You are here

Bluebird Care Braintree and Uttlesford Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 25 November 2017

Bluebird Care Braintree and Uttlesford is a domiciliary care service that provides personal care to people living in their own homes. The service serves the local community around Braintree. They provide a service for adults, who are predominantly older and who may be living with dementia or adults who have a physical or learning disability. At the time of our inspection there were approximately 33 people using the service. The inspection took place on 26 and 27 September 2017 and was announced.

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. The registered manager had appointed a branch manager to assist them in the daily running of the service.

Whilst the service was relatively small it benefitted from its links with the larger branch, based in Colchester. The registered manager covered both branches and other senior staff such as training and human resources managers supported the Braintree and Uttlesford branch. The service was well run and was growing slowly in a sustainable manner while focussing on providing good quality and safe care.

The branch manager was approachable and communicated well with people, families and staff. The manager was hands on and made effective use of the systems in place to check the quality of the service. People, families and staff had opportunities to provide feedback and felt able to speak to the manager about any concerns they had.

People were safe at the service. Staff were focused on people’s safety and raised alerts when they were concerned about a person they were supporting. Risk was communicated clearly to staff and managed well across the service. Staff had been safely recruited and there was a focus on selecting staff who had the right values and attitudes. People received their medicines safely and the electronic monitoring of the support staff meant senior staff could efficiently check for gaps in the administration of medicines and in the support provided.

Staff were well supported to develop their skills and knowledge. Staff communicated effectively as a team to ensure consistency in the support provided. The manager had developed the role of mentors to minimise the isolation of care staff working in the community and to promote best practice across the service.

Staff and people were matched to ensure were well suited. They developed positive relationships and staff had enough time to get to know people and treat them with kindness and compassion. They were respectful and communicated well with people to make sure the support they received met their preferences.

People made choices about the support they received. The manager had an understanding of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet, in line with their preferences. Staff enabled people to maintain good health and to access health and social care professionals, where necessary.

Care was person centred and adapted flexibly to people’s needs and preferences. Care plans were detailed and presented to staff in an accessible attractive manner which ensured they focused on people’s current needs. The care people received was reviewed and adapted as necessary.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 25 November 2017

The service was safe.

Staff knew how to raise alerts when they were concerned about people’s safety.

There were excellent systems in place to ensure people received the support and the medicines they required.

Staff were recruited safely and deployed effectively.

Effective

Good

Updated 25 November 2017

The service was effective.

Staff had varied opportunities to develop their skills, including mentoring from formally trained staff.

People were enabled to make decisions about the care they received.

Staff supported people well to maintain a balanced diet of their choice and to access health and social care services when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 25 November 2017

The service was caring.

Staff had enough time to get to know people well and developed positive relationships with them and their families.

People were treated with respect and given time to communicate their needs and preferences.

Responsive

Good

Updated 25 November 2017

The service was responsive.

Support was personalised and based on the people’s choices. Staff received clear communication about what support was required.

When people’s needs and circumstances changed the support they received was reviewed and amended, where necessary.

Concerns were dealt with swiftly to prevent them developing into formal complaints.

Well-led

Good

Updated 25 November 2017

The service was well led.

The registered manager and branch manager worked well to ensure the smooth running of the service.

The hands on approach by senior promoted consistently good practice.

There were varied systems to check the quality of the care and to ensure there were no gaps and concerns in the support provided.