Archived: Bluebird Care (Stafford)

Is the service safe?

The provider had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service and ensure that people received safe care. Risk assessments had been reviewed regularly to reflect people's changing conditions and ensure they were safely cared for.

The provider had made improvements in staff recruitment and selection. References and checks had been put into place to ensure that people were of good character and had satisfactory references before providing care and support for people. This reduced the risk of people receiving care from unsuitable staff.

Staff demonstrated their detailed knowledge of people's needs. Each person had a risk profile that had been reviewed regularly. We saw that the service took immediate action when a vulnerable person had unwelcome visitors to their home. The actions taken had ensured the safety of the person in their home.

There was a safe system of medication in place in the homes of people who needed staff support in taking their medication. Risk assessments were in place. Medication records had been checked regularly by senior staff and a monthly audit of medicines completed to ensure people were receiving their medicines safely and as prescribed.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them before they received the service. Regular reviews of care plans and quality reviews had been carried out to ensure people's needs continued to be met. Care plans were up to date and reflected

people's current needs.

We saw examples of the service working closely with health professionals who were involved in people's care and support. Where there had been areas of concern, meetings had been held with other professionals including district nurses, occupational therapists and social workers to share information and plan care and support.

People had been involved in planning their care and had signed to confirm their agreement with the care and support provided for them. More complex decisions had included relatives and other people involved in the person's care to ensure the decisions were made in the person's best interests.

Is the service caring?

Three people using the service told us they were highly satisfied with the service provided. People spoke highly of the staff supporting them. Comments included, "Staff are marvellous". "I could not ask for better staff". We spoke with a relative who told us, "I can't fault the service. Staff show compassion and care that is out of this world. X needs two staff to help four times each day. Staff have helped to retain their dignity. I have a telephone call every two weeks to keep me informed and ask if there is anything more X needs."

Is the service responsive?

A copy of the complaints procedure had been included with the care information left in people's homes. The procedure stated how complaints would be managed. We found that complaints had been recorded and investigated in line with the complaints policy of the service. Complainants were always advised verbally and in writing of the outcome of complaints. We saw instances where apologies had been made and changes made to improve the service.

We saw examples where reviews had indicated that people's needs had changed and where support staff had reported particular difficulties relating to moving and handling. In one example an assessment by an occupational therapist had resulted in new equipment to provide better support for the person.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality assurance system in place and records showed that identified problems and opportunities to change things for the better had been addressed promptly. The system included listening to people who used the service, staff and their relatives. There was a pro-active approach to complaints made about the service. The provider sought the views of people and consistently reviewed the service in response to the views expressed by them.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They told us they could speak to a senior member of staff at any time including the on-call manager after hours. Regular supervision had been provided to all staff. We saw examples during our visit of good open communication between office staff and the manager and deputy manager. Discussions were centred around seeking solutions to issues raised to improve the service provided to people in their homes.

At our last inspection the company did not have an effective recruitment procedure in place. On this inspection we saw that the provider had taken some action but other areas we checked needed to be improved. The provider was not completing the required checks to make sure that care workers were of good character before they started providing care for people. Inadequate actions were taken to keep people safe when references identified concerns about prospective staff's conduct.

People we spoke with were overwhelmingly positive about the care they received. They told us that care workers treated them with respect and promoted their dignity. Comments included: "It's perfect for me in every way" and "Very pleased".

People said they usually had their care provided by care workers that knew them well and knew how their wanted their care provided. People said that care was reliable. Care was provided close to the time agreed with people and care workers stayed the agreed length of time. People told us that their care was not rushed.

Care workers were trained to identify signs of abuse and knew how to respond if they had concerns about people's safety and welfare.

The agency's recruitment practices had not made sure that all care workers were suitable to provide people's care.

The agency had effective systems in place to review and monitor people's care. When people raised concerns about their care these were acted upon.

We spoke with six people who used the service who told us they were delighted with the care they received. One person told us, 'The staff are very good. They are polite and we have some good fun; they do me the world of good. I like having the regular people, they turn up on time. I have a contact number if there is a problem, but I haven't had to ring it, they're marvellous'.

A relative we spoke with told us, 'I am quite satisfied with the agency; the staff arrive on time and they are always polite and courteous. They check we are alright before they leave'.

We visited the office and looked at care records, recruitment and training records and the quality assurance surveys.

We met and spoke to six staff on the telephone. The staff praised the management team for the support they received in the community, the respect they were given as carers and the training that had been given.