Archived: Bluebird Care (Wakefield)

Updated 20 February 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector on 13 and 17 December 2018 and was announced. We gave the service two days’ notice of the inspection site visit because we needed to be sure someone would be available for us to review records and speak with staff.

We reviewed information we held about the service, such as notifications, information from the local authority and the contracting team. We looked at the provider information return (PIR). This is a form which asks the provider to give key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make. The provider informed people using the service we were inspecting. There were 50 people using the service, 33 of whom were receiving personal care.

We looked at care documentation for four people, in electronic and paper format. We reviewed three staff files and records relating to how the service was run. We spoke with the nominated individual, the registered manager, the deputy manager and three care staff. We spoke with four people who used the service and/or their relatives by telephone after the inspection visit.

Updated 20 February 2019

Bluebird Care (Wakefield) is registered to provide personal care for people in their own homes. When we inspected the service there were 33 people who were supported with personal care. The inspection took place on 13 and 17 December 2018 and was announced. The last inspection was on 16 August 2017 and there was one breach of regulations, relating to recruitment of staff. This was because the provider’s recruitment procedure was not operated effectively. At this inspection, we found the provider had taken sufficient action to address the breach and ensure systems and processes were more thorough.

At the time of this inspection, 50 people were using the service, 33 of whom were supported with personal care.

People felt safe with the care provided. Staff knew how to keep people safe and there were clear procedures and guidance in place for staff to manage risks. Risk assessments were clear and understood by staff. Systems for managing medicines were clear and audited regularly.

People were supported to have maximum control and choice over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff were well supported and valued. There was regular communication with the management team through formal routes, such as supervision and meetings, as well as informal routes through continuous communication. Staff training was in place, although we made a recommendation training needed to be more robustly evidenced where staff supported people with specific needs.

There was a clear assessment process which ensured people had choice and involvement in their care and support. Staff demonstrated caring and compassionate behaviours and attitudes towards the people they supported and their families.

Staff were committed to positive outcomes for people and placed emphasis on supporting people as individuals. Staff told us they felt well cared for themselves and were therefore easily able to transfer a caring approach to their work.

Staff supported people’s dignity and were respectful in verbal and written communications. Care was responsive to people’s needs and very person centred. There was clear emphasis on involving and including people as active partners in their care and support.

Care records contained information which was accurately detailed and easy to locate. The provider needs to consider further ways to enhance communication with people about their care plans, through making information more accessible such as in picture format.

The complaints process was clear and there was evidence of complaints being responded to thoroughly and transparently.

Partnerships and community working was evident.

Issues from the last inspection had been addressed and the management team was working to ensure further improvements could be made to the service.

The service was well run and the registered manager was aware of the strengths and areas to improve. Audits were clear with defined responsibilities and actions for improvement. Audits showed areas identified had been addressed.