• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Bluebird Care North Hampshire & West Berkshire

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Unit 17, Plantagenet House, Kingsclere Park, Kingsclere, Newbury, Berkshire, RG20 4SW (01256) 762324

Provided and run by:
P & M Homecare Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 3 January 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

One inspector and an Expert by Experience carried out this inspection. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. The service also provided ‘live in care’ services for people. People predominantly purchased their care privately, but some people had their care funded by the local authority.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. A registered manager and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave 48 hours’ notice of the inspection because we needed to ensure the provider had time to contact people to inform them we may be calling them via telephone to gain their feedback about the care they received.

Inspection activity started on 18 September and ended on 15 October 2019. We visited the office location on 25 September and 1 October 2019. We made telephone calls to people who used the service between 18 September and 15 October 2019.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service and received feedback from one social worker. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 15 people who used the service and three relatives via telephone about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with the provider, the registered manager and seven members of staff including senior staff and care workers.

We reviewed a range of records. This included five people’s care records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We requested and received additional information from the provider which helped to support the judgements detailed in this report.

Overall inspection


Updated 3 January 2020

About the service

Bluebird Care Hook and Kingsclere is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 47 older people living in their own homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The provider was driven by excellent leadership, who were constantly seeking innovative ways to extend the traditional role of a domiciliary care agency, to provide different and new models of homecare.

The provider was constantly evolving the service through the implementation of new technology. The benefits to this helped make the service safer and more accessible for people.

The provider had nurtured an inclusive, positive culture within the service. They had an excellent understanding of protected equality characteristics and was committed to ensuring people and staff were not discriminated against in any way.

There was a strong sense of social responsibility, which translated into the provider playing a key role in keeping people connected with their community by avoiding social isolation. The provider viewed the wellbeing of people and staff as of paramount importance, investing time and resources to ensure they felt valued and cared for.

There were effective systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service. There were clear lines of accountability through all branches of the staff team, meaning that performance was under constant review, which promoted a culture of continuous improvement.

There were systems to deal appropriately with complaints and gain people’s feedback about the service. The provider was open to suggestions and used this feedback to make improvements.

People were involved in developing and reviewing their care and told us they were given choice and control about their care arrangements. People’s care plans clearly identified the help they needed and where they wished to remain independent.

The provider understood how to provide responsive and empathetic end of life care. People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy and confidentiality were upheld.

There were enough staff in place to meet people’s needs. The provider had systems to monitor staff utilisation, which meant that informed decisions were made about how the business could sustainably grow.

There were appropriate systems in place to gain people’s consent to care. 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.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 7 March 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

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