The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Bluebell Nursing Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

45-53 St Ronan's Road, Southsea, Hampshire, PO4 0PP (023) 9282 3104

Provided and run by:
Techscheme Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 26 May to 15 June 2026.

 

This assessment was prompted due to the length of time since the last inspection and concerns raised by partner agencies and staff in relation to staffing, safe care and governance arrangements. At the time of the assessment, 39 people were living at Bluebell Nursing Home.

 

People received safe care and staff managed risks safely, responsively and effectively. People’s needs were assessed before and after they moved into the home. This was used as the basis for personalised care plans to ensure care supported people’s preferences and wellbeing. People had detailed individual care plans and risk assessments in place that guided staff to deliver safe care.

 

Staff demonstrated an understanding of individual needs, respecting preferences, promoting independence, and engaging people in meaningful activities. Recruitment practices were safe, and staffing levels were sufficient, with trained and skilled staff supporting people safely and responsively. Safeguarding and infection prevention and control systems were generally understood, and people reported feeling safe. The provider had plans in place to make improvements to the overall environment. Equality and inclusion were promoted, with staff treating people respectfully and supporting access to care in line with individual needs. People were supported to eat and drink well and medicines were managed safety.

 

Systems were in place that allowed people, relatives and staff to speak up and have their voices heard. The provider had good governance systems in place to ensure any improvements required were identified and actioned. Staff felt the management team were open and approachable, and there were regular opportunities for staff and management to discuss incidents or areas for improvement within the service to ensure lessons were learnt.

 

23 October 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Blue Bell Care Home provides accommodation, nursing and personal care for up 48 older people, some of whom are living with dementia. The home is arranged over three floors. At the time of our inspection there were 43 people who used the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People received a personalised, caring service. People told us they received very kind and respectful support from staff who promoted their abilities, knew them well and genuinely enjoyed their company. The whole staff group worked as a team to support people in a person-centred way. Care was planned, risk assessed and provided in full consultation and involvement of people and their relatives, where this was appropriate.

People, staff and external professionals were extremely confident in the management of the service. Everyone described an open culture where they were listened to. The enthusiasm of the nominated individual, registered manager and team to continuously improve the service, was evident by their commitment and dedication.

There were effective quality assurance processes in place, which supported the delivery of high-quality care. Staff were valued, and their achievements were recognised and rewarded. Teamwork was evident, with staff working together in delivering the values of the service. People were actively involved in the service and their feedback had led to improvements.

The environment was very clean and homely and was maintained to a high standard with personalised bedrooms. Audits and monitoring systems were used effectively to manage the service and to make improvements as and when required.

Relatives commented, "I feel the care my relative receives is individually suited to their needs, and they are very much treated as an individual"; "The staff keep me very well informed about my relative's condition and what's happening to improve things since they moved here from hospital" and, "I visit my relative daily and without fail, the atmosphere is lovely, and all the staff are so friendly and welcoming."

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this.

The service was very well-led. The registered manager, management team and staff were extremely open to hearing feedback on the service and acting promptly to correct anything the inspection team identified.

There was an open, caring culture that demonstrated staff were passionate about supporting people. Everyone told us that this culture emanated from the registered manager and nominated individual.

The provider's quality assurance processes were effective and there was a focus on continuous improvement and seeking out ways to offer personalised care. People, relatives and staff all felt valued as individuals and partners in their care and the running of the service. The registered manager provided empowering and high-quality support for staff to be able to do their job effectively. They, the staff team and the provider acted to ensure continuous excellent quality care, for people living at Bluebell care home.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good last report (published 19 April 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

16 February 2017

During a routine inspection

This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on16 and 17 February 2017. Bluebell Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to 51 people. During the inspection 43 people were being accommodated. We were advised when the home is full it accommodates 49 people as some double rooms are being occupied as single rooms.

The service had a registered manager. 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 service was last inspected in July 2014 and at that time the service was rated overall good, with good in all five domains.

People told us they felt safe living at Bluebell Nursing Home. Staff understood the principle of keeping people safe. Risk assessments were in place to ensure staff were aware of how to minimise risks for people. Staffing levels met the needs of people, with the home having a long - standing staff group. Staff told us they felt well supported by the management team. They received support and on-going development through reviews and an annual appraisal with the management team. There was an extensive training programme, with training arranged when the need arose. Recruitment checks had been completed before staff started work to ensure the safety of people. Medicines were administered and stored safely.

Staff had a basic knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act and people were not being restrained other than to keep them safe. People enjoyed their meals and were offered a choice at meal times. People were supported to access a range of health professionals.

Before people moved into the service an assessment of their needs was undertaken. Care plans had been completed which explained how people wished to be supported and care needs were monitored and reviewed to ensure the care given continued to meet people's needs. People felt confident they could make a complaint and it would be responded to. Complaints were logged and there were recordings of investigations into complaints.

