Archived: Bluebird Care (Wellingborough)

Updated 21 February 2018

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 11, 12, 18 and 19 December 2017 and it was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice, because the service provides a community care service and we needed to ensure someone was available to facilitate the inspection.

One inspector conducted the inspection.

Prior to the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We planned for the inspection using information from the PIR and other information we held about the service. This included statutory notifications. A statutory notification is information about important events; the provider is required to send us by law. We also took into consideration information we had received from commissioners who monitor the care and support of people using the service.

During the inspection, we visited one person that received personal care from the service. We spoke with two care staff, two senior staff, the registered manager and the registered provider. We carried out telephone interviews with one relative and a close friend (next of kin) of a person using the service.

We reviewed the care records of four people using the service and three staff recruitment files. We also reviewed records relating to the management and quality monitoring of the service.

Updated 21 February 2018

Bluebird Care (Wellingborough) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to older adults living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of our inspection 44 people received personal care from the service.

At the last inspection in December 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

Staff received safeguarding training so they knew how to recognise the signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report any concerns of abuse. Risk management plans were in place to protect and promote people’s safety. The staffing arrangements were suitable to keep people safe. The staff recruitment practices ensured staff were suitable to work with people. Where the provider took on the responsibility for the management of medicines, staff followed best practice guidelines. Staff followed infection control procedures to reduce the risks of spreading infection or illness.

The provider understood their responsibility to comply with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), which came into force in August 2016. The AIS is a framework that makes it a legal requirement for all providers to ensure people with a disability or sensory loss can access and understand information they are given.

Staff received comprehensive induction training when they first commenced work at the service. On-going refresher training ensured staff were able to provide care and support for people following current practice. Staff supervision systems ensured that staff received regular one to one supervision and appraisal of their performance.

Where the provider took on the responsibility, staff supported people to eat and drink sufficient amounts to maintain a varied and balanced diet. The staff supported people to access health appointments when required, including opticians and doctors, to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.

People were encouraged to be involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and they gained people's consent before providing personal care. People had their privacy, dignity and confidentiality maintained at all times. The provider followed their complaints procedure when dealing with complaints.

People had their diverse needs assessed, they had positive relationships with staff and received care in line best practice meeting people’s personal preferences. Staff consistently provided people with respectful, kind, caring and compassionate care.

The provider fostered an open and transparent culture. When required to do so, they reported notifiable events to the CQC and other relevant agencies.