Bluebird Care Winchester, Eastleigh & Romsey

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 outstanding. At this assessment the rating has remained outstanding. This meant people were protected by a strong and distinctive approach to safeguarding, including positive risk-taking to maximise their control over their lives. People were fully involved, and the provider was open and transparent when things went wrong.
 

This service scored 91 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There were systems in place to record, report and investigate incidents. Staff had a good knowledge of reporting procedures and there was evidence learning had been implemented in line with findings. Systems around governance supported ongoing learning and improvement. There was evidence learning from complaints had been implemented to promote improvement. The provider had a good level of oversight from all tiers of management around quality improvement. The provider asked staff to give feedback through surveys and through supervision. Staff told us they were able to raise safety concerns, and they would be dealt with. Most staff said they received feedback on the concerns they raised.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. Risks related to people’s care were assessed, and people told us staff effectively managed risks related to their care and the support they received was safe. The provider had effective systems to manage risk related to remote working/domiciliary settings. People’s care visits were monitored to ensure they received their care as planned. Out of hours cover, business continuity plans, and a non-entry policy were in place to support staff to escalate concerns. Staff had received training in line with people’s needs to help reduce risks.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The service made sure there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People told us they received care from regular carers with new carers shadowing more experienced ones. Although not all people and their relatives were happy with the times and changes of calls. The provider had been working hard to resolve this, and some people told us it had improved recently. There were systems in place to electronically manage rotas, which promoted consistency and helped to ensure preferred, sufficiently skilled staff were allocated to people’s care.
Staff received training relevant to their role and systems were in place to promote ongoing learning and development. Staff had received supervision and told us they received sufficient support and training to undertake their roles. Staff told us the quality and availability of training was good. The provider was implementing a new system to integrate and manage eLearning with face-to-face training. This included the ability to customise training courses and manage attendance.
People and their relatives told us staff were well trained and competent in their role. There was particular praise for staff training on hoisting. The provider had an internal recruitment team who ensured staff recruitment processes and policies met the requirements of the regulations. The evidence we reviewed supported this.
 

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.