D-CO). The bill was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary. Ranking Member Leahy (D-VT) and 
Senators Feinstein (D-CA), Durbin (D-IL), Tillis (R-NC), and 
Ayotte (R-NH) later joined as co-sponsors of the legislation.

                       C. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    The Senate Judiciary Committee considered S. 3270 on 
September 15, 2016. Chairman Grassley offered an amendment in 
the nature of a substitute. The amendment was accepted by voice 
vote. The Committee then voted to report the Elder Abuse 
Prevention and Prosecution Act of 2016, with an amendment in 
the nature of a substitute, favorably to the Senate by voice 
vote.

              III. Section-by-Section Summary of the Bill


Section 1. Short title: table of contents

    Section 1 cites the short title of the Act as the ``Elder 
Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act.'' It also provides the 
table of contents for the Act.

Sec. 2. Definitions

    Section 2 defines certain terms used in the legislation 
(including ``abuse,'' ``adult protective services,'' ``elder,'' 
``elder justice,'' ``exploitation,'' ``law enforcement,'' and 
``neglect'') by reference to section 2011 of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397j). It also gives additional 
definitions of terms used in the bill, including ``elder 
abuse'' and ``State.''

       Title I--Supporting Federal Cases Involving Elder Justice


Sec. 101. Supporting Federal cases involving elder justice

    Section 101 requires the designation of at least one 
Assistant United States Attorney in every judicial district to 
prosecute (or assist with) elder abuse cases, conduct public 
outreach, and ensure the collection of the statistical data on 
elder abuse that's required under section 202 of this Act. This 
section tasks the Attorney General, in consultation with the 
FBI, with implementing a comprehensive training program for FBI 
agents on the investigation and prosecution of elder abuse 
(including specialized communication strategies and relevant 
forensic training).
    Under this section, DOJ, through its Executive Office for 
U.S. Attorneys (``EOUSA''), must operate an elder abuse 
resource group that facilitates information sharing among 
prosecutors. Further, this section directs the Attorney 
General, in consultation with the EOUSA Director, to establish 
an advisory working group or subcommittee of U.S. Attorneys for 
the purpose of providing advice on DOJ's elder abuse policies, 
within 60 days of the bill's enactment.
    This section also calls for the designation, by the 
Attorney General (within 60 days after this bill's enactment), 
of an Elder Justice Coordinator within DOJ and specifies the 
Coordinator's duties. It also calls for the chairman of the 
Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'') to designate (within 60 days 
after this bill's enactment), an Elder Justice Coordinator 
within the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, and it 
specifies the Coordinator's duties. It also requires that each 
of the FTC and DOJ annually report to Congress on Federal 
enforcement actions in which an elder abuse victim was 
identified. Finally, this section clarifies that no additional 
appropriations are authorized for the implementation of this 
legislation.

      Title II--Improved Data Collection and Federal Coordination


Sec. 201. Establishment of best practices for local, state, and Federal 
        data collection

    Section 201 requires the Attorney General, in consultation 
with Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies, to 
establish best practices for the voluntary collection of 
government data focused on elder abuse. Such information must 
be posted online within a year after the legislation's 
enactment. This section also calls for provision of technical 
assistance to State, local, and tribal governments that choose 
to implement the Department's best practices.

Sec. 202. Effective interagency coordination and Federal data 
        collection

    Section 202 directs the Attorney General to annually 
collect statistical data on elder abuse enforcement actions 
initiated by Federal law enforcement agencies, other agencies 
as appropriate, and Federal prosecutors. It also specifies the 
type of data to be collected in such cases. The Secretary of 
HHS is required to provide statistical data to the Attorney 
General on elder abuse cases investigated by adult protective 
services agencies on an annual basis. This section calls for a 
summary of such data to be posted on DOJ's website, along with 
additional recommendations for improved data collection by 
government agencies at every level of government. This section 
further ensures that the reported data may not reveal the 
identities of specific individuals.

     Title III--Enhanced Victim Assistance to Elder Abuse Survivors


Sec. 301. Sense of the Senate

    Section 301 expresses the sense of the Senate concerning 
the problems posed by elder abuse and exploitation as well as 
the importance of supporting the victims of this crime and 
developing a multi-pronged approach to elder abuse and 
exploitation.

