• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Homely Supported Living Ltd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

14, Clements Court, Clements Way, Ilford, IG1 2QY (020) 8306 1483

Provided and run by:
Homely Supported Living Ltd

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Assessment report published 19 August 2026

Ratings

  • Overall

    Good

  • Safe

    Good

  • Effective

    Good

  • Caring

    Good

  • Responsive

    Good

  • Well-led

    Good

Our view of the service

Date of assessment: 24 July 2026 to 12 August 2026.

Homely Supported Living Ltd is a ‘supported living’ service and is registered to provide the regulated activity of personal care to people, primarily with a learning disability living in their own homes. The service was supporting 6 people with personal care at the time of the assessment.

Not everyone using Homely Supported Living Ltd received a regulated activity; the CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. This assessment was carried out with a site visit to the office location on 27 July 2026 and a supported living service on 3 August 2026.

We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

Safeguarding systems were in place to ensure people were safeguarded from abuse. The provider demonstrated a learning culture of openness and transparency with learning taking place following incidents. People’s home environment was assessed to ensure they were suitable and safe for the delivery of care. Risks were identified and assessments were carried out to ensure risks associated with people were minimised. Systems were in place to ensure staff were recruited safely and people were supported by competent staff who had the right mix of skills, experience and knowledge to support them safely. Staff were supported well by the management team and received regular supervision to support them in their roles. Medicines were managed safely. Staff were trained to administer medicines and records showed people received their medicines as prescribed.

The provider assessed people’s needs prior to the service commencing and care plans included people’s preferences on how they would like to be supported. Staff monitored people's care and support, wellbeing and expected outcomes. Consent was sought from people and Mental Capacity Assessments were completed to determine if people had capacity to make specific decisions about their care.

We observed staff had a good relationship with people and were caring and kind when supporting people. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. People were encouraged to be independent, such as going shopping and helping with household tasks.

Some improvements were required with care plans to ensure people received person centred care at all times. Staff communicated effectively with people.

People, relatives and staff were encouraged to share feedback about the service, and the provider had systems in place to use this information to support continuous improvement of the service. There was an open and positive culture within the service and staff were positive about the management team. Quality assurance systems were in place to ensure there was oversight of the service and people received safe and effective care.

People's experience of this service

People and relatives told us that people felt safe when being supported by staff. We observed people were at ease at home and felt safe around staff. A person told us, “I like living here, it is safe.” A relative commented, “Whilst I’ve been at the home, they’ve been loving and supportive and [person] feels safe.”

People received their medicines as prescribed. A relative told us, “They do administer medicines. They are very good at giving [person] medicines. They have a really good routine for it.”

People received support from staff that knew them well. A relative commented, “Yes, to be honest, they are good at their job.” Another relative told us, “The staff were really kind, and I really like how they support the individuals under their care.”

People were supported when they were not feeling well. A relative told us, “Recently, [person] has not been very well. The carer supported [person] at the hospital. The home responded well.”

People were able to make choices on how they liked to be supported and their preferences were taken into account. A relative told us, “Yes, the carers are brilliant, but [person] is particular about what [person] wants to wear and they are good at honouring that and [person’s] other preferences.”

People had a positive relationship with staff and staff were kind and caring. A person told us, “I like the staff, they are my friends.” A relative commented, “The carers are very kind, lovely people in their own selves, which is really reassuring.”

Staff encouraged people to be independent. We observed a person supporting staff with household chores when we visited a supported living service. A relative told us, “They are good at helping [person] make their own choices and empowering [person] to do stuff which has helped [persons] development.”

Staff communicated effectively with people. We observed staff communicated well with people. A relative told us, “They show [person] pictures and things of where to go etc. Staff are good at understanding [person].”

People were supported by a service that had a positive culture. A person told us, “The staff are friendly and I like them.” A relative told us, “It always delights me when people go above and beyond for people with learning disabilities. They recently did a sports day with all their different homes which was really nice; there were a lot of people and service users with different abilities and learning difficulties. It was a mix of people and very inclusive.”