Archived: Bluebird Care (Stoke-on-Trent)

People’s experience of using this service: People and their relatives told us they were happy with the care and support they received from the service. One person told us, “The carers are all very good whoever comes. Very caring all of them.”

People received care and support from a regular team of staff. The service ensured staff had the right training, skills and experience to support people safely. A robust recruitment process was in place.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people were protected from abuse and harm. Staff had completed safeguarding training and were aware of the provider’s whistleblowing process. Individual and environmental risks were identified and mitigated. Systems were in place to ensure people would continue to receive support in the event of an emergency.

The registered manager constantly reflected on the service provided. Information was reviewed with lessons learnt cascaded to staff.

People were treated with respect and dignity. Staff had extensive knowledge about people, their preferences and interests. People were involved in reviews of their care and support. Staff knew people’s preferred methods of communication.

Care plans were person centred and provided staff with clear information on how to support people in line with their preferences. Staff were responsive to changes in people’s needs. People and relatives had no complaints about the service but were aware of the complaints procedure.

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

The provider had an effective quality assurance process to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided. The registered manager was passionate about ensuring people received the best care possible. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to offer feedback. The service had an open culture and shared lessons learnt in their yearly newsletter.

Rating at last inspection: Good (Last report published 30 September 2016).

Why we inspected: We inspected the service as part of our inspection schedule for ‘Good’ rated services.

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

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

We inspected this service on 30 September 2016. This inspection was announced. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. There were 38 people in receipt of personal care support at the time of this inspection visit. Our last inspection was carried out in October 2013 and no breaches of regulations were found at that time.

The service had 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.

People received their calls as agreed and from a regular staff team. Staff were knowledgeable about the support people needed to enable them to provide it in a safe way. Staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and systems and processes were in place to protect people from the risk of harm. The provider had undertaken thorough recruitment checks to ensure the staff were suitable to support people. Medicines were managed safely and people were supported to take their medicine when needed. Equipment was in place to meet people’s diverse needs which enabled them to maintain choice and independence.

Staff received training to develop their skills and enable them to support the people they worked with. Staff were supported by the management team and received supervision to monitor their conduct and support their professional development. Staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported people to make their own decisions. The delivery of care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and preferences.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans were developed with people, which directed staff how to support them in their preferred way. People were supported to maintain a diet that met their dietary requirements and preferences and to access healthcare services.

People knew how to complain and we saw when complaints were made these were responded to in a timely way. Staff felt listened to and were happy to raise concerns. People knew who the manager was and felt the service was well managed. The provider sought the opinions from people who used the service to bring about changes.

Quality monitoring checks were completed by the provider and manager and when needed action was taken to make improvements. The registered manager understood their responsibilities around registration with us.

There were 27 people using the service at the time of the inspection. We spoke with three people using the service or their relatives and a social worker by telephone. We spoke with two staff, the registered manager and the registered provider in person.

People received safe and appropriate care because their needs were assessed before care was delivered. This ensured the provider could meet people's individual needs.

We saw information to demonstrate how arrangements to seek people's consent to care or treatment had been agreed. People had care records which included up to date information about how they wanted their care and support provided, and they understood the care and treatment choices available to them. One person said, 'They are professional but friendly. They care if I'm not happy, I'm a person not a piece of paper and that's what I wanted.'

We saw records to confirm medicines were managed safely and effectively.

The staff received training that was appropriate for their individual needs and provided them with the information they needed to care for the people living in their own home.

There were quality monitoring systems in place and people were able to share their views and opinions about the service. People's views were used to develop the service and maintain quality.