Thanks, Kate! The concept here, simplified, is crowd-funding for a specific person that is common to the crowd. I have to stick w/ over 50 for the sake of our challenge but it's relevant to all ages. That said, I think it's important that these Challenges bring about solutions to complex problems by staying as tight to the initial framing of the challenge as possible. This concept seems to help our target audience with their finances, but it does not create a "financial service" more than it creates a financial opportunity.
Thus, from this idea I think there's something valuable in evaluating how public policy can be modified to incentivize giving and saving for a newly defined protected class of citizens, elderly people of low financial means.
Regarding the Group Savings Account - I think that's closer to a "financial service" and has the potential to become something bigger. For elderly people that put off saving for retirement there will be some opportunity in group savings, but with a relatively tighter window of opportunity (time to save, compared to younger audiences) I'm afraid a sizable initial investment is required to result in a substantial fund.
This is an excellent concept. To Kate Rushton's point, and concerns about users on one account -- I don't think we'll want to restrict participation to only people you know. I think that's a great option to have - but like a local softball league, you're not playing ball with a team of three! I think there's space for an algorithm here to compile random investments together (similar to robo-investing platforms like Ellevest) and move them into investment portfolios grouped by desired risk profiles. There are a lot of financial regulations out there that may throw a wrench in the original concept or any modified model that collects money from multiple parties and invests it. Though, this is something that brokerages like Fidelity Investments do, inherently.