Grant Delay and a Conditional Donation at an Old Age Home
You are the secretary of a registered society running an old age home in Thrissur with 42 residents, of whom 28 are women and 11 are bedridden. The state maintenance grant for 2023–24 has been pending for seven months, nine staff have not been paid for two months and three have resigned. A trustee proposes asking residents to pay or shifting the bedridden to the government hospital. A local businessman offers a donation large enough to clear the arrears, on condition that the home displays his name prominently and in future admits only elders from his community. A company has also expressed interest in CSR support, but wants a proposal and an audit report; the society's audit is pending. The next board meeting is in ten days.
1. Identify the administrative, financial and ethical issues in this case and the legal and policy frameworks that apply.
Read the worked answer
Administrative and financial issues. The home has 42 residents, 11 bedridden, nine staff, two months of unpaid wages, three resignations and a seven-month grant delay. Staff ratios for bedridden elders are already stretched, which is a safety and quality issue. The pending audit and grant require proper accounts, utilisation certificates, resident registers and inspection records. Registration and minimum standards under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and Kerala rules apply. If foreign funds are received, FCRA applies; CSR must comply with the Companies Act, 2013, Schedule VII.
Ethical issues. Residents have rights to dignity, non-discrimination and care. They should not be used as a revenue source or selected by community. A donation conditional on admitting only one community would be discriminatory and contrary to trust law and public policy. Shifting bedridden residents to a government hospital without their consent and without proper arrangements would be abandonment. The board must manage conflict of interest, keep minutes and ensure transparent accounts. Unpaid staff may leave, so retention is urgent. The response should be a board-approved emergency plan, not an individual trustee's suggestion decided in isolation.
2. Evaluate the three funding options and recommend a course of action with conditions.
Read the worked answer
Option 1: Resident fees. Acceptable only if means-tested, with a written policy, exemptions for those unable to pay, and no retrospective change to existing residents' terms without consent. It gives modest, stable income but cannot close a seven-month gap quickly.
Option 2: Businessman's donation. The money is useful, but the conditions - prominent naming plus community-based admission - are unacceptable. I would reject the discriminatory admission condition, negotiate an unconditional or general-purpose donation, disclose it to the board, issue a receipt and record it in the accounts. Naming rights can be considered only if they do not compromise residents' dignity and are approved by the board.
Option 3: CSR. A company can support old age homes under Schedule VII. It requires a proposal, budget, MoU, reporting and no hidden quid pro quo. It is slower but more sustainable and safer for reputation.
Recommendation. Immediately: pass a board resolution, pursue the pending grant with utilisation certificates, arrange a bank overdraft or trustee bridge loan to pay two months' wages, and redeploy staff. Medium term: submit a CSR proposal and adopt a transparent donation policy. Start a relatives' contribution policy with exemptions. Do not shift the bedridden residents; arrange a visiting doctor and a temporary nurse. Minute all decisions and send accounts for audit.