Supreme Homecare

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The registered manager and operations manager told us they aimed to support people to lead independent and fulfilling lives in their homes for as long as possible. There were a clear culture and vision that enabled this. This was reflected in the service user guide that was issued to people. There was a policy on equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff all received training in this topic.

Relatives told us the registered manager and operations manager was open, transparent, and approachable and this enabled them to feel comfortable speaking with them regarding any issues or concerns. They felt confident that any concerns raised would be listened to and addressed promptly. One person said, “The manager's proactive approach, giving the example of receiving a telephone call during the recent period of hot weather with advice about staying cool and maintaining hydration. I felt this demonstrated that the provider genuinely cared about people's wellbeing.” A relative said, “The provider as pretty switched on and appreciated the regular reviews and telephone calls to check how things were progressing.” This contributed to a positive relationship between families and the service.

The management team operated an ‘open door’ policy where people, relatives and staff could speak to them at any time to ensure there was an open culture where concerns could be raised and acted upon.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and were clear about their responsibilities. Staff were provided with information and guidance, which covered several areas to do with their roles and responsibilities.

The registered manager and operations manager demonstrated high levels of capability, compassion, and inclusivity. People, relatives, staff, and external professionals consistently praised their leadership, describing them as visible, approachable, and highly skilled. One professional said, “Their ongoing collaborative approach with social work teams is evident, and they remain open to feedback, responding promptly to implement any recommended improvements.”

Staff consistently described leadership as exceptionally supportive, visible, and approachable. They told us leaders were always available and genuinely invested in their wellbeing. One staff member said, “The managers are very nice and approachable,” while another highlighted the open-door policy and the reassurance of being able to seek support at any time. Communication was described as open and effective, with regular meetings and updates ensuring staff felt informed and involved. Staff felt confident raising concerns or ideas, knowing these would be listened to and acted upon, demonstrating a strong culture of trust, psychological safety, and continuous improvement.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

A whistleblowing policy included details on how to raise concerns both internally and externally, which allowed staff freedom to speak up. Staff feedback was sought as part of supervisions and staff meeting. Whistleblowing is the act of reporting wrongdoing, misconduct, or illegal activities within an organisation.

Systems were in place for staff to raise concerns internally and externally. Staff knew how to use the whistleblowing policy and understood their role and responsibilities of reporting concerns and knew who to go to if they needed to.

Surveys were sent out to people and staff so that they could share their views on the organisation or raise any concerns. Records showed that during staff meetings, supervisions and appraisals staff were encouraged to speak up and be heard. Any information was acted on and respected.

Annual surveys were sent to relatives, staff, and professionals, and feedback was sought from people living at the service. All feedback was used to drive improvements at Supreme Homecare.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

The registered manager and operations manager told us staff worked well together as a supportive and respectful team, and this was confirmed by staff we spoke with. Staff described the service as flexible and accommodating of their personal circumstances. One staff member told us that if changes to work schedules were needed at short notice, colleagues worked together to provide support and cover shifts where required.

Staff had completed equality and diversity training, and there was a clear focus on promoting an inclusive and cohesive working environment. Staff told us they felt valued and empowered to share suggestions and ideas for improving the service, and felt their views were listened to and considered by management.

Policies and procedures supported staff to work in an environment free from discrimination. The registered manager promoted diversity within the workforce and provided ongoing support to staff.

Records of staff meetings showed staff were kept informed about developments within the service and were encouraged to provide feedback and raise concerns. The provider maintained an open and transparent culture, supported by an open-door approach which enabled staff to speak openly with management.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

There was a registered manager and operations manager who had responsibility for the day to day running of the service. Governance arrangements were fully embedded and consistently effective. The registered manager and operations manager completed comprehensive daily, weekly, and monthly audits across key areas, including medicines, care plans, infection prevention and control (IPC), late or missed visits, and safeguarding. These audits were used dynamically to drive improvement, with clear action plans developed where needed and progress monitored through follow-up reviews. This demonstrated a strong culture of continuous learning, where lessons from incidents were embedded into practice and led to sustained improvements in care quality.

Leaders used governance systems not only to improve the service internally but also to contribute to wider system learning. The registered manager and operations manager worked collaboratively with external partners and shared learning from audits, incidents, and quality improvement initiatives. Staff from all departments attended regular meetings to promote consistency and a shared understanding of people’s needs and were actively involved in reflective practice and improvement discussions. External partners spoke positively about the management of the service. One representative told us, “Throughout our partnership, they have demonstrated a consistent level of responsiveness and a collaborative approach when working with various teams across the Local Authority. Supreme Homecare recently secured a place on our new Homecare Framework following a highly competitive tender process, achieving a reserve position within the West Locality.”

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

Partnership working with health and social care professionals was a clear strength. External professionals consistently described collaborative, outcome‑focused relationships, with the service working routinely alongside GPs, social services and specialist teams. Professionals reported that leaders were receptive to feedback, responsive during quality visits and proactive in acting on recommendations, ensuring people received safe, well‑coordinated and joined‑up care.

The provider maintained strong commissioning and system-level relationships. Local authority commissioners described the partnership as positive and proactive, highlighting the service’s willingness to innovate, engage constructively, and maintain high standards within a challenging care market. The registered manager was an active member of Care Providers’ Voice, a network that supports, represents, and connects social care providers across North East London. This involvement demonstrated the provider’s commitment to partnership working, sector development, and sharing best practice across the wider health and social care system.

A regular satisfaction survey was sent to staff, people and relatives to obtain their feedback about the service.Should it be required, there were systems to learn from and improve practices based on feedback received.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

There were robust systems in place to drive continuous improvement throughout the service. Following incidents, the registered manager and operations manager ensured that learning was consistently identified, shared, and embedded into practice. There was a clear and ongoing focus on reflection and development to ensure care continually improved in response to people’s needs and experiences.

The registered manager described the ways in which they continuously worked to enhance the quality of the service. This included identifying areas for improvement through regular checks, audits, and reviews of care delivery.Supervisions and team meetings were used to openly discuss training needs and further training would be accessed if staff felt they needed it, which in turn better supported safe and effective practice.

The provider encouraged feedback from people and other stakeholders and used this information to adapt and change the service to accurately meet peoples’ individual preferences and characteristics.