You are here

Bluebird Care (Lancaster and South Lakeland) Good

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

This inspection was carried out on the 06 and 11 April 2017. Bluebird Care (Lancaster and South Lakeland) registered as a domiciliary care agency with the Care Quality Commission in February 2015. We inspected this service in October 2015. However, the service changed location in December 2015 and has not been inspected since being registered at this location. As the agency is small we gave 24 hours’ notice of our inspection. This was because the registered provider is actively involved in the day to day running of the agency and we needed to ensure they were available. The office is based in Lancaster with parking available at the office.

At the time of the inspection Bluebird Care (Lancaster and South Lakeland) supported 28 people with care and support needs. An out of hours contact number is provided for use in the event of an emergency.

At the time of inspection there was no manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The registered provider told us they had recently appointed a new manager who was in the process of becoming registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

There were systems to ensure people who used the service were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable of the action to take if they had concerns in this area. They told us the registered provider encouraged concerns to be raised.

There were procedures to ensure medicines were managed safely. The manager carried out checks of medicines to ensure any errors were identified. Staff received training in the administration of medicines and observations of staff competencies were being planned. We have made a recommendation regarding this.

People were invited to give feedback on the service provided. A quality survey was provided to people to enable them to voice their views. This was analysed and areas of improvement were addressed. Checks on care records and accidents were carried out but were not formally documented. We have made a recommendation regarding this.

Staff were knowledgeable of peoples’ assessed needs and delivered care in accordance with these. Staff spoke respectfully of people they supported. People who received care and support and their relatives told us they were happy with the care provision from Bluebird Care (Lancaster and South Lakeland).

Sufficient recruitment checks were carried out prior to a staff member starting to work with the agency and staff received training to enable them to give care which met peoples’ needs. Staffing was arranged to ensure people received care and support at the time they wanted.

People’s nutritional needs were considered as part of the assessment process and preferences were reflected within care documentation. Care records reflected the care and support people required and people told us they were involved in the development of their care plans.

Care records contained assessments of risk and information on how risks could be managed. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable of the action to take to minimise risk.

There was a complaints policy which was understood by staff and was available to people who used the service. Staff were aware of the reporting procedures to ensure complaints were addressed.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The service was safe.

Medicines were managed appropriately.

Staff were suitably recruited, and staffing levels were sufficient to respond to peoples’ individual preferences.

Assessments of risk were carried out and care documentation contained information on how risks were managed.

Staff were aware of the policies and processes to raise safeguarding concerns if the need arose.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The service was effective

Peoples nutritional needs were considered as part of the assessment process and documentation reflected peoples preferences.

There was a training programme to ensure people were supported by suitably qualified staff.

Referrals were made to other health professionals to ensure care and treatment met people’s individual needs.

The management demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA.)

Caring

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The service was caring.

People were treated with care and respect and their dignity was maintained.

People were involved in the development of their care plans.

Staff spoke professionally and respectfully of people they supported and demonstrated a person centred approach.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The service was responsive.

Care records outlined peoples care and support needs and staff were knowledgeable of people’s needs and wishes.

Staff responded to peoples’ requests and direction as instructed by people who used the service.

There was a complaints policy to address complaints made regarding the service the agency provided.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The service was well-led.

Quality assurance systems were in place to ensure areas of improvement were identified and actioned.

The registered provider consulted with people they supported and relatives for their input on how the service could continually improve.

People, relatives and staff told us the registered provider was approachable and supportive.