Agenda item

Fiona Gibbs, Stronger Communities Manager, was in attendance, together with representatives of Bell Farm Christian Centre (Diane Faichney) and of Hillingdon Women’s Centre (Kayci Powell and Melanie Aston).

Diane Faichney of Bell Farm Christian Centre was invited to address Members of the Select Committee. It was explained that the Centre was a charitable organisation based on the Bell Farm Estate in West Drayton, established in 2000, which had delivered a wide range of community projects over many years in response to local needs. Members were informed that the charity operated a long?standing advice centre, which had been running for approximately 25 years and was partly funded through the Hillingdon Advice Partnership (HAP). This service was delivered in partnership with Nucleus, DASH and Age UK and operated twice weekly alongside the food bank. The organisation was also a founding partner of the UB7 Foodbank, established in 2017, and worked holistically to enable referrals between services.

Members heard that additional activities included an older people’s dining and social centre providing weekly freshly cooked meals, social activities, and trips, as well as children’s events, summer holiday clubs and year?round family activities. Over the previous three years, the charity had also undertaken work supporting asylum seekers accommodated in local hotels.

It was reported that, over the preceding six months, the organisation had experienced harassment directed at staff and volunteers due to its work with asylum seekers. This included significant criminal damage to the premises, with windows and doors repeatedly smashed, resulting in substantial financial costs. These incidents were attributed to a small minority of individuals and had caused division and intimidation within the estate. As a result, the delivery of asylum seeker support services had been adapted and relocated away from Bell Farm, although the work itself had continued. An application for Home Office funding to improve building security had been submitted in December, but a decision was still awaited, and it was noted that existing security infrastructure was outdated and difficult to upgrade due to limited charitable resources.

Despite these challenges, it was highlighted that the organisation had recently secured funding to become a “Loved and Wanted” Centre, supported by the Mayor of London in partnership with the National Lottery. This programme focused on community building and the creation of safe community spaces across London and would contribute to enhancing existing activities at Bell Farm until March 2028. The initiative aimed to embed social mixing and cohesion programmes and was expected to reach approximately 3,000 people per year. Delivery partners, including REAP and HACS, would provide additional activities such as wellbeing courses as part of the project.

It was emphasised that this funding had been secured at a critical time of heightened community tension in West Drayton and increasing financial pressures on the voluntary sector, alongside rising demand for services that exceeded current capacity. It was expressed that the Loved and Wanted Centre would help to restore hope, strengthen community cohesion and foster togetherness over the coming years. The organisation confirmed its intention to continue working collaboratively with council officers and partners and to build on its long?standing role in reducing hardship, strengthening belonging and supporting vulnerable and newly arrived residents. Overall, the charity aimed to promote inclusion, resilience and cohesion by addressing social, cultural and economic barriers and restoring hope in the south of the Borough in a compassionate and meaningful way.

Kayci Powell and Melanie Aston of Hillingdon Women’s Centre were also in attendance and addressed the Select Committee confirming that the charity was approaching its 40th anniversary in April 2026. It was outlined that the primary focus of Hillingdon Women’s Centre was to support women across the Borough, with the most prevalent needs relating to domestic abuse, poverty, destitution, isolation, loneliness and a lack of access to support and resources. It was reported that approximately 85% of women supported by the service had experienced domestic abuse, with this proportion having increased year on year. Although the organisation was not solely commissioned to deliver domestic abuse services, this area represented the most significant demand.

Members heard that the Centre’s domestic abuse services were described as being delivered by a small team of specialist caseworkers who provided safety and crisis support, assisted women to access safer accommodation, worked with partner professionals, and undertook risk assessments and safety planning. Support was provided on both a short?term and long?term basis, depending on individual circumstances, and it was noted that domestic abuse cases were often complex and multifaceted. In addition, a domestic abuse recovery programme was offered to women who were no longer in abusive relationships and were living safely. This programme comprised a six?week group intervention aimed at supporting recovery, reducing the risk of re?victimisation, promoting goal setting, and reinforcing that survivors were not to blame.

It was further explained that the Centre also delivered general advice services, providing support in relation to benefits, basic housing issues and access to legal advice through referrals to solicitors, operating as a one?stop support service. The Centre was based in the same building it had occupied for 40 years and operated as a women?only safe space. It was confirmed that a range of group activities and events were delivered to promote inclusion and connection, including weekly wellbeing groups such as “Positive Energy”, which focused on wellbeing activities and skills development.