Sec. 302. Report

    Section 302 calls for DOJ's Office for Victims of Crime to 
report to Congress, within one year after the collection of 
statistical data in Sec. 202 begins and annually thereafter, on 
the nature, extent, and amount of victims' compensation and 
victims' assistance received by victims of crime who are aged 
60 years or older, under the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 
U.S.C. 10601 et seq.).

      Title IV--Robert Matava Elder Abuse Prosecution Act of 2016


Sec. 401. Short title

    Section 401 cites the short title as the ``Robert Matava 
Elder Abuse Prosecution Act of 2016.''

Sec. 402. Enhanced penalty for telemarketing and email marketing fraud 
        directed at elders

    Section 402 amends the Federal criminal code to add new 
definition of ``telemarketing or email marketing'' and prohibit 
such conduct under the telemarketing fraud statute. Further, 
this section makes it mandatory for a Federal court, in 
sentencing criminals under 18 U.S.C. 2326, to order the 
forfeiture of property, equipment, software, or other 
technology that was used (or intended to be used) in 
perpetrating a financial exploitation scheme against 
individuals over the age of 55.

Sec. 403. Training and technical assistance for States

    Section 403 calls for the Attorney General, in consultation 
with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and in 
coordination with the Elder Justice Coordinating Council, to 
provide training and technical assistance to States and local 
governments on the investigation, prosecution, prevention, and 
mitigation of various forms of elder abuse and neglect.

Sec. 404. Interstate initiatives

    Section 404 encourages the formation of interstate compacts 
or cooperative agreements that will promote elder safety and 
improve the enforcement of elder safety laws. This section also 
provides congressional consent for such compacts or agreements. 
Finally, this section directs the State Justice Institute (in 
consultation with State and local adult protective services, 
aging, social and human services and law enforcement agencies 
as well as certain nonprofits) as well as the HHS Secretary) to 
submit proposed legislation to Congress that will facilitate 
such interstate agreements or compacts.

                        Title IV--Miscellaneous


Sec. 501. Court-Appointed Guardianship Oversight Activities Under the 
        Elder Justice Act of 2009

    Section 501 amends title XX (Block Grants to States for 
Social Services and Elder Justice) of the Social Security Act 
to clarify that grants may be awarded by the Secretary of 
Health and Human Services to the highest courts of States to 
improve adult guardianship and conservatorship proceedings. 
Specifically, such grants could be used to conduct 
demonstration programs that: (1) assess adult guardianship and 
conservatorship proceedings, including the appointment and the 
monitoring of the performance of court-appointed guardians and 
conservators; and (2) implement changes deemed necessary as a 
result of the assessments (e.g., requiring background checks 
for all potential guardians and conservators and establishing 
systems that enable electronic filing and review of specified 
materials). It also requires any court receiving such a Federal 
grant to collaborate with the State's unit on aging and adult 
protective services agency.

Sec. 502. Elder justice recommendations

    Section 502 tasks GAO with furnishing Congress with 
recommendations on elder abuse-related programs and initiatives 
in the Federal criminal justice system. It also calls for GAO 
to report to Congress on the extent to which older adults of 
the United States are being exploited in international criminal 
enterprises as well as the extent to which their exploitation 
has resulted in these older adults' incarceration in other 
countries. GAO has a deadline of 18 months after enactment of 
the legislation to meet this reporting requirement and come up 
with the required recommendations.

Sec. 503. Outreach to State and local law enforcement agencies

    Section 503 directs the Attorney General to report to the 
Judiciary Committees in each chamber of Congress on the Justice 
Department's efforts to conduct outreach to State and local law 
enforcement agencies on appropriate ways to collaborate with 
the Federal government on the investigation and prosecution of 
interstate and international elder financial exploitation 
cases.

Sec. 504. Model power of attorney legislation

    Section 504 directs the Attorney General to publish model 
power of attorney legislation for the purpose of preventing 
elder abuse.

Sec. 505. Best practices and model legislation for guardianship 
        proceedings

    Section 505 obligates the Attorney General to publish best 
practices for improving guardianship proceedings and model 
legislation relating to guardianship proceedings for the 
purpose of preventing elder abuse.

