Background to this inspection
Updated
3 August 2019
The inspection:
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team:
The inspection team consisted of one inspector.
Service and service type:
Bluebird Care Mid Essex is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care to people in their own homes.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection:
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be available.
Inspection site visit activity started on 10 May 2019 and ended on 13 May 2019. This included visiting the office location to speak with the registered manager, interview staff and review care records and policies and procedures.
What we did:
Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we had about the service including statutory notifications which include information the provider is required to send us by law. We also looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR gives us information about what the service does well and any planned improvements.
During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, the provider of the service, one director, one office staff, two supervisors, five care staff and one relative. We looked at ten people’s care records including their medicine record and daily notes. Additionally, we viewed people’s care notes on the computerised system. We examined six care staff members recruitment records, including supervision records and training files. We viewed documents relating to the management of the service, complaints and compliments, satisfaction surveys and quality audits.
After our initial visits we then contacted 14 people, 10 relatives, four staff and two professionals by telephone and email to obtain feedback on the service on 16th, 17th, 20th and 21st May 2019. We also requested further documents and information from the registered manager.
.
Updated
3 August 2019
About the service: Bluebird Care Mid Essex is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of inspection there were 80 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People and their relatives said the service was excellent and staff went above and beyond their expectation. We were told by people, “The [registered manager] is a guardian angel, so dedicated”, “Their [staff] coming enables me to have a life rather than an existence. They lift my day and hopefully through caring for me I make their day”, “They [staff] make me feel human, worth something and feel valued” and, “They [staff] are a class act.”
Staff spoke with compassion when referring to the people they cared for. The caring ethos of ‘people first’ and ‘people at the heart of the service’, expressed to us by the provider and registered manager, was echoed in the comments made by the staff. This was reflected in the care people told us they received.
People appreciated the continuity of care from the same care staff who were punctual and always attended. People and their relatives confirmed that they received a weekly rota which was adhered to, with changes only occurring in unforeseen circumstances. People and their relatives had trust and confidence in the staff and management. Communication with the service was described as excellent by people, relatives, staff and professionals.
The service worked in collaboration with health and social care professionals, the fire service and the police to promote joined up care. The service was exceptionally proactive in recognising social exclusion and isolation and involved people in the life of the community.
The service was person-centred, viewing their relationship with people using the service as a ‘partnership’ with emphasis on equality and diversity including cultural and lifestyle choice. Computerised care plans were comprehensive with clear instructions for staff on how the person wanted to be cared for. Consent to care was agreed at every visit which allowed for choice at the time of care delivery, taking into consideration a person’s preferred way of communication.
Customer Handbooks were provided for people with information on the service including how to make a complaint. People and their relatives were confident that if they had concerns they would be dealt with appropriately.
Systems were in place to monitor the delivery of care through audits, spot checks, staff observational supervision and quality assurance questionnaires. Lessons learned were documented and shared with the management team and in staff meetings. Medicines administration records showed that medicines were taken as prescribed. People confirmed that staff followed infection control procedures and wore gloves and aprons appropriately to prevent the spread of infection.
Safe staff recruitment practices were followed which included the involvement of the people using the service who were asked to complete a questionnaire on staff performance. People confirmed that new staff shadowed experienced staff, and that they were consulted beforehand for their consent. Staff received an initial induction, refresher and specific subject training. The service promoted a learning and development culture to continually strive towards excellent care practice.
People and relatives knew the name of the registered manager and confirmed that they and supervisors visited the people regularly for spot checks or lead by example through working with staff.
The wellbeing of staff was viewed positively by management, and staff told us they felt valued and supported.
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 22 October 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk