Facebook PixelAdopt a community, village, city when in need
Create newCreate new

Adopt a community, village, city when in need

Image credit: Photo by Pixabay: www.pexels.com

Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Dec 20, 2022
Please leave the feedback on this idea

Is it original or innovative?


Is it feasible?


Is it targeting an unsolved problem?


Is it concisely described?

Bounty for the best solution

Provide a bounty for the best solution

Bounties attract serious brainpower to the challenge.

Currency *
Who gets the Bounty *
The idea is to adopt people in need struck by calamities that are larger than their capacity to overcome individually. They may be refugees or may be disaster-struck (wars, natural calamities, etc.). They need help reinstating their life or creating a new one. Governments and NGOs work for them. However, if people or companies could adopt them, they would expedite the process toward a stable life for those in need.
  1. If you are on the "plus" side at that time, you may help those that are not, as kindness.
  2. Governments do work. However, if individuals or companies could adopt a group of people, they would make the transition (to a better life) faster. This is because an individual can make faster decisions for a small group of people. Governments have to manage a lot of individuals and that may take more time. Of course, for the safety of the people in need, their whereabouts would be under surveillance until they are registered and taken care of.
  3. A more personal touch would help people heal emotionally.
How it works?
  1. You register yourself as a foster parent on a website specifically created for this purpose. The government will review your profile and will assign you a maximum number of people you can adopt for a maximum time, which will be based on your income. This process will be going on in perpetuity.
  2. When a crisis strikes, you adopt a family or a group of people and register them on the same website as your foster children. You upload any documentation the family has and click and upload their photos.
  3. You communicate and understand their problems. You try to solve them in your capacity. You help them build a life. You understand what they are good at and search for ways to make money out of it.
  4. The adoption will not be lifelong. It will only last until the people in need are taken care of.
  5. You could apply to the government and get some amount (the amount that the government would have had to spend on the respective people) as a refund for taking care (spending) on a family for that period.
Creative contributions
Know someone who can contribute to this idea? Share it with them on , , or

Add your creative contribution

0 / 200

Added via the text editor

Sign up or


Guest sign up

* Indicates a required field

By using this platform you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

General comments

jnikolaa year ago
The idea is very generous and idyllic. Finding new ways of helping people in need is always welcome. However, I think the solution is already implemented through charity organizations and government support programs. Private subjects can nowadays, in times of trouble, give money, food, clothes or any other material thing to local charity organisations such as the Red Cross or similar and help the people in need. They can also pay a certain amount of money directly to the bank account of the local governing office and help them live through the struggle. At least that's the way how my country helped 2020 earthquake survivors. This seems like a more simple way because your solution requires registration and a lot of effort from every and each subject that wants to "adopt" and help people, while organisations make it easier for you by bridging adopters and adoptees.
Also, wouldn't your solution potentiate individuals with hidden intentions to show up and "help" people? This could be a great way to manipulate people.
Do you have some arguments why this could be a better solution than the existing (mentioned) ones?
Please leave the feedback on this idea
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarnia year ago
J. Nikola As I said, bigger organizations take more time in helping people to start a life. An earthquake relief fund provides the affected people with temporary food and shelter. However, when you consider refugees, they are hosted in a camp and provided food and clothing. Registration of refugees regularly takes place and it will, too, take the necessary time even if governments do it. However, it takes time for the government to help the refugees start a life on their own without external support. This is the point where individuals could help. They could care only for the 10 people they are adopting and not for the 100s and increasing number of refugees that the bigger organizations have to handle. On the small scale, the reinstating could be faster.
Yes, "helping" people is an issue. Hence, necessary registration of the foster parent beforehand and the foster children is necessary. The registration will also tell the government who the 10 individuals are being adopted by. The foster parents will be held responsible until the foster children can sustain themselves on their own.
Please leave the feedback on this idea
jnikolaa year ago
Shubhankar Kulkarni Well, the earthquake relief fund raised many homes for people who lost them, built a new school and kindergartens and provided food coupons. The governments have inclusion programs and courses for the registered refugees, through which they can, after some time, get the right to receive social help (money) monthly. Therefore, their support is not "short-lived", but yes, it takes more time due to registrations and money distribution.
On the other hand, why registration of adopters? What stops the individual to visit the camp, foster home or people in need and talking to them, finding out what they need, etc.? That would be the fastest way. Registration could easily end up being time-consuming and similar to organisations. I'm still trying to find the difference strong enough to understand the need.
Please leave the feedback on this idea
Povilas S
Povilas Sa year ago
J. Nikola I think the main difference is direct human-to-human contact. Organization is something abstract. Having a "foster parent" is like having a governess or a mentor. I agree that a concrete person can guide people better through the process of recovery, finding jobs, etc., organizations have protocols, individuals try to help directly with their knowledge and experience as well as through empathetic relationships with people. But it's really important to have the right person for that role. Not everyone will do. Also, it will depend on the people they adopt, with each different individual you'll have a different relationship, so naturally, some people might not like or resist the foster parent.
Therefore an important thing here is to make the adoption two-sided meaning that all the adoptees separately as individuals or together as a group (group decision) will have to agree to be adopted, it can't be an "automatic" process coming from one side like the government or the adopter.
I also think that prescreening of the adopters is crucially important in this, so an organization like the human rights committee or similar will have to have a prescreening and admission/decline process for the adopters.
Shubhankar Kulkarni Are you aiming more at rich people as adoptees, so that they could also contribute their money if they are willing to in a form of donations as well as their actions and maybe gain something from it (like hiring workers), or is this for anyone with enough empathy and will to volunteer?
Please leave the feedback on this idea
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarnia year ago
Povilas S To answer your last point, I am aiming at someone rich enough to house and feed a refugee family for the time they need to start a life on their own. This may be between a month and a year. If it's taking more than a year, the adopter is not efficient enough. However, your point is also a good addition to the solution. Thank you! The adopters could hire the adoptees or recommend them to their friends. This is what will make the process faster. If the adopters have more money, well and good. They could either donate the money or lend it to the adoptees. An official contract could be signed between the parties and the adoptees could repay the money over the years. The adopters may charge a lesser interest than the bank loan or no interest at all, based on their financial situation.
J. Nikola, Povilas S explained it very nicely in his comment. I agree that registration and scrutiny of the adopters will take time. Hence, that process will be ongoing in perpetuity and not only after a crisis hits. The adopters will be pre-registered and simply notified of the crisis and asked to help. As Povilas S mentioned, human-to-human contact is important. I have mentioned that as the third point in the "why" section.
Please leave the feedback on this idea