People felt the staff were caring, kind and compassionate. The home had an open culture where staff felt if they raised concerns they would be listened to. Staff felt supported by the management team and were clear about their roles and the values of the home. The management and staff team strove constantly to improve the quality of the service people received by ensuring people were at the forefront of making decisions which affected them. There was a good quality assurance process which ensured a good quality service was provided to people.

16 July 2014

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the home.

The inspection was unannounced.

Bluebell Nursing Home provides accommodation for up to 51 people who require nursing, respite or end of life care. Some of the people being cared for at Bluebell were living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 48 people living at the home. The accommodation was arranged over three floors and there are lifts available for accessing the each floor. The home offers single and double rooms, most with private en-suite facilities.

The home had a registered manager in post that was responsible for the day to day running of the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. There were three people living at the home who were subject to a DoLS. The manager had followed the relevant application processes and any conditions made by a supervisory body to ensure people who were being deprived of their liberty were authorised and safe. Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and put them into practice to protect people.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm and people told us they felt safe in the home. One person said, “I can relax here.” A relative told us, “I trust them completely to look after Mum here.” Healthcare professionals said they would be happy for their relative to live at the home.”

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and provide people with individualised care. We found all staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns. Risk assessments and management plans had been completed when people experienced behaviour, which may challenge others. Medicines were administered safely to people. All checks were completed to ensure only staff who are suitable and safe to work with vulnerable people are employed.

People were supported by staff who had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet their assessed needs. People had enough to eat and drink throughout the day and night if required and steps were taken to identify and support people who were nutritionally at risk. People were supported to have access to healthcare services, such as podiatry, GP’s and dentists, and were involved in the regular monitoring of their health.

People, relatives and health and social care professional told us staff were friendly, kind and caring. One relative said, “Staff are attentive, and really respect residents.” Staff involved and treated people with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. Interactions between staff and people were kind and respectful. People’s preferences, likes and dislikes had been taken into consideration and support was provided in accordance with people’s wishes and people’s privacy and dignity were respected and promoted.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans were regularly updated to reflect changes in need. Staff on duty used a Digital Care System (DCS) to inform them when people required support. There were a range of activities available to protect people from social isolation and give them a choice of activities to take part in. People told us if they had any issues they would speak to the director or the registered manager and something was always done about their concerns. Relatives responded positively about the home and said they would not change anything.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service People, staff, health and social care professionals and visitors all told us the home was friendly and management were always visible and approachable. Staff were supported to question practice and they told us they would report any concerns. The home had a system to manage and report incidents, and safeguarding concerns and CQC had been notified of these concerns. A quality assurance system was in place which helped the management team assess people’s experiences of care they received and observed.

25 November 2013

During a routine inspection

There were forty eight people living in the home at the time of our visit. We spent time with them in communal areas, in their private rooms and during a meal time. People told us they were happy living in the home.

In order to ensure that the home could meet individual needs, people had their needs and wishes assessed and recorded and families and other professionals were involved in the process.

People had their personal and nursing needs recorded in a person centred plan of care that was kept under regular review.

The staff team had received training in protecting people from risk of abuse or harm and those that spoke with us were aware of their responsibilities.

Evidence we saw and documents we examined showed us that the staff team were well trained and well supported and received regular supervision and appraisal.

There were processes in place to record and respond to complaints and concerns in a timely manner.

Comments from people living in the home included. 'It's a very good place to live. The service is good, I get very nice food and all the staff are lovely, they are very helpful'. A family member said, 'It feels like an extended family, everybody is so kind and friendly. We visit every day and wouldn't want mum to be anywhere else.'

12 March 2013

During a routine inspection

Due to their medical conditions people who used the service were unable to express their views. In order to determine how care and treatment was provided we spoke with staff, observed their practices and looked at some people's care records. We also spoke to relatives of people who used the service. One person told us "The staff are brilliant. 'They're very good, very caring and very patient.'

17, 24 January 2011

During a routine inspection

We were not able to speak to the majority of people who use the service due to the nature of their disabilities. Those that were able said that they were happy living at the service.

Relatives of people that we spoke to said they had no complaints about any aspect of the service their family members received and that the service was well managed. They said the food was of a good quality with plenty of choices. They felt they were involved in planning their relatives care and expressed satisfaction with the support given.

Relatives said the staff were always kind, patient and attentive. They also expressed satisfaction with the environment saying that it is always clean, comfortable and welcoming.

Staff that we spoke with said that they were happy working at the service due to the support they receive from the proprietor and manager. They felt that they work well as a team and that this reflects positively on people living there.

We spoke with a continuing care nurse assessor who was visiting the service. They said the service was good at identifying any changes in needs of people and communicating with other agencies.