             IV. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    The Committee sets forth, with respect to the bill, S.3270, 
the following estimate and comparison prepared by the Director 
of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, November 18, 2016.
Hon. Chuck Grassley,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 3270, the Elder 
Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz.
            Sincerely,
                                                        Keith Hall.
    Enclosure.

S. 3270--Elder Abuse Prevention Act of 2016

    Summary: CBO estimates that, assuming appropriation of the 
necessary amounts, implementing S. 3270 would cost $21 million 
over the 2017-2021 period for programs in the Department of 
Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Health and Human Services 
(HHS) to combat abuse of the elderly.
    Enacting the bill could affect revenues and associated 
direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. 
However, we estimate that any such effects would be 
insignificant in any year and over the 2017-2026 period.
    CBO estimates that enacting S. 3270 would not increase net 
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2027.
    S. 3270 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of S. 3270 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 500 
(education, training, employment, and social services) and 750 
(administration of justice).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
                                                                2017    2018    2019    2020    2021   2017-2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
 
DOJ Programs:
    Estimated Authorization Level............................       3       3       3       3       3        15
    Estimated Outlays........................................       3       3       3       3       3        15
HHS Programs:
    Estimated Authorization Level............................       6       0       0       0       0         6
    Estimated Outlays........................................       *       2       2       1       *         6
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
    Total Increases:
        Estimated Authorization Level........................       9       3       3       3       3        21
        Estimated Outlays....................................       3       5       5       4       3        21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: DOJ = Department of Justice; HHS = Department of Health and Human Services;
*Less than $500,000; components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

    Basis of estimate: CBO assumes that the bill will be 
enacted near the end of calendar year 2016, that the necessary 
funds will be provided for each year, and that outlays will 
follow the historical rate of spending for similar activities.

Department of Justice

    S. 3270 would direct DOJ to undertake numerous activities 
to prevent crimes against the elderly and to improve the 
treatment of elderly victims, including the following:
           Provide training and technical assistance to 
        state and local governments to assist them in 
        investigating, prosecuting, and preventing crimes 
        against the elderly and treating the victims of such 
        crimes;
           Collect data from federal agencies on crimes 
        against the elderly;
           Provide regular training to agents of the 
        Federal Bureau of Investigation on the investigation of 
        crimes against the elderly; and
           Prepare reports on issues relating to crimes 
        against the elderly.
    Based on an analysis of information from DOJ about the 
costs to carry out those additional tasks, CBO estimates that 
it would cost the department about $3 million annually to 
implement S. 3270, assuming appropriation of the necessary 
funds.

Department of Health and Human Services

    The bill also would authorize appropriations for grants to 
assess the effectiveness and fairness of legal proceedings that 
result in court-appointed guardianships for elderly people. 
Those grants, which would be for demonstrations, would be in 
addition to other activities supporting elder rights conducted 
by HHS. Based on the cost of other demonstration projects to 
support elder rights, CBO estimates that implementing the new 
provisions would cost HHS about $6 million, assuming 
appropriation of the necessary funds.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go 
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement 
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending and 
revenues. S. 3270 would amend federal criminal law to make any 
assets found in connection with telemarketing fraud against 
elderly persons subject to seizure by the federal government, 
upon an individual's prosecution and conviction for such fraud. 
Proceeds from the sale of such assets are recorded as revenues, 
deposited into the Assets Forfeiture Fund, and later spent 
without further appropriation action. Because of the small 
number of relevant assets likely to be seized, CBO estimates 
that any additional revenues and associated direct spending 
would not be significant in any year and over the 2017-2026 
period.
    Increase in long-term direct spending and deficits: CBO 
estimates that enacting S. 3270 would not increase net direct 
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 
10-year periods beginning in 2027.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 3270 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz and 
Robert Reese (DOJ), Christi Hawley Anthony (HHS); Impact on 
State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Rachel Austin; Impact on 
the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
    Estimate approved by: H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    V. Regulatory Impact Evaluation

    In compliance with rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate, the Committee finds that no significant regulatory 
impact will result from the enactment of S. 3270.

