Bluebird care (Central Bedfordshire)

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 were placed at the centre of their care and treatment and were involved in decisions about how their support was delivered.

Care plans reflected people’s individual needs preferences and were developed with input from people relatives. One person said, “I was involved in discussions about my care,” another person said, “I was involved in the assessment and reviews. The reviews take place approximately every 6 months.”

Daily care notes reflected what was recorded in care plans and staff understood how to provide support in line with people’s personal preferences and wishes.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and worked in a flexible and joined up way to support choice and continuity.

Care plans reflected people’s individual needs preferences and the involvement of relatives, unpaid carers and other services.

Staff worked in partnership with health professionals and external partners to coordinate care and ensure people received consistent support.

Staffing arrangements supported continuity and most people were supported by regular staff who knew them well. Comments received from people and their relatives included, “On the whole, the same people. Might get the odd person, we don’t know,” and “we see a regular group of carers. It is about who (family member) likes and gets on with. They are good at finding the right carers”

The provider had systems in place which ensured people were able to receive information in a format which met their needs.

People’s communication needs were identified, recorded and shared with staff so information could be provided in a way they could understand. Care plans included details about communication preferences and any support required to help people engage in their care and make decisions, for example, wearing glasses or hearing aids.

Staff understood how to adapt communication and used clear and accessible approaches when sharing information. People and relatives told us they were able to access information about their care.

Systems were in place for people, their relatives and staff to share feedback and ideas, and make complaints about their care. People were provided with written information before using the service. This explained what to expect and how to raise concerns or complaints.

People and relatives understood how to give feedback and felt confident their views would be listened to and taken seriously. One person told us, “I do know how to raise a complaint. I made a complaint and it was taken seriously and resolved.” Another person told us, “I would speak to the area manager. I have done this a couple of times, and my concerns were dealt with.”

The provider gathered feedback through a variety of channels including formal surveys, meetings, care reviews, spot checks and supervision. Feedback was analysed by the registered manager and any issues identified were addressed and shared with staff to support driving change and service improvement.

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People and their relatives told us the provider was flexible and responsive to their needs.

They told us they received their care when it suited them and were supported to attend health appointments where needed. One person said, “I have a rota sent every Friday which states the times and who is coming. They stay for the full time. The time works well for us.” Another person said, “I have a rota every week. Mostly the staff are on time. If they are late the office will let me know. They stay for the full length of time. Most staff do what they are supposed to.”

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People confirmed they were offered choices about their care and support. Staff delivered care respectfully and in line with people’s preferences and wishes. One relative told us, “Staff treat (family member) with respect. They listen well and do what (family member) says. Staff know how to treat (family member) properly.”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Care plans reflected people’s wishes and were regularly reviewed. Records showed clear information about DNACPR decisions where these were in place. These were recorded, accessible, and shared with relevant professionals when needed. People and relatives said they were involved in planning decisions where appropriate.