Bluebird Care (Oldham)

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 registeredservice. This key question has been ratedgood.

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 using the service and their families confirmed the service was very person centred. The provider’s assessment, review process, alongside feedback from people demonstrated how people were actively involved in decisions about their care and treatment. People told us they were listened to and that their views, preferences, and desired outcomes were taken into account when planning and reviewing their care.

One relative we spoke with said, “The care plan reflects [person’s name] needs, and the care staff stick to it and review it regularly, they are on top of it.”

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.

People received consistent care and support from staff who knew them well. Staff rotas, daily care records, and feedback from people and staff, confirmed continuity of care was promoted wherever possible.

One relative said, “I am happy with the consistency of carers attending, [person’s name] has a set team who have learned their habits.” And “If a new staff member comes, they are introduced first to meet [person’s name] and see the workings of the house etc.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

We saw evidence the Accessible Information Standard was fully considered and implemented. The Accessible Information Standard (a legal requirement for social care providers to ensure information and communication is provided in a way that meets people’s needs and can be understood) was met. People’s communication and accessibility needs were assessed, documented and met through practical supports and adjustments, ensuring people can access and understand all information relevant to their care.

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.

The provider listened to and involved people. One person said, “I can ask any questions and they answer me, if they don’t know the answer they find out and always get back to me, they are very helpful.” One relative said, “They are very responsive, any questions I ask they get back to me immediately, even on a weekend.”

People were fully involved in the creation and ongoing management of their care and support, all preferences, wishes and choices were central aspects of people’s care ensuring a person-centred and empowering approach.

People were invited to complete surveys about their experiences of the service, and all feedback received was positive.

There was a suitable complaints procedure and people knew who to speak with if they had any concerns. One person said, “I have no complains, whatever I want I can just phone, if I did have a complaint I would ring the manager.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The provider had systems and processes in place to support people to access care and support in a timely manner. People told us the service was flexible and responsive when changes to care arrangements were required. One relative told us, “Any help that we may need beyond the routine visits is easily actioned and provided by a call to the manager.”

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.

No concerns relating to discrimination were identified during this assessment. The provider had an equality and diversity policy in place, which provided guidance to staff on the importance of treating people fairly, with dignity and respect, regardless of their background or personal characteristics. This was further supported through staff training.

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.

The provider helped people plan for the future. They asked them about their wishes for future care and objectives they wanted to achieve. Staff provided care which helped people work towards these objectives. At the time of our assessment, no one using the service was being cared for at the end of their lives.