- Homecare service
SM Voice Advocacy Limited
Assessment report published 17 February 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 12 December 2025 to 20 January 2026. This was a comprehensive assessment of all 5 key questions in response to the information we held about the service. The service is a care at home service providing support to adults of all ages living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection 4 people were using the service. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
The service provides support for people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. 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. People were supported in accordance with this guidance.
Audits were in place giving oversight of quality but had not always been effective in identifying all risk and quality issues in the service. Some recruitment practices and policy needed to improve. The provider made available suitable mandatory training for staff, but it was not always clear when or what training staff had completed. However, staff had a good knowledge of subjects when questioned. Medicines were administered appropriately where required by competent staff, but the provider needed to improve their documentation and medicines policy in line with best practice guidance.
There was a positive learning culture, where the provider was proactive in seeking feedback and implementing learning to make improvements. People and their relatives knew how to give feedback and were confident the provider took it seriously and acted on it. People were protected and kept safe from abuse. Staff were happy to raise any safety concerns and felt they would be dealt with properly. There were enough staff in place. People and relatives were consulted around how they wished their care to be carried out. Staff understood and managed risks related to people’s care. Staff worked with stakeholders involved in people’s care to promote the best outcomes and safe transitions when people moved between services. Staff cared for people with dignity and respect and promoted their independence. People were treated with kindness and compassion and had a good level of consistency in care staff.
Leaders were visible and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. There was a registered manager in place at the time of the inspection. Staff felt able to give feedback and were treated equally. The provider worked with professionals in the local community to deliver high quality care. There was very positive feedback about the service from all of the professionals we contacted.
The provider worked to continuously improve the service and ensure good outcomes for people.
They took immediate action in response to our inspection feedback.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 4 relatives of people who used the service to gain feedback about their experience of receiving care from the provider.
Relatives we spoke with were positive about how staff supported people, telling us they were happy and felt safe receiving care. Comments included, “I am very satisfied with [person’s] care.” and “[Person] has a good relationship with [their] carers.”
We were also told people received regular staff.
Relatives did not raise any concerns about people’s medicines. One relative told us, “They (the provider) have reassured me that [person] has had a meds review and they are now monitoring.”
Relatives told us staff knew people’s needs well, and they had worked with the provider to review people’s care and support. One relative said they would like to be more involved. The registered manager told us they would work with the relative to facilitate this. Relatives told us complaints were dealt with although most complaints were only for minor things. One relative said, “I can always call the manager - very polite.”
Relatives told us they would like people to have a better diet, and better feedback to them from GP appointments or other health needs. The registered manager told us they were working to improve this.