Objectives The objectives of this study were threefold: (1) to empirically test the conceptual model proposed by the Lichtenberg Financial Decision Rating Scale (LFDRS); (2) to examine the psychometric properties of the LFDRS contextual factors in financial decision-making by investigating both the reliability and convergent validity of the subscales and total scale, and (3) extending previous work on the scale through the collection of normative data on financial decision-making. Methods A convenience sample of 200 independent function and community dwelling older adults underwent cognitive and financial management testing and were interviewed using the LFDRS. Confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency measures, and hierarchical regression were used in a sample of 200 community-dwelling older adults, all of whom were making or had recently made a significant financial decision. Results Results confirmed the scale’s reliability and supported the conceptual model. Convergent validity analyses indicate that as hypothesized, cognition is a significant predictor of risk scores. Financial management scores, however, were not predictive of decision-making risk scores. Conclusions The psychometric properties of the LFDRS support the scale’s use as it was proposed in Lichtenberg et al., 2015. Clinical Implications The LFDRS instructions and scale are provided for clinicians to use in financial capacity assessments.

One of the challenges in preventing the financial exploitation of older adults is that neither criminal justice nor noncriminal justice professionals are equipped to detect capacity deficits. Because decision-making capacity is a cornerstone assessment in cases of financial exploitation, effective instruments for measuring this capacity are essential. We introduce a new screening scale for financial decision making that can be administered to older adults. To explore the scale’s implementation and assess construct validity, we conducted a pilot study of 29 older adults seen by APS workers and 79 seen by other professionals. Case examples are included.

No abstract