28 April 2015 and 6 May 2015
During a routine inspection
This inspection took place on 28 April 2015 and 6 May 2015 and was announced. This was so we could be sure that management would be available in the office as this is a domiciliary care service. We last inspected this service in June 2013 where we found three breaches of regulation, which the provider addressed and at a follow up inspection in October 2013 we found the service was meeting all of these regulations.
Bluebird Care (North Tyneside) provides personal care and support to people in their own homes and help to access the community. At the time of our inspection the provider delivered care and support to 69 people and employed 31 members of staff. The service supports people with mental health issues, physical disabilities, sensory impairments, learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorders, older persons and people living with dementia. The care and support provided ranged from 24 hour care packages to short visits, which for example supported people to access the community, and provided companionship.
There was a registered manager in post who had been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) since January 2015. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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.
People spoke highly of staff whom they said supported them safely and in line with their needs. Systems were in place to protect people from abuse and there were channels available through which staff could raise concerns. Records showed that safeguarding matters had been handled appropriately and referred on to either people’s social workers or North Tyneside local authority safeguarding team for investigation.
People’s needs and risks that they were exposed to in their daily lives were assessed, documented and regularly reviewed. Some records would benefit from further detail and we discussed this with the provider and registered manager who took our comments on board. Medicines were managed and administered safely. Staff supported people to manage health and safety risks within their own homes and refer matters on to third parties if necessary. Recruitment processes were thorough and included checks to ensure that staff employed were of good character, appropriately skilled and physically and mentally fit. Staffing levels were determined by people’s needs and the number of people using the service. We had no concerns about staffing numbers.
Records related to staff training showed that this was up to date and staff received the support they needed to ensure they had the skills relevant to their roles and the varying care needs of the people using the service. Supervisions and appraisals took place regularly as did staff meetings. Staff told us they felt supported by management and could approach them at any time.
CQC monitors the application of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and deprivation of liberty safeguards. There was evidence to show the service understood their legal responsibility under this act and that they assessed people’s capacity when their care commenced and on an on-going basis if necessary. Decisions that needed to be made in people’s best interests had been appropriately referred to their social workers.
People reported that staff were very caring and supported them in a manner which promoted and protected their privacy, dignity and independence. People said they enjoyed kind and positive relationships with staff and they had continuity of care from the same members of the care staff team whenever possible, which they appreciated.
People knew how to complain and records showed that complaints were handled appropriately and records kept of each complaint received. People’s views and those of their relatives were gathered through surveys.
Care records were person centred and demonstrated that the provider was responsive to people’s needs when necessary. People were supported to access the services of external healthcare professionals if they needed help in this area.
Management promoted an open culture and staff told us that they found the registered manager and the provider approachable as a result. The provider had clear visions and values and had future plans in place about how she wanted the business to develop. Audits and quality monitoring of the service delivered was carried out regularly and records showed that where any issues were identified these were addressed promptly.