Archived: Bluebird Care (Harrogate)

Updated 30 July 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.

This inspection took place on 9 June 2016. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in the location offices when we visited. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection visit we reviewed the information we held about the service, including the Provider Information Return (PIR) which the provider completed. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We sent surveys to people who used the service, relatives, staff and health and community professionals to feedback on their experience of the service. We reviewed the information we held about the service. This included notifications regarding safeguarding, accidents and changes which the registered provider had informed us of. A notification is information about important events which the registered provider is required to send us by law.

During our inspection, we spoke with the provider, the new manager, and four members of staff. We spoke with five people who used the service and two relatives by telephone to seek the views and experiences of people using the service. We reviewed the records for three people who used the service and staff recruitment and training files for three staff. We checked records relating to the management of the service including staff rotas, staff meeting minutes, quality assurance visits, annual surveys, the staff handbook and the Statement of Purpose. We also looked at a sample of policies and procedures.

Updated 30 July 2016

This inspection took place on 9 June 2016. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the Bluebird Care (Harrogate) provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available when we visited.

At our last inspection on 12 February 2015 the provider was meeting all the regulations that were assessed. Although some further improvements were required the provider had made improvements in relation to the care and welfare of people, staff recruitment and training, record keeping and quality assurance.

Bluebird Care (Harrogate) is registered to provide care and support to people who live in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, there were 38 people receiving a service.

There was a new manager in post who was required to submit an application to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to be the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

Staff reported the manager was supportive and they had attended recent staff meetings, training and supervision sessions with them. We could see the new manager had introduced management systems and regular contact with people using the service, to check they were satisfied with their care packages. However, these had yet to be fully established for the service to be able to demonstrate continuous development.

We received conflicting information from staff about the quality of training. Some staff told us they would like more training while others commended the level of training they received. A new training programme was being developed to provide staff with the knowledge and skills to support people effectively. Staff had undertaken training on a range of topics in June 2016. This included awareness training to enhance their knowledge and understanding of their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005.

People were positive about the care staff and said they received consistent support from caring and kind staff. When we spoke with staff they understood the importance of people being supported to make decisions for themselves. Staff liaised with healthcare professionals at the appropriate time to help monitor and maintain people’s health and wellbeing.

Although there had not been any safeguarding issues the staff understood their responsibility with regard to safeguarding and said they would raise any concerns with managers. Recruitment checks were in place for the safe recruitment of new staff. These checks were undertaken to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who used the service.

There were systems in place for assisting people to take their medicines and the manager had put in place a system of audits to monitor medicines administration.

People were consulted about their health and care needs before a service was provided. This meant that people were involved in planning the care and support they wished to receive. Care plans were sufficiently detailed to provide information for staff on how to carry out individual care and support for people. Care plans and daily records were maintained on a mobile system and we saw that staff were confident in the use of this system. When people were identified as being at risk, their care plans showed the actions required to manage these risks. We saw that records were updated when people's care and support needs had changed. This meant staff had up to date information to deliver consistent care and support. People told us how their service was effective in meeting their needs.

Appropriate systems had been introduced to be able to gather feedback from people using the service via questionnaires and we saw the provider acted upon the results of this feedback.

People we spoke with said they had not needed to raise a complaint. However, they felt confident that the provider would act upon any concerns raised with them. In their written feedback to us people said that when they raised concerns these had been addressed appropriately.