Bluebird Care (Hull and Beverley)

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 67 (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 not always fully assessed or recorded. Pre-admission information was not fully utilised to ensure accurate and detailed information was recorded about people, their support needs and associated risks.

People were involved in their care plans and regular reviews were undertaken. One relative told us, “The manager does a review every 3-6 months, they are constantly reviewing the care, and the [manager] keeps me up to date.”

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Staff were insightful about people’s individual needs and people told us they received care from staff who knew their individual support needs well. One relative told us, “They [staff] know [person] well, they use a sling to support [person], they know what they are doing.”

Professionals were involved in the assessment of people’s health, care and wellbeing needs.

People were supported to live a healthy life, and managers and staff understood the importance of sharing accurate information in a timely manner. Staff told us communication within the service was effective and various systems were in place for the staff team to share information in a timely way.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff felt they were able to support people to be as independent as possible, and staff were able to request more time on calls to support people when required.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The provider did not always follow recognised best practices when decisions were being made around consent. Whilst the provider told us consent was being discussed with people and relatives at the commencement of the care package, we found consent to care documentation was not in place. The manager offered immediate assurances during the assessment that consent to care documentation was now in place.

People told us staff sought consent prior to completing care tasks. One person told us, “They ask my permission before doing anything.”