We carried out a review of the data available to us about Bluebird Care (Stockport) 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 (Stockport), you can give feedback on this service.
At the last inspection on 28 and 29 April 2016 the overall rating for the service was found to be requires improvements. At that inspection we identified two regulatory breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014, which related to staff training and good governance.
Following the inspection the provider sent us an action plan detailing how the identified breaches would be addressed. This inspection was to check improvements had been made and to review the ratings.
During this inspection, we found the two breaches had been met.
Bluebird Care (Stockport) is a domiciliary care service that was registered with the Care Quality Commission in June 2011. They provide care and support in the community to adults who live in the Stockport area.
At the time of our inspection the service was providing a service to 102 customers.
When we visited the service there was a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. However the registered manager was not available during this inspection.
We received positive comments from people who used the service (customers are the term used by the registered provider for people receiving a service), relatives and staff.
All of the customers and relatives we spoke with told us they felt safe in the care of the staff who worked for Bluebird Care. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in keeping people safe and had received training in safeguarding adults.
We found there were enough staff to make sure people received the care needed and were being provided. Customers and relatives told us care workers were generally on time and in most cases, if staff were running late for any reason, the office staff would phone to let the person know. All people we spoke with confirmed that staff remained in attendance for the agreed time.
Care staff were given appropriate support through a programme of training and on-going supervision, spot checks of their work and an annual appraisal. Care staff said the training provided them with the skills and knowledge they needed to do their jobs. They were happy in their work, motivated and confident in the way the service was managed.
All of the people we spoke with told us the staff were kind and caring and they told us they felt they were treated with respect and dignity and their privacy was always respected.
People's care plans contained up to date, detailed information about their care and support, including risk assessments and action plans.
The complaints procedure was explained in the ‘service user guide’ which was provided to people when they started with the service. Customers and their relatives told us they knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. Where customers had expressed concerns they told us appropriate action had been taken by the service.
The registered provider and registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included customer questionnaires, spot checks whilst staff carried out their caring duties and care reviews.
The service was previously inspected in September 2013. At that follow up inspection we found that the service was meeting the regulation we assessed.
When we visited the service there was a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Bluebird Care (Stockport) is registered to provide personal care and support to people living in their own home. At the time of our inspection there were 120 people using the service.
During this inspection we identified two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. These were in relation to staff training and the lack of systems to audit and monitor the quality of service people received. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.
From looking at the training records, speaking with the registered manager and staff we found there were gaps in staff training. This meant some staff may not be appropriately trained and skilled to meet the needs of the people receiving a service.
The service did not have robust systems and processes in place to assess and monitor all parts of the service provided to people.
The service had good recruitment processes to ensure only suitable staff were employed.
Staff were receiving regular supervision and annual appraisals.
Systems were in place to ensure the administration of medication was carried out safely.
Care plans looked at contained enough detailed information to direct staff members on how to provide care and support for people taking into account the person’s personal preferences and encouraging independence.
We were told by people receiving a service (customers) and relatives of people receiving a service that staff were kind and respectful when attending to their needs.
All of the customers, who we asked, told us they felt safe when being supported by the care staff.
Those staff we spoke with understood their responsibilities to protect the wellbeing of the people who used the service and were clear about the action they would take if an allegation of abuse was made to them or if they suspected that abuse had occurred.
Customers and relatives of customers said they knew who to contact if they wanted to make a complaint and felt they would be listened to and action would be taken. We recommended that the registered manager implement a formal system for recording the outcome and actions taken following concerns raised.
During this inspection we spoke to the manager, the owner and two staff members. We saw that the service had systems and processes in place to ensure that the quality of the service was monitored and action taken as appropriate.
We also spoke with five family members whose relatives used the service. All family members said that they considered the care to be good. Comments included;'They are brilliant (with my relative)' and 'They are caring, kind and know (my relative) inside out.'
We saw that the provider had effective recruitment procedures in place and that staff received a comprehensive induction before supporting people with care.
During our visit we saw that although the provider had some systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service delivered, there were areas that required additional systems to be developed.
'The carers are very nice and do the jobs they should do. They ask me what I need and are caring. I couldn't put a bad name to them.'
'The service is very good and I'm quite satisfied. The carers are friendly and polite. They are on time and reliable. If I need to make any changes I just contact the office.'
The manager had sent surveys to the people who used the service to find out their views about how the service was operating. The thirteen responses indicated that people were happy with the care and support they received. They all said that tasks were carried out properly and that carers were professional. All said that they had received the support that they had requested and that staff generally arrived at the time that had been specified.
A few responses to the surveys indicated that people had not been informed if there was going to be a change to their carer. Two people were unsure how they could complain if they needed to.
We spoke to four relatives/advocates who said they were happy with the service. They said the staff were respectful and promoted people's dignity. They said staff were reliable and the same staff tended to visit. All knew how to make their views known if they were not happy with the service. One person had raised some issues with the manager that had been satisfactorily addressed. Some comments made were:-
'I think the service is marvellous. Nothing is too much trouble for the staff. They work with us and listen to what we say. My relative is more content since we have had this service.'
'It's a smashing service. The staff are lovely with my relative. They are very accommodating.'
'We are really happy with the service and can't fault them. We get a weekly rota showing which staff are visiting. We get a call if staff are running late or if they are sending a different carer.'
'The staff are caring and friendly. They take their time and don't rush. There have been a few different staff visiting lately but the manager has a plan to address this.'
We asked Stockport LINKs and Stockport Council for information about how the service operated. No information was available at the time of writing this report.