Group home: High cost, complex rules keep families away from applying

Families from the economically weaker section (EWS) and general categories are facing difficulties in applying for the group home facility built by the UT Administration for intellectually disabled and mentally ill adults. Despite extending the deadline from March 10 to March 25, only about 20-25 applications have been submitted, leaving families frustrated. Prospective families and mental health professionals addressed the media today to highlight these challenges.

Key issues and demands

The application form is lengthy and technical, difficult for many parents and care givers to understand. Besides, it is only available in English, making it inaccessible to many families. The requirement for multiple certificates and affidavits is cumbersome, particularly for elderly parents. MP Manish Tewari has raised this issue in the Lok Sabha.

“The exorbitant security deposit is the biggest hurdle. The deposit should not exceed one year’s fee for each room type,” said Satish Kumar, an 82-year-old father of an adult son with schizophrenia. Many families fall in the income bracket of Rs 1.5 lakh to Rs 8 lakh per annum, making it extremely difficult to afford the Rs 20 lakh security deposit and monthly charges.

Barkhu Ram, with an annual income of Rs 4 lakh and a son suffering from schizophrenia, submitted an application, stating that he could not afford the deposit and could only pay half the monthly rent of Rs 8,000 for the shared set-up. Many others share similar concerns. “We have no information on group home activities beyond boarding and lodging. Despite repeated requests, the UT Social Welfare Department has not conducted awareness programmes. The application form is complex, with difficult terms and conditions. It feels like the UT Administration is preparing to divert the facility for other purposes,” said Joginder Kaur, mother of an adult son with an intellectual disability.

Families also criticised the requirement of naming three guardians. They questioned why the Administration does not seek basic information such as the applicant’s skills, education and job capabilities. “Requiring three guardians is unrealistic for many families. Legally, only one guardian is needed. Many applicants lack a support system, which is why we need group homes,” said Dr BK (Simmi) Waraich, psychiatrist and governing body member of the Utthaan Group Home Society.

Neelu Sarin, former area director of Special Olympics, Chandigarh, urged the Administration to start a daycare-cum-vocational centre within the group home. “After four years of struggle, we finally have a world-class group home. The Administration should operationalise the vocational centre immediately,” she said. Though the Group Home was completed in July 2024, it is yet to be occupied.

Palika Arora, Director of Social Welfare, UT Administration, acknowledged the low number of applications and further extended the deadline to April 10. Families blame the lack of awareness programmes for the confusion surrounding the admission process.

Dr Paul, a governing body member, highlighted discrimination against EWS applicants. Initially, 20 seats were reserved for EWS, but were later reduced to 11. While families earning below Rs1.5 lakh annually are fully exempt from fee, those earning slightly more must pay the full amount. Dr Paul urged the Administration to introduce a subsidised category for families earning between Rs1.5 and Rs 8 lakh annually to ensure fair access.

Another concern is the mandatory 45-day assessment at MHI/GRIID. Rajni Sood, governing body member of Utthaan and mother of an intellectually disabled adult, criticised the rigid admission process, which does not consider the distinct needs of individuals with Down syndrome, autism and intellectual disabilities. “The assessment period disrupts routines, particularly for working applicants. Despite repeated requests, no awareness programmes have been conducted to clarify the admission process or services offered,” she said.

Applicants also lack information about the group home’s staff, services and activities. While financial obligations are clearly outlined, details regarding available support remain absent.