Case # 1
Where: 90 unit assisted living facility in New York
Primary Victim: Resident & Facility
Secondary Victim: Facility Employees & Resident’s Family
Incident: Resident’s AT&T calling card stolen
Action: $500.00 cash reward offered for information leading to perpetrator
Result: An employee at the facility called the 800 # to name a suspect. The suspect named was questioned, admitted her guilt, and the reward was paid to the informant. The guilty party reimbursed the resident and was terminated. After a review of the facility phone records for the six months prior to the theft of the long distance phone card, it was determined that the facility paid for $1,079.00 in long distance phone calls made by this employee. The unauthorized charges to the facility phone bill immediately ceased after the termination of the employee.
Case # 2
Where: 80 unit assisted living facility in Massachusetts
Primary Victim: Resident
Secondary Victim: Resident’s spouse, Resident’s other family members, Employees, Facility
Incident: Wedding rings removed from resident’s apartment
Action: $750.00 reward posted for information leading to the resolution of this incident
Result: A call was received at the tips line giving the location of a pawnshop where the rings could be located. The caller stated that he had overheard a conversation to this effect. The information was forwarded to the Executive Director who asked the family to visit the pawnshop and identify the rings. The family identified the rings and Senior Crimestoppers provided the money to pay the pawn shop, recover the rings and involved the local authorities in order to arrest the individual holding the pawn ticket. The rings had been removed from the apartment by a housekeeper and passed to her boyfriend to pawn. The boyfriend, who was responsible for pawning the rings, immediately identified his girlfriend, an employee at the facility, as the individual who stole the rings.
Case # 3
Where: 60 unit assisted living facility in Missouri
Primary Victim: Facility Owners, Management
Secondary Victim: Residents, Employees
Incident: Food removed from facility kitchen
Action: Information was provided to the program tip-line stating that a dietary employee was stealing meat out of the facility refrigerator. The informant stated that the employee would wrap the meat in plastic and paper, place the meat in the garbage, take the garbage to the dumpster, remove the meat from the garbage and place it in his car. Surveillance was done on the employee and the information determined to be accurate.
Result: The employee was terminated and the informant was paid a $400 reward for providing the information. Without the provision of the information, the facility may never have known of the thefts, thus costing the facility hundreds of dollars.
Case # 4
Where: 100 unit assisted living facility in South Carolina
Primary Victim: Facility Employee
Secondary Victim: Employee’s family, Other Employees, Facility
Incident: Employee’s purse removed from locker in employee locker room
Action: $700.00 reward placed on information leading to the recovery of a resident's purse.
Result: After having seen the reward poster at the facility (within thirty minutes of posting), a caller phoned the tips line with information on the missing purse. The caller said she had seen a male employee going to his car in the middle of his shift carrying a purse. The information was immediately forwarded to the Administrator for investigation. The suspect was still on duty. After going to the parking lot and looking in the suspect’s car, the Administrator discovered the purse, along with bolt cutters used to remove the lock. The police were called, the perpetrator arrested, and the entire contents of the locker recovered.
Case # 5
Where: 119 unit assisted living facility in Texas
Primary Victim: Resident
Secondary Victim: Resident’s family, Employees, Facility
Incident: Theft & forgery of resident’s checks
Action: $600.00 reward placed on incident
Result: Three checks were removed from the back of the resident’s checkbook and cashed for a total of $1,568.00. After posting the rewards around the facility, three tips were received naming one individual as the responsible party. Because of the information provided, the facility compared the handwriting of the employee named to the forged handwriting on the checks. The handwriting matched, local authorities were involved, and charges pressed.