                             VI. Conclusion

    The Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act of 2016, S. 
3270, increases penalties for perpetrators of elder abuse 
crimes--including mandatory forfeiture--to deter future 
offences. The bill calls for increased training of Federal 
investigators and prosecutors and calls for the designation of 
at least one Federal prosecutor in each judicial district to 
handle cases of elder abuse and exploitation. The bill also 
ensures that each of the Federal Trade Commission and the 
Department of Justice will have their own Elder Justice 
Coordinator. Finally, the bill includes various requirements to 
promote greater information sharing among agencies at all 
levels of government, for the purpose of promoting a more 
coordinated response to elder financial exploitation. Such 
measures are designed to enhance the nation's ability to combat 
elder abuse and financial exploitation.

      VIII. Changes to Existing Law made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
S. 3270, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, and existing law in which no 
change is proposed is shown in roman):

                           UNITED STATES CODE

                TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

                             PART I--CRIMES

         CHAPTER 113A--TELEMARKETING AND EMAIL MARKETING FRAUD


Sec. 2325. Definition

    [In this chapter, ``telemarketing''--
          [(1) means a plan, program, promotion, or campaign 
        that is conducted to induce--
                  [(A) purchases of goods or services;
                  [(B) participation in a contest or 
                sweepstakes; or
                  [(C) a charitable contribution, donation, or 
                gift of money or any other thing of value,
by use of 1 or more interstate telephone calls initiated either 
by a person who is conducting the plan, program, promotion, or 
campaign or by a prospective purchaser or contest or 
sweepstakes participant or charitable contributor, or donor; 
but
          [(2) does not include the solicitation of sales 
        through the mailing of a catalog that--
                  [(A) contains a written description or 
                illustration of the goods or services offered 
                for sale;
                  [(B) includes the business address of the 
                seller;
                  [(C) includes multiple pages of written 
                material or illustration; and
                  [(D) has been issued not less frequently than 
                once a year, if the person making the 
                solicitation does not solicit customers by 
                telephone but only receives calls initiated by 
                customers in response to the catalog and during 
                those calls takes orders without further 
                solicitation.]
    In this chapter, the term ``telemarketing or email 
marketing''--
          (1) means a plan, program, promotion, or campaign 
        that is conducted to induce--
                  (A) purchases of goods or services;
                  (B) participation in a contest or 
                sweepstakes;
                  (C) a charitable contribution, donation, or 
                gift of money or any other thing of value;
                  (D) investment for financial profit;
                  (E) participation in a business opportunity;
                  (F) commitment to a loan; or
                  (G) participation in a fraudulent medical 
                study, research study, or pilot study, by use 
                of 1 or more interstate telephone calls, 
                emails, text messages, or electronic instant 
                messages initiated either by a person who is 
                conducting the plan, program, promotion, or 
                campaign or by a prospective purchaser or 
                contest or sweepstakes participant or 
                charitable contributor, donor, or investor; and
          (2) does not include the solicitation through the 
        posting, publication, or mailing of a catalog or 
        brochure that--
                  (A) contains a written description or 
                illustration of the goods, services, or other 
                opportunities being offered;
                  (B) includes the business address of the 
                solicitor;
                  (C) includes multiple pages of written 
                material or illustration; and
                  (D) has been issued not less frequently than 
                once a year, if the person making the 
                solicitation does not solicit customers by 
                telephone, email, text message, or electronic 
                instant message, but only receives interstate 
                telephone calls, emails, text messages, or 
                electronic instant messages initiated by 
                customers in response to the written materials, 
                whether in hard copy or digital format, and in 
                response to those interstate telephone calls, 
                emails, text messages, or electronic instant 
                messages does not conduct further solicitation.

