Bluebird Care (Stroud and Cirencester)

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 outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People had care plans that contained relevant details about people, these were reviewed and updated in real time with any changes. Care plans detailed people’s routines and how they liked to do things. Staff supported some people to access the community, attend groups, read to them at home and provided companionship. Care plans showed meaningful outcomes people wanted to achieve from the care and support they received.

Communication across the staff team supported a consistent approach to person-centred care.1 staff member told us, “We always put the customers at the heart of everything we do, respecting their choices and dignity, independence, their culture and beliefs if this is relevant and understanding what matters to them. Giving full attention to them, always being patient with them and letting them have the time. Everyone is different.”

People and relative comments supported the strong person-centred approach within the service “I would describe it as an ongoing dialogue…they’re good at picking up the phone…. I would say I speak to them two to three times a week and the app I consult every day. I get fairly regular emails” and “Yes, I think they know what I like and what I dislike and they just help me out with that.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The provider was clear on the type of care needs the service could provide and meet. When required, they worked with external professionals to meet people’s needs. Staff told us how they worked alongside occupational therapists and district nurses to achieve the best possible outcomes for the people they supported. At times the service worked with other health and social care professionals who assessed people’s needs.

The registered manager tried to offer people a core team of staff for consistency and to help staff understand people’s needs and develop trust with people.

1 person’s relative told us, “What’s quite good is there’s probably 4 or 5 staff and I think that’s a good thing as [relative’s] not dependent upon the same person. We get a rota the week before to say who’s coming and I write it on [relative’s] notice board.” Another relative said, “[Relative] knows them very well now. It’s normally the one or two staff. The same ones. I think the uniform is good for him to recognise who it is.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People and their relatives told us they had access to their care plans, mostly this was electronically but if they wanted a paper copy the service provided this. Staff knew people’s needs and knew how to communicate with them in order to provide them with the right information. People’s communication needs had been identified and recorded within their care plans. Information was recorded about people’s preferred communication styles and how staff could support them.

A relative told us, “[Relatives] quite chatty. If they’re not getting on with someone they will shut down. They get on really well. I think, as well, staff get their sense of humour.” Another relative said, “Staff use gestures to show [relative] agrees with the care they receive. They have a visual impairment which the service is aware of.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider worked collaboratively with staff and people who used their service, they were open to feedback and acted to make improvements at and individual level and at a service level.

The provider used a range of formats to collect customer feedback which included telephone, in person and annual surveys. Information was collated and acted upon in a timely manner.

The provided had a complaints policy in place, people and their relatives understood how to complain and felt confident concerns would be acted on.

Feedback we received included, “People have different values and expectations. Whenever I’ve said it’s not quite good enough, they have responded” and “I would speak to the people in the office if I needed to make a complaint. If there was a form to fill in, I would go on the website, but I think I have the relationship that I would phone up and speak to them.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The management team and staff understood people’s barriers to care and worked in a way to tailor care and support people to overcome these barriers where needed. This included areas of people’s health, home life situations and family support. The registered manager spoke about how the service would aim to be flexible to fit people’s circumstances. The provider was a strong believer in supporting people to stay in their own homes, in accordance with their wishes. They worked with families to coordinate care to ensure the right services were involved to support the person to be where they wanted to be.

A relative told us, “Because there’s a call line, we can ask if there’s any issues. We can just phone them. They’re very good at signposting us as well… We get to know them. We feel very supported as a family…They’ve given us advice on contacting social services’ safeguarding.”

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. Policies relating to equality, diversity and dignity were in place and supported by staff training. This helped to ensure staff understood their responsibilities in providing inclusive, respectful care.

Care plans considered people’s individual needs and protected characteristics, enabling adjustments that may be required.

Staff demonstrated awareness of equality and inclusion principles in their day-to-day practice, and the service promoted a culture of dignity and respect for all. The provider worked to ensure people’s experiences and outcomes were fair and person-centred. 1 staff member said, “There is a lot of walking/standing aids that the OTs put in place, bluebird will give extra time for visits and suggest environmental changes and adjust care plans accordingly. It is team effort.”

A relative told us, “I think it is an excellent service. It’s enabling [Relative] to stay in her own home.”

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.

People were supported to plan ahead if they wanted to. The service had received accreditation from the Gold standards framework, during the assessment the provider was undergoing their 3 yearly renewal. This framework helped upskill staff to provide effective care at the end of people’s lives and work collaboratively with health care teams involved in the person’s care.

Evidence we viewed demonstrated staff were able to recognise changes to people’s needs at this time, work closely with family and health partners to ensure people had access to equipment and medicines when needed and supporting families through difficult times. Records showed staff respected people’s individual wishes and preferences towards the end of their life whilst ensuring people remained safe and comfortable.

People had respect forms in place, respect forms are personalised recommendations for a person’s clinical care and treatment in a future emergency in which they are unable to make or express choices. They help health and care professionals understand what is important to people. Staff knew about people’s forms and where they could access them in the event of an emergency.

A relative told us, “There’s often conversations about what future care might look like. Bluebird is constructive in that dialogue.” A person told us “They haven’t pushed anything. They’ve just said ‘this is available.”

The service had positive links within the community. Recent developments included attending a ‘death café’ which offered a safe space for people to come together and share thoughts and feelings and reflections about death and dying. By attending the café the service shared this community resource with bereaved loved ones of people they have supported.

Staff we spoke to were confident in supporting people in their final days. 1 staff member said, “Yes we have a good relationship with nurses, OTs and GPs etc so we all work together to ensure the customer is comfortable on their last days of life. Communication is very good.”

The provider told us they were planning to create a specific care team that worked with people at the end of their life to provide consistency and an enhanced level of care consistently for people.