Archived: Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire)

Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to people living with dementia, people with mental health needs, people with a physical disability, older people and people with sensory impairments. Its office is based in the outskirts of Huntingdon. At the time of our inspection visit there were 26 people receiving a service of personal care.

Peoples experience of using this service:

People were effectively supported to be safe by staff who understood how to apply safeguarding systems and reporting procedures. A sufficient number of staff were in post; they continued to be recruited safely. Medicines were administered and managed safely. Risks were identified and managed well. Lesson’s were learned when things did not go well. There were systems in place to promote good hygiene and infection prevention standards.

Staff received appropriate support for their roles and this included training, supervision, shadowing experienced staff and staff meetings. People’s needs were met. The registered manager ensured staff followed best practice guidance such as for medicines in the community. People were supported to eat and drink enough. Staff enabled people to access healthcare support. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The staff team worked well with others to help ensure people’s care was consistent.

People were cared for with kindness and compassion. People were listened to and staff respected their choices. The registered manager signposted people to local advocacy services. Staff upheld people’s dignity and promoted their privacy. People were supported to be as independent as practicable. One person told us how good staff were at supporting them in a dignified way”.

People involved others in their care including relatives and friends. People’s care plans were up-to-date, accurate and gave staff information they needed about what was important to people. Staff cared for and supported people in the way they preferred. Concerns were acted upon before they became a complaint. Systems were in place to support people with dignified end of life care.

The registered manager had fostered an open and honest staff team culture. Staff upheld the provider’s values in the provision of good quality care. Staff received appropriate support for their role. Audits, quality assurance and oversight were effective in driving improvement. One of the many compliments stated, “Thank you for all the lovely care you gave to me from all the staff over the years”. People had a say in how the service was run. The provider and registered manager worked well with other stakeholders in providing coordinated care. Systems were in place should any person require information in an alternative format including large print or an alternative language format.

We undertook an announced focused inspection of Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) on 18 January 2019. This inspection was done to check that improvements to meet legal requirements planned by the provider after our comprehensive inspection 19 January 2018 had been made. The team inspected the service against one of the five questions we ask about services: is the service well led. This is because the service was not meeting some legal requirements. At this inspection in January 2019 we found the provider had made the improvements they told us they would make.

No risks, concerns or significant improvement were identified in the remaining Key Questions through our ongoing monitoring or during our inspection activity so we did not inspect them. The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for these Key Questions were included in calculating the overall rating in this inspection.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 23 January 2019. At the latest inspection the service had improved the rating in: is the service safe to Good and the overall rating remained Good.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

At our previous inspection of Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) on 12 January 2018, the service was rated 'Requires Improvement'. There was also a breach of Regulation 18 of the CQC Registration Regulations (2009). We asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question is the service well-led to at least good. They sent us an action plan and told us they would make these improvements by 20 February 2018.

This was for the following reasons because we had not always been informed about events that we should have been. We carried out a focused inspection to check if improvements had been made.

At this inspection, we found the service had made the necessary improvements under the key question is the service well-led, which is now rated as 'Good'.

Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) is a domiciliary care service and provides personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, there were 18 people using the service.

Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) operates from an office based on the outskirts of Huntingdon.

Not everyone using Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) received a regulated activity; Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

The service was well-led. The registered manager and provider had notified the CQC about incidents they are required to. Improvements had been made in the way the provider worked with others involved in people's care. Procedures and policies that were in place had been adhered to. Quality assurance systems were effective in identifying incidents that we needed to be informed about. The provider was correctly displaying their previous inspection rating.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Bluebird Care (Huntingdonshire) provided the regulated activity of personal care from an office based on the outskirts of Huntingdon. At the time of this inspection there were 22 people using the service.

The inspection took place on 12 January 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

This is the first inspection of this service under its current registration.

A registered manager was 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.

Staff knew what keeping people safe meant as well as how to achieve this by managing any identified risk. Staff were trained in safeguarding people and were informed about who they could report any incident of harm to. However, we found that not all incidents of harm had been reported to the local safeguarding authority.

People were given information in a format that they could understand about staying safe.

Robust checks were in place to check that staff were only employed once they had been safe and suitable to care for people using the service.

People's needs were met by staff who were trained appropriately for their role and they were deployed to ensure people’s needs were met.

People were not always administered their prescribed medicines safely. Advice had however been sought from healthcare professionals to ensure people’s safety. Staff were trained and deemed competent to administer people's medicines by staff who had the skills to do this.

Staff were supported in their role and they knew what standard of care was expected. Incidents were used as an opportunity for learning and to help drive improvements.

People were enabled to access healthcare services. People's nutritional needs were met by staff who knew each person's needs well. Staff knew when people needed support and also when to respect people's independence.

The equipment that staff supported people with was regularly checked to make sure that it was safe.

A positive and good working relationship existed between the registered manager, staff and relevant stakeholders. People were supported in partnership with other organisations including healthcare professionals to help provide joined up care.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were involved in their care and relatives or friends helped provide information, which contributed to people's independent living skills.

People's care plans contained sufficient information about the person to assist staff with providing person centred care. Staff understood how to provide care that was compassionate as well as promoting people’s independence.

People were provided with information about, and or enabled to access, advocacy services when required.

Complaints were investigated in line with the provider's policies and procedures. Complaints were acted upon before they became a complaint.

Support arrangements and procedures were in place to understand and meet the needs of people requiring end of life care when this was required.

The registered manager motivated the staff team with regular meetings, formal supervision, mentoring and being shadowed by experienced staff.

The registered manager and provider had not always notified the CQC about events that, by law, they were required to do so. Audits were not always as effective as they should have been.

An open and honest staff team culture had been established by the registered manager and this meant incidents were reported where they needed to be.

We found one breach of the Care Quality Commission (Registration Regulations) 2009. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.