Sec. 2326. Enhanced penalties

    A person who is convicted of an offense under section 1028, 
1029, 1341, 1342, 1343, [or 1344]1344, or 1347 or section 1128B 
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7b), or a 
conspiracy to commit such an offense, in connection with the 
conduct of telemarketing or email marketing--
          (1) shall be imprisoned for a term of up to 5 years 
        in addition to any term of imprisonment imposed under 
        any of those sections, respectively; and
          (2) in the case of an offense under any of those 
        sections that--
                  (A) victimized ten or more persons over the 
                age of 55; or
                  (B) targeted persons over the age of 55, 
                shall be imprisoned for a term of up to 10 
                years in addition to any term of imprisonment 
                imposed under any of those sections, 
                respectively.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 2328. Mandatory forfeiture

    (a) In General.--The court, in imposing sentence on a 
person who is convicted of any offense for which an enhanced 
penalty is provided under section 2326, shall order that the 
defendant forfeit to the United States--
          (1) any property, real or personal, constituting or 
        traceable to gross proceeds obtained from such offense; 
        and
          (2) any equipment, software, or other technology used 
        or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the 
        commission of such offense.
    (b) Procedures.--The procedures set forth in section 413 of 
the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 853), other than 
subsection (d) of that section, and in Rule 32.2 of the Federal 
Rules of Criminal Procedure, shall apply to all stages of a 
criminal forfeiture proceeding under this section.

                TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

                       CHAPTER 7--SOCIAL SECURITY


  Subchapter XX--Block Grants to States for Social Services and Elder 
                                Justice


                       Division B--Elder Justice


PART II--PROGRAMS TO PROMOTE ELDER JUSTICE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1397m-1. Adult protective services functions and grant programs

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    (c) State demonstration programs.--
          (1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall award grants 
        to States (and, in the case of demonstration programs 
        described in paragraph (2)(E), to the highest courts of 
        States) for the purposes of conducting demonstration 
        programs in accordance with paragraph (2).
          (2) Demonstration programs.--Funds made available 
        pursuant to this subsection may be used by States and 
        local units of government (and the highest courts of 
        States, in the case of demonstration programs described 
        in subparagraph (E)) to conduct demonstration programs 
        that test--
                  (A) training modules developed for the 
                purpose of detecting or preventing elder abuse;
                  (B) methods to detect or prevent financial 
                exploitation of elders;
                  (C) methods to detect elder abuse;
                  (D) whether training on elder abuse forensics 
                enhances the detection of elder abuse by 
                employees of the State or local unit of 
                government; [or]
                  (E) subject to paragraph (3), programs to 
                assess the fairness, effectiveness, timeliness, 
                safety, integrity, and accessibility of adult 
                guardianship and conservatorship proceedings, 
                including the appointment and the monitoring of 
                the performance of court-appointed guardians 
                and conservators, and to implement changes 
                deemed necessary as a result of the assessments 
                such as mandating background checks for all 
                potential guardians and conservators, and 
                implementing systems to enable the annual 
                accountings and other required conservatorship 
                and guardianship filings to be completed, 
                filed, and reviewed electronically in order to 
                simplify the filing process for conservators 
                and guardians and better enable courts to 
                identify discrepancies and detect fraud and the 
                exploitation of protected persons; or
                  (F) other matters relating to the detection 
                or prevention of elder abuse.
          (3) Requirements for court-appointed guardianship 
        oversight demonstration programs.--
                  (A) Award of grants.--In awarding grants to 
                the highest courts of States for demonstration 
                programs described in paragraph (2)(E), the 
                Secretary shall consider the recommendations of 
                the Attorney General and the State Justice 
                Institute, as established by section 203 of the 
                State Justice Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 
                10702).
                  (B) Collaboration.--The highest court of a 
                State awarded a grant to conduct a 
                demonstration program described in paragraph 
                (2)(E) shall collaborate with the State Unit on 
                Aging for the State and the Adult Protective 
                Services agency for the State in conducting the 
                demonstration program.
          (4) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
        under this subsection, a State (and, in the case of 
        demonstration programs described in paragraph (2)(E), 
        the highest court of a State) shall submit an 
        application to the Secretary at such time, in such 
        manner, and containing such information as the 
        Secretary may require.
          (5) State reports.--Each State (or, in the case of 
        demonstration programs described in paragraph (2)(E), 
        the highest court of a State) that receives funds under 
        this subsection shall submit to the Secretary a report 
        at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
        information as the Secretary may require on the results 
        of the demonstration program conducted by the State 
        (or, in the case of demonstration programs described in 
        paragraph (2)(E), the highest court of a State) using 
        funds made available under this subsection.
          (6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
        subsection, $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 
        through 2014.

                                  [all]