Situation–Reaction:\nYou have launched a winter project to create night shelters for homeless people. Within a week of opening the shelters, nearby residents complain that theft incidents have increased and demand that the shelters be removed. As the responsible project lead, what should you do?

Introduction / Context:
Situation–reaction questions test practical judgment under social pressure. Here, a public welfare project faces community pushback after alleged thefts. The goal is to protect vulnerable beneficiaries while maintaining public trust and safety.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Night shelters for homeless people have started recently.
• Residents report increased thefts and demand closure.
• No formal verification of the allegations has yet been completed.
• As project lead, you have responsibility for both welfare outcomes and community confidence.

Concept / Approach:
Balance compassion with accountability. Good administration requires acknowledging concerns, initiating fact finding, engaging law enforcement, and implementing risk controls. Premature closure harms beneficiaries and concedes to unverified claims; inaction erodes trust.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Responsible leaders both protect beneficiaries and reduce externalities. Independent verification plus targeted safeguards achieves both aims better than closure or neglect.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(a) Offloads responsibility; too passive. (c) Moralizes without remedy. (d) Ignores risk and erodes trust. (e) Punishes beneficiaries before facts are known.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming correlation equals causation; stereotyping homeless people; overreacting by shutting services without due process.

Final Answer:
Assure enquiry and coordinate immediate safeguards with police and staff (Option B).