- Homecare service
Friendly Support Services Limited
Assessment report published 17 March 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
We started this assessment on 15 December 2025, visiting the office where the service operates on this day, as well as 18 December 2025. We visited people using the service in their homes on 15 January 2026 and reviewed documents, had follow up contact with the provider, finishing the assessment on 23 January 2026.
We carried out this assessment due to an aged rating. The provider runs a homecare service, supporting people with personal care in their own homes.
The provider worked well with external organisations, such as Speech and Language Therapists, but an area for improvement was identified to ensure that they were prepared for emergency situations so transition between services for people would be smooth and cause minimal disruption for people.
The provider assessed people’s needs, assessed and managed risk and provided person centred care to people using the service. They included people, relatives and relevant professionals in decisions about people’s care and worked closely with people and relatives to fine tune people’s experiences.
The provider held a long-standing staff team, with some staff having worked there for over 10 years. Staff had good knowledge of the people they were supporting and their roles. The provider ensured there was detailed and thorough information available to staff should they need to refer to it for guidance. This in turn ensured consistency for people using the service.
Leaders at the service maintained good oversight and were regularly involved with people’s care. There was not as much provider oversight, however, when asked about this, providers maintained that they were extremely confident in the managers ability to run the service effectively.
During [LT1]our assessment, we found some low risk, low impact concerns. When these were highlighted to leaders, they took prompt and effective action to rectify these concerns. These concerns were in relation to medication storage conditions, and we found some staff were not clear on their role in safeguarding processes. However, we found no evidence of people being harmed or put at risk of harm.
We found that there was a strong learning culture within the provider and they were receptive to feedback, ensuring new processes were embedded into the service in a timely manner.
We found there was a lack of knowledge around the Mental Capacity Act, Deprivations of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and safeguarding amongst leaders and staff. This had not had an impact on people at the time of our assessment. The provider took this finding seriously and began work to improve this immediately.
Staff fed back that they were happy in their jobs and felt the service had improved significantly since the new management team were in place, which happened in June 2025. One staff member told us that the managers were implementing and introducing things that should have been there all along, another told us, they really do their best for the service, and they could see the positive impact this was having.
People's experience of this service
Some people could not tell us directly how they felt about their care, so we used observation to gauge their experience of care. We found that people’s experience was positive, and interactions between staff and people showed kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew the people they were supporting well and had great rapport with them.
People and their relatives were generally happy with the service, one relative told us “My [relative] gets the care they need. Excellent care” and another told us “A consistent team. It means a lot. I never lose sleep worrying about [person].”
Most people were being supported to achieve long and short-term goals. This included working and achieving more day-to-day activities such as maintaining a safe and clean home.
People’s independence was always promoted and there was a good understanding amongst the staff team on the importance of maintaining and encouraging people’s independence.
People and relatives were involved in decisions about their care and the provider worked closely with them to fine tune their care plans and assessments, although this wasn’t always clear in documentation.
People had choice and control of their day, and the service was flexible for people’s needs, wants and wishes. For example, one person occasionally liked to go to London into the early morning hours, so managers would coordinate the appropriate staff to support them with this with some notice.
One relative told us “They [the provider] don’t force [person] into their calendar. It’s not timetabled.”
Relatives felt that the consistent care team had a positive impact on people’s care. One relative told us, “[Person] loves what they see as their extended family”.
In relation to managers and leaders of the organisation, relatives were confident in their ability to run the service. Relatives told us that if there ever were any issues or concerns, they were confident in managers to resolve it. Another said “I can get in touch with the managers anytime I like. Always friendly. They sort things. No worries about approaching them”.