We carried out a review of the data available to us about Bluebird Care (Barnet) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Bluebird Care (Barnet), you can give feedback on this service.
At the time of the inspection, the location did not care or support for anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.
About the service
Bluebird Care (Barnet) is a domiciliary care service providing personal care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the agency was supporting 90 people. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Care
People felt safe, staff were caring and treated them with dignity and respect. People and their relatives generally felt the service was managed well and people’s care needs were met. People’s care and risk management plans set out their care needs, preferences and communication support. Staff found these plans helpful. Staff received regular training, supervision and the provider checked their competency. Staff and managers knew how to report and respond to potential safeguarding adults concerns.
Right Support
Staff supported people with their medicines appropriately. There were procedures for responding to and learning from accidents and incidents. There were enough staff to meet people's needs. People were usually visited by the same staff with whom they were familiar. There were safe recruitment processes in place.
Right Culture
People knew how to raise issues or complaints and the provider responded to these appropriately. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and recognise when improvements were required. People and staff were asked to give feedback about the service. The service worked in partnership with other professionals to meet people’s needs and help them to access healthcare support. 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 practice.
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 (12 October 2017). The rating for the service following this inspection remains good.
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
At the last inspection on 28 April and 5 May 2015, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns and there were robust processes in place to ensure concerns were followed up. Risks were fully assessed and there were control measures identified for any areas of concern. Medicines were managed safely and staff had face to face training and competency testing on administering medicines.
Recruitment processes were thorough and showed staff had been checked they were competent and safe to work with vulnerable people before starting in their role.
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.
Staff received effective support to fulfil their roles through regular supervision and training related to the needs of the people they were supporting. People said they were happy with how they were supported to eat and drink and had their food prepared. Fluid intake records and food records were maintained for people that needed them.
People said staff were kind and caring. We saw many examples of where the service had gone the extra mile in supporting people to feel valued and cared for. People and families had an input into care planning. People were offered choice in how they had their care and care staff treated people with respect and dignity.
Changes in needs were responded to promptly and care files were person centred and from the perspective of the individual they were describing care for. Care plans were detailed and gave detailed descriptions of what care staff needed to do. People’s preferences were captured.
Complaints were managed in line with the provider’s policy and people and relatives knew how to complain.
The service was well led and all staff we spoke with felt supported. People were placed at the centre of the service’s focus and the registered managers and directors were eager to listen to feedback and make any improvements that might impact on the quality of care. Audits were robust and regular spot checks were completed during care calls.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection took place on 28 April 2015 and 5 May 2015. It was unannounced.
Bluebird Care (Barnet) is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. The registered provider is KLEJ Limited. Referrals to the service come from various sources including the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), private and social services. At the time of our inspection approximately 120 people were receiving a personal care service, and the agency employed approximately 100 staff members including 20 live-in care workers. The service was registered at its current location on 11 February 2015.
The service did not have a registered manager however an application had been made to register a manager who was in post at the time of the inspection. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We found that people were kept safe and free from harm with risk assessments in place to address relevant issues. There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs and to provide a flexible service. Systems were in place to ensure that the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was followed with people’s consent recorded as appropriate. Staff training in this area was being rolled out to all of the team.
Staff received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities, and they received regular supervision and support.
Staff knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported. People spoke highly of the support staff provided.
People were supported to eat and drink, and to attend health care appointments. Systems were in place for staff to administer their prescribed medicines safely, although there was room for improvement in the implementation of the new medicine records audits.
People told us that the management were accessible and approachable, and that they felt able to speak up about any areas for improvement. There were regular checks in place to review the quality of the service provided to people.
At this inspection there were no breaches of regulations, but one recommendation has been made regarding the recording and monitoring of concerns and incidents.