Hall Green Churches Child Contact Centre

Charity 1148514

www.hgcccc.org.uk

Overview

Summary

Sources:Civic AtlasAI-assisted

Hall Green Churches Child Contact Centre appears to occupy a focused but important role at the intersection of family separation, family justice and community support. Rather than resolving disputes or assessing parenting, it provides a time-limited, neutral setting in which contact can be re-established or maintained. Its two-centre model, volunteer delivery and referral links suggest that it functions as practical local infrastructure around more formal family-court and children’s-services systems.

See observations

Operational geography

Sources:ONSCivic AtlasAI-assisted

Coverage: Multi Neighbourhood

Operational areas:

Evidence and reasoning
Supporting evidence
Hall Green North

Confidence: low

The organisation's official website identifies an active Hall Green Child Contact Centre with regular Saturday sessions, but the supplied evidence does not directly confirm that it operates within Hall Green North.

  • Hall Green and North Solihull Child Contact Centres — Hall Green Child Contact Centre page
    States that the Hall Green Child Contact Centre operates from the main hall of the Church of the Ascension in Hall Green, with weekly and fortnightly Saturday opening.
  • Birmingham City Council — Hall Green North ward map
    Provides the official ward geography for Hall Green North.
Remaining uncertainties
  • The charity operates a second, active North Solihull centre in Fordbridge/Kingshurst, but this site is outside Birmingham and cannot be represented using the supplied Birmingham area identifiers.
  • The Charity Commission records Birmingham City and Solihull as the charity's operating area, but this describes reported geographic scope rather than confirming service delivery across all Birmingham wards.
  • Family Courts, CAFCASS, solicitors, mediators and local-authority children's services are referral routes. The available evidence does not establish formal place-based partnerships or demonstrate that they extend delivery into particular Birmingham wards.
  • The organisation facilitates agreed hand-overs into the community, but does not identify the destinations; these should not be treated as additional operational areas.
Additional evidence needed
  • Current aggregated referral and attendance data showing the broader Birmingham localities from which families using each centre are drawn.
  • A current annual or impact report confirming whether the two centres remain the complete service footprint and describing their intended catchment areas.
  • Evidence of any formal delivery arrangements with Birmingham-based agencies, venues or community partners beyond referral relationships.

Areas of work

Source:Charity Commission
  • Economic/community Development/employment
  • General Charitable Purposes
  • Other Charitable Purposes

Who they help

Source:Charity Commission
  • Children/young People
  • Other Defined Groups
  • The General Public/mankind

How they help

Source:Charity Commission
  • Provides Buildings/facilities/open Space
  • Provides Services

Discoveries involving this organisation

The Atlas has not published any Discoveries involving this organisation yet.

Observations

Sources:Civic AtlasAI-assisted
  • A bridge between formal systems and family relationships

    The organisation appears to translate referrals from courts, CAFCASS, solicitors, mediators and children’s services into a practical opportunity for separated families to sustain contact. It may therefore be a local delivery partner around family-justice processes, while remaining distinct from those decision-making bodies.

    Why it matters

    This clarifies that its value is not only providing a venue: it may reduce the gap between a contact arrangement being proposed and a family being able to carry it out safely.

    Show evidence
    • Professional referrals may come from the Family Courts, CAFCASS, solicitors, family mediators or local authority children’s services.

      Source:Organisation
    • The Centres are neutral, safe and friendly places where children may spend time with a parent or other family members with whom they do not live.

      Source:Organisation
  • Support is deliberately bounded rather than supervisory

    The service appears designed for families where contact needs structure and neutrality, but not observation or formal assessment. Its refusal to provide session reports reinforces a boundary between facilitating contact and acting as an evidential or safeguarding authority.

    Why it matters

    This distinction helps identify both its specialist contribution and a likely service boundary: families requiring supervised contact or professional monitoring may need different provision.

    Show evidence
    • Only supported and not supervised contact is available.

      Source:Organisation
    • The organisation does not provide written reports about contact at sessions.

      Source:Organisation
  • The intended outcome is independence from the service

    The organisation appears to treat centre-based contact as a transitional arrangement rather than an ongoing destination. Reviews after approximately eight sessions and facilitated hand-overs may indicate an emphasis on helping families move toward more normalised contact arrangements.

    Why it matters

    This suggests success may be measured partly by reduced reliance on the centres, an important lens when considering demand, outcomes and relationships with mediation or wider family-support services.

    Show evidence
    • Attending the Contact Centre is intended to be a short term measure, eventually leading to more permanent contact arrangements.

      Source:Organisation
    • Unless dictated by court order, use will be reviewed after approximately 8 sessions.

      Source:Organisation

    Remaining uncertainties

  • There is no evidence about the number of families supported, waiting times, geographic catchment or unmet demand.
  • It is unclear whether the two centres serve different communities or face different patterns of referral and need.
  • There is no outcome evidence showing whether families progress to independent contact arrangements.

    Additional evidence needed

  • Annual service data on referrals, attendance, duration of use, outcomes and reasons for exit.
  • Information on volunteer capacity, funding stability, waiting lists and partnership arrangements with local family-support organisations.
Charity Commission profile
Source:Charity Commission

Activities

Operating two Child Contact Centres providing supported contact for children of separated families whereby the non-residential parent/party is enabled to have contact to his/her or relevant children in a safe, secure and neutral environment.

Charity objects

THE CHARITY'S OBJECTS ("OBJECTS") ARE TO OFFER SAFE, FRIENDLY AND NEUTRAL ENVIRONMENTS WHERE CHILDREN OF SEPARATED FAMILIES CAN SPEND TIME WITH ONE OR BOTH PARENTS AND SOMETIMES OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS.