Bluebird Care (Northumberland South)

Bluebird Care (Northumberland South) is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their homes. 58 people were receiving personal care at the time of the inspection.

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

The needs of people had been assessed before they joined the service and this was regularly reviewed, involving people in decisions about their care. The provider had also taken steps to ensure there was sufficient staffing so that people received care from the same staff that they knew.

When things went wrong people were told and the registered manager understood their responsibilities. They had taken steps to receive feedback from people who used the service so that care could be improved. Joined up working, alongside other healthcare professionals, also took place to find good outcomes for people who used the service.

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.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

At the time of the inspection, the location did not provide care or support for anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (report published 5 January 2018).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service and the time that had passed since our last inspection.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

The overall rating for the service has remained good based on the findings of this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Bluebird Care (Northumberland South) on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Bluebird care (South Northumberland) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults (including people who may be living with dementia), younger and disabled adults and people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 57people with a range of needs, 22 of whom were receiving support with personal care.

The service had a registered manager who had been registered since December 2013. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they were safe when being supported by staff and we found the service had in place safeguarding adults procedures. The registered manager was able to describe lessons learned from a recent minor information breach. Risk assessments had been undertaken with regard to staff working in people’s own homes. Accidents and incidents were monitored and reviewed.

Suitable recruitment procedures and checks were in place, to ensure staff had the right skills. People told us staff arrived on time and always stayed the full allocated period. Medicines were managed and recorded appropriately. People said staff always used personal protective equipment when delivering personal care.

The provider had a policy regarding equality and diversity and staff understood issues related to this area, and what it meant for people using the service. Staff told us they had access to a range of training and updating and records confirmed this. They confirmed they had access to regular supervision and an annual appraisal. The registered manager described how technology was being used to enhance care delivery, especially the introduction of electronic care and medicine records which could be updated in real time.

CQC monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). No one using the service was subject to any restrictions imposed by the Court of Protection. People were asked for their consent on a day to day basis or had signed consent forms. Where this was not possible there was evidence of best interest decisions being made. People were supported with food and drinks in their own home. Special monitoring of people with a higher risk of weight loss was undertaken.

People told us they were happy with the care provided and the approach of staff. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s individual needs and preferences. People and relatives said they were always treated with respect and dignity. They told us they were regularly involved in care decisions. People were supported to maintain good health and wellbeing and access general practitioners and other health staff.

Care plans related appropriately to the individual needs of the person, although this was sometimes difficult to find amongst a range of more generalised information. People were supported to access activities or attend events in the community. Formal complaints in the last 12 months had been addressed appropriately.

The registered manager demonstrated that regular checks on people’s care and the running of the service were undertaken. People told us senior staff carried out spot checks and quality monitoring calls. Staff felt well supported by the registered manager, who they said was approachable and responsive. Records were up to date and well maintained. The service was meeting legal requirement related to its registration through the display of its current quality rating and ensuring the CQC was notified of significant events.