Bluebird Care (Essex West) Also known as K & T McCormack

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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.

People’s needs were assessed before care started, and this information was used to develop detailed care plans and risk assessments. Pre-assessments considered people’s health conditions, mobility, communication, routines, home environment and what was important to them. People and relatives confirmed the assessments were thorough. One relative said staff had “Come out and took lots of information and walked around their home doing risk assessments” before care started.

Care plans were detailed and reflected people’s needs and preferences and included guidance for staff on how to provide support in a way that reflected the person’s wishes. Reviews were completed regularly and whenever needs changed, for example after a hospital admission or deterioration in health. One person said, “I like the fact they come out once a month and ask me how things are going. We talk about my care plan, and they want to know if they can do anything else.” This showed people were involved in reviewing whether care remained right for them.

Staff told us they could identify and report changes in people’s needs quickly, and office staff would update care plans or arrange further reviews where needed. This helped people receive care that remained effective as their health or circumstances changed.
 

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

Policies and training reflected current guidance, and care records showed staff were expected to follow professional advice relevant to each person’s needs. The registered manager explained policies were aligned to current guidance. For example, records referred to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] guidance within policies such as skin care and tissue viability. Care plans also showed the provider incorporated advice from occupational therapists, district nurses, general practitioners (GP) and other professionals into the way support was delivered.

Feedback from professionals highlighted staff competence and their ability to apply best practice, particularly when supporting people with specific needs such as dementia.
 

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once.

Staff worked with a range of health and social care professionals to help make sure people’s care was joined up. This included liaison with general practitioners (GP), occupational therapists, district nurses, hospices, social workers, physiotherapists and community teams. This approach demonstrated multi-agency working and helped people receive timely and coordinated support. For example, the service worked with district nurses and GPs to respond to a person’s skin concerns and incorporate clinical guidance into the care plan. This meant people did not have to repeatedly explain their needs and staff had clearer information about how to support them.

Internal teamwork was also effective. The registered manager was supported by a deputy manager, care supervisors and a care coordinator, and information was shared through weekly handovers and team meetings. Staff spoke positively about this. One member of staff said changes in people’s needs were “discussed in handovers which are weekly, so all seniors are kept up to date, which helps us to support the care team.” This supported continuity and reduced the risk of changes being missed.
 

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff understood the importance of promoting health and wellbeing and supported people to live healthier lives and, where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff supported people with a wide range of health and wellbeing needs, including nutrition and hydration, mobility, skin integrity, medicines, emotional wellbeing and meaningful activity. Care plans included specific guidance on food and drink preferences, hydration, monitoring for deterioration and how staff should encourage people to do as much as possible for themselves. Staff also described how they used everyday visits to support healthier choices. One staff member said they would encourage higher fluid intake in hot weather and explain that “Keeping hydrated would reduce the risk of a fall or urinary tract infection (UTI).”

Staff also supported people’s emotional and social wellbeing as part of helping them live healthier lives. This was evident in examples where staff identified reduced mood or social isolation and helped people to attend meaningful activities. For example, records for one person showed staff worked with family to support attendance at community dance sessions after the person had become low in mood and withdrawn. This led to improved emotional wellbeing, increased social interaction and meaningful engagement. The impact for the person was not only attendance at an activity but reduced distress, more enjoyment and more connection with others.

People and relatives gave positive feedback about how staff encouraged independence and wellbeing. A relative said, “There’s more to their job than physical care,” and described staff suggesting local activities for their family member. Another person said staff helped them remain independent by encouraging them to do what they could for themselves and discussing additional time if visits ever felt rushed. This meant support was focused not only on completing tasks, but on helping people maintain health, confidence and quality of life.
 

The registered manager monitored outcomes through audits, reviews, incident analysis and governance systems. This included structured risk analysis reviews, which identified key themes such as falls, medication adherence and communication.

Evidence of impact was seen in outcomes for people. For example, 1 person initially experienced lethargy and repeated GP visits. Following structured medication support, no further GP visits were recorded, alongside improved alertness and engagement. Another person, identified at risk of self-neglect and repeated falls, experienced no further falls after increased support and multidisciplinary intervention. This showed monitoring processes were not only identifying risks but leading to measurable improvements in people’s health and safety

Professionals also highlighted clear oversight and accountability within the service, with systems in place to monitor outcomes and drive improvement.
 

The provider made sure people were supported to give consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance.

The service promoted consent in day-to-day care and in formal decision-making. Staff described consent as an important part of their role and said they always assumed people had capacity unless there was reason to assess otherwise. Staff understood that consent could be verbal or non-verbal and that people had the right to make unwise decisions if they had capacity. One staff member explained, “Someone with full capacity would be able to fully understand the information given to them and retain this information and be able to communicate consent.”

Care plans reflected this approach. They included guidance on how people communicated consent, what staff should do if a person refused, and when staff should stop and reassess. In more complex situations, the provider had completed mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA).

People were involved in day-to-day decisions about their care, and relatives confirmed they were involved in important decisions where appropriate. Staff feedback showed this was embedded in practice. A member of staff said, “People should be presumed to have capacity unless assessed otherwise.” This helped protect people’s rights and supported care that remained person-centred rather than task led.