Supreme Care Services Limited

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 12 February 2025 (assessment visit 19 November 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

1. Safe

   GGood Good

   Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At this inspection we rated this key question as good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm. People received a safe service, were protected from abuse or neglect and had their human rights promoted. Staff and managers understood the reporting procedure for any safeguarding concerns or allegations. Risks to people were assessed and their safety was monitored and managed, with minimal restrictions on their freedom. Accidents and incidents were monitored and analysed, so lessons could be learned, and recurrences could be avoided. The service established solid relationships with healthcare professionals to help maintain people’s safety. The service followed robust recruitment procedures and there were enough suitably trained staff employed to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. Staff completed a wide and comprehensive training programme that helped them carry out their work safely. Staff supported people to manage their medicines safely where required. Regular medicines audits were completed, staff were trained and their competency was checked at regular intervals. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question, as we did not identify concerns relating to those areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

2. Effective

   GGood Good

   Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At this inspection we rated this key question as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. People had their needs assessed and their choices listened to. People’s needs assessments formed the basis of their care plans and these were accurate and up to date. People’s care needs were regularly reviewed and any changes or updates that were required were made accordingly. People were supported to understand the care and support that was being offered to them. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question, as we did not identify concerns relating to those areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

3. Responsive

   GGood Good

   Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. At this inspection we rated this key question as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. People received a personalised service and were able to access any external resources they needed without barriers or delays. People were supported to live their lives as they chose, without discrimination. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question, as we did not identify concerns relating to those areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

4. Well-led

   GGood Good

   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 this inspection we rated this key question as good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care. The service had made improvements to missed and late calls. They had also made improvements to ensure systems and processes were being operated effectively to monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service. Staff and leaders ensured records regarding people’s care and the management of the service were accurate and up to date. The staff and management worked well with external professionals. Staff felt confident to speak up and were positive about the support they received from the whole management team. There was an open and inclusive workforce, which promoted people and staffs’ equity of experience and celebrated diversity. The provider had an effective process for evidencing lessons learnt. There were effective quality assurance processes and systems were in place to monitor and audit the quality of the service. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question, as we did not identify concerns relating to those areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.