Bluebird Care (Stockton and Hartlepool)

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People’s records contained a high level of person-centred information and staff demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of listening and responding to people’s wishes. A member of staff told us, “We always try to put people at the centre of their care. Care plans are detailed and regularly updated, and we take time to ask individuals how they prefer things to be done.”

We received positive feedback on the way care was delivered. A professional told us, “Bluebird Care (Stockton and Hartlepool) have been brilliant in supporting my client in a person-centred way.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Management were knowledgeable about people’s needs and liaised with external health professionals when required to help ensure people received appropriate support. Professionals gave positive feedback about how the registered manager and staff worked with them to achieve good outcomes for people.

Staffing was planned in advance to ensure people’s support needs were met. Wherever possible the same staff supported people to ensure continuity. The provider had an emergency plan in place to ensure safe delivery of care during adverse events such as poor weather conditions and power cuts.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Relatives also received information and updates in a variety of ways. One relative told us, “We have an App which keeps us updated so I know that [they are] safe.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. A relative told us, “They get feedback from us when they phone us. They keep an eye on her and keep us informed about her.”

People and their relatives told us they knew how to complain and were comfortable to do so. Details of the providers complaints policy was given to people and their relatives when they first started to use the service.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Care records showed people had support from a range of health professionals. Relatives told us they were involved in decisions about people’s care, and staff respected people’s choices and preferences.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The provider had policies on equality, diversity and inclusion, and staff had completed relevant training. This helped ensure they understood people’s protected characteristics and the importance of delivering fair and equal care.

Care records demonstrated decisions were made in conjunction with the relevant people to ensure staff always acted in people’s best interest. This included family members, advocates or other health professionals.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

At the time of this inspection, the service was not supporting anyone who currently required end of life care. We spoke with the registered manager who recognised this could change at any time and was ensuring staff were prepared and equipped with the skills and knowledge in this area. People and relatives were provided an opportunity to discuss and plan end of life wishes as part of the care planning and review process. Care records included information about advance decisions such as ‘do not attempt cardiovascular pulmonary resuscitation’ (DNACPR).