ABSTRACT
Objectives
The purpose of the present study was to develop a short form of the Financial Exploitation Vulnerability Scale (FEVS) with good psychometric properties to detect contextual risk exploitation.
Methods
The sample included community volunteers who were 60 years and older, as well as elders who were referred to the SAFE program after being the victim of a financial scam or identity theft. All participants completed the FEVS as part of a larger test battery. Factors analysis was used to explore the underlying structure of the FEVS and eliminate items. ROC analysis and logistic regression were used to evaluate the clinical utility of the Financial Exploitation Vulnerability Scale – Short Form (FEVS-SF) to detect exploitation.
Results
The resulting FEVS-SF was unidimensional, contained nine items, and had comparable internal consistency to the full FEVS. Sensitivity and specificity were good at a cut score of five or greater. FEVS-SF was a better predictor of exploitation than demographic factors and several measures of cognitive functioning.
Conclusions
The FEVS-SF can detect the experience of financial exploitation among older adults better than other known risk factors, and equally as well as a measure of executive functioning.
Clinical Implications
This tool serves a need in many professional settings (e.g., doctor’s offices and Adult Protective Services) for a brief, standardized assessment measure of financial exploitation risk. This measure also provides actionable information for professionals to follow up with the standard of care for their clients.
Clinical implications
The FEVS-SF serves a need in many professional settings for a brief, standardized screening measure of contextual financial exploitation risk.
Similar to a depression or anxiety screening measure, the FEVS-SF can serve as a launching point for more in-depth conversations about financial health and the presence of financial exploitation.
The FEVS-SF detects financial exploitation better than several commonly used cognitive measures, with little benefit added by including a measure of executive functioning.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.