Bluebird Care (Swindon)

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

The manager investigated all accidents and incidents and then held a ‘lessons learned’ meeting with office staff, followed by a meeting with relevant care staff. We saw evidence of one of these meetings following an incident. This allowed staff to learn from previous incidents to reduce the risk of recurrence.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

People had documents in place to support safe transitions into hospital. These contained key information about people’s needs, including their medical history, likes and dislikes, and communication methods. The manager told us if a person required an ambulance, staff would stay with the person until the ambulance arrived.

When people were discharged from hospital, the hospital discharge team contacted the provider to ensure a staff member was available to support the person to transition back home. We did not receive any concerns in relation to how people were supported to transition between services.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People felt safe and did not raise any safeguarding concerns. Incidents were reported to safeguarding and CQC where appropriate. Staff received training in safeguarding and knew how to report any concerns.

‘Risks people faced had been assessed and identified. However, at times information in care plans was unclear or inconsistent. One person’s needs had changed and their risk management plans had not been updated to ensure staff always had clear information on what type of food textures people needed to remain safe. The manager made changes during the inspection to update the documentation. People felt risks were well managed and staff said they mitigated risks effectively. The provider told us they were reviewing risk assessments and condensing them to clearly identify the key risks and the actions required to manage them.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Staff had assessed environmental risks people faced. This included risks relating to fire safety and lone working procedures. Health and safety checks and fire drills took place at the registered office. There was a business continuity plan in place which listed steps to take in the event of various emergency situations.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

People said staff came on time and stayed for the full duration of the visit. Staff had been recruited safely and had received a range of training in line with people’s needs. Staff had received regular supervision and support. Comments from staff included, “I feel well supported in my role as I have been recognised in several ways over the period of my working for Bluebird,” and “I undertake regular, interesting training.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. There was an infection control policy in place which outlined procedures for staff. People said staff wore personal protective equipment where appropriate. Staff had received training in infection prevention and control.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

People received their medicines as prescribed. There were protocols in place for “when required” medicines such as for certain creams. Staff had undertaken an appropriate level of training for medicines and, where required, had been trained by a health professional with specialist techniques such as Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG). Staff’s competence in relation to administering medicines was assessed regularly.