You are here

Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland Good Also known as Used to be Bluebird Care with no comma

We are carrying out checks at Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland. We will publish a report when our check is complete.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 23 October 2015

The inspection took place on 18 September 2015 and was announced. The service received 48 hours’ notice of our intention to inspect the service. This is in line with our current methodology for inspecting domiciliary care agencies.

The service provides care and support to people in their own home. At the time of our inspection 88 people were receiving a service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

Staff were trained in safeguarding people from abuse and they understood their responsibilities. Safeguarding concerns had been raised appropriately with the local authority and staff were confident about raising concerns if they had to.

Risks to people and staff were assessed and actions taken to minimise them.

Staffing levels were assessed and kept under review. There was a recruitment procedure in place which ensured that staff were safe to carry out this kind of work and had the required skills and experience.

Medicines were administered safely and records related to medicines were accurate.

Training and support was provided for staff to help them carry out their roles and increase their knowledge about the health conditions of the people they were caring for. There was a robust induction process which trained, monitored and supported staff during their first three months.

People gave their consent before care and treatment was provided and all except the newest staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. The MCA ensures that, where people lack capacity to make decisions for themselves, decisions are made in their best interests according to a structured process.

People were supported with their eating and drinking and staff helped to ensure that people had access to the food and drink they might need after staff had left for their next call. Staff also supported people with their day to day health needs and worked in partnership with other healthcare professionals.

Staff were caring and people were treated respectfully and their dignity was maintained.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their own care and were encouraged to provide feedback to enable the service to learn and grow.

Formal complaints were managed well. Informal complaints, gathered as a result of the regular feedback the service encouraged, were dealt with promptly and to the satisfaction of the people raising the issue, although some may have warranted a more formal response.

Staff understood their roles and were well supported and valued by the management team. The management team demonstrated a commitment to using innovative practices to improve the service.

Robust quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the delivery of the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 23 October 2015

The service was safe.

Staff were trained in safeguarding people from abuse and understood their responsibilities.

Risks were assessed and managed well and medicines were administered safely.

Emergency plans were in place to make sure people did not go without the care they needed.

Effective

Good

Updated 23 October 2015

The service was effective.

Training was provided for staff to assist them to carry out their roles. Staff were well supported through their induction.

People gave their consent before care was provided.

The service supported people to maintain a good diet and to look after their health.

Caring

Good

Updated 23 October 2015

The service was caring.

Staff knew the people they were caring for well.

People who used the service, and their relatives, were very positive about the way the staff provided care.

Staff were kind and treated people with respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 23 October 2015

The service was responsive.

People were involved in assessing and planning their care.

People’s choices and preferences were recorded in their care plans and they were supported to give feedback about their care.

The service actively sought out people’s views and any complaints were responded to appropriately and promptly.

Well-led

Good

Updated 23 October 2015

The service was well led.

People, their relatives, and staff were involved in developing the service.

Staff understood their roles and were well supported and valued by the management team.

Innovative quality assurance systems were being implemented to monitor the delivery of the service.