Reference was also made to the Women’s Hub, previously funded by the Greater London Authority, through which support had been provided to grassroots women’s groups offering community connection, such as the Austin Sewing Club and the Afghan Women’s Support Group. This support included assistance with basic funding needs, such as venue hire, and guidance to group leaders to help sustain their activities and fundraising efforts.

It was highlighted that demand for domestic abuse support within the Borough continued to increase and that cases were frequently complex. The Centre worked closely with the Council’s Hillingdon Domestic Abuse Service (HDAS), which was identified as its largest referral partner. Strong partnership working with the Council was maintained through operational groups and contractual arrangements with the local authority.

Councillors sought clarification as to how effectively the Council was supporting these organisations, given the complexity and multi?agency nature of their services, and where the Council could improve its contribution.

In response, Diane Faichney of Bell Farm Christian Centre explained that experiences varied across individual projects but identified ongoing difficulties in contacting Council officers by telephone, particularly in relation to housing and benefits matters. She stated that significant time was often spent attempting to reach officers, sometimes for several hours, which diverted resources away from supporting clients who were waiting to be seen. It was noted that this issue had existed for several years and was exacerbated by staff turnover, redundancies and retirements, which made it harder to maintain established relationships with officers. Ms Faichney suggested that the provision of more direct contact numbers for advice services, including those working under the Hillingdon Advice Partnership (HAP), would enable issues to be resolved more efficiently. It was acknowledged that the Council could not resolve all cases, particularly given the scale of homelessness pressures locally and nationally, but it was emphasised that advice services could assist by signposting clients to appropriate contacts if communication with officers was improved.

Melanie Aston of Hillingdon Women’s Centre stated that her organisation shared similar concerns. She explained that one approach which had worked well at the Women’s Centre was the attendance of a Council housing officer at a weekly housing drop?in specifically for domestic abuse survivors. This arrangement had made it easier to navigate housing challenges and prioritise cases. It was highlighted that navigating the housing system could be particularly difficult for survivors of domestic abuse, noting that issues such as perceptions of intentional homelessness and other survivor?specific barriers could place women at increased risk and potentially force them to return to perpetrators.

Members asked Hillingdon Women’s Centre whether it provided domestic violence funding to assist women who had left abusive situations, specifically asking whether the organisation could help with rebuilding a home or providing essential items such as furniture. In response, it was confirmed that the Centre did not have direct funding for this purpose. It was explained that the organisation was exploring the possibility of securing hardship funding in the future but that such funding was difficult to obtain. In the meantime, caseworkers supported women to search for individual grants and, where possible, accessed limited support such as free SIM cards. Members heard that  small allocations from the Centre’s wider funds were sometimes used to assist with essential costs such as travel or top?ups, but it was confirmed that the organisation did not currently have the funding capacity to provide furniture or similar support, although this was an area it was working towards.

The Committee directed a question to the Stronger Communities Manager regarding references to a noticeable increase in community tensions and visible street?based issues, asking what data or baseline metrics underpinned this assessment.

It was explained that this observation related primarily to recent protests, particularly those associated with the placement of asylum seekers in hotels. Members were advised that the assessment was informed by a combination of anecdotal feedback from communities, discussions with colleagues, the police and schools, and reports of increased fear and concern among residents regarding their experiences in public spaces. The Stronger Communities Manager added that this was supported by reporting data relating to hate crime statistics, as well as direct observations of protest activity. She further noted that, at a national level, there had been an increase in inflammatory rhetoric in online spaces. From a Prevent perspective, it was explained that this was reflected in the nature of referrals received, as well as lower?level concerns and conversations that did not meet referral thresholds but nonetheless indicated worrying changes in attitudes and behaviours. The Stronger Communities Manager concluded that these combined factors contributed to ongoing concern and were likely to persist for the foreseeable future.

Diane Faichney requested that if any members became aware of funding opportunities for work with children, particularly for holiday clubs and children’s events, this information be shared with her organisation. She explained that previous Council grant funding for this work had ceased, that no charges were made for children’s activities due to high levels of deprivation in the area, and that there was a pressing need for funding to continue delivering services for children, including those from specialised groups.

The Chair confirmed that this request would be passed on and suggested that ward councillors or other members might be able to share ideas or funding opportunities identified within their wards or communities. The Chair thanked the speakers for attending the meeting and for their invaluable input.

RESOLVED: That the Residents’ Services Select Committee:

1.    Noted the activity undertaken to build stronger communities and promote community cohesion particularly in light of the challenges emerging from national and global events, a national rise in hate crime and threats from extremist influence and the impacts on local communities; and

2.    Noted the activity that had been undertaken during the past year in relation to delivering against the Prevent duty.