About the Service:

Bluebird Care provides is a domiciliary care service. The service provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes in Uttoxeter and the surrounding areas. At the time of the inspection 10 people were receiving support.

People’s experience of using this service:

Improvements had been made in the area of Mental Capacity. The registered provider complied with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. Staff received training around MCA, they understood and respected people’s right to make their own decisions and where possible, encouraged people to make decisions about the care they received.

People’s level of risk was appropriately assessed, reviewed and effectively risk managed. Staff told us that they were provided with relevant information in a timely and effectively manner and able to provide the correct level of support that was required.

Staff received safeguarding training and were familiar with the safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures; they knew how to report any concerns and the importance of keeping people safe.

Staff told us they were fully supported by the management team, that they received regular supervision and were provided with learning, training and development opportunities.

The registered manager ensured that staffing levels and recruitment practices were safely managed. People received continuity of care from regular staff who were subject to the appropriate pre-employment checks.

Medication procedures were safely in place. Staff received medication administration training and competency levels were regularly checked.

There was an up to date medication policy in place and staff had access to this policy at their convenience.

People were treated with dignity, respect and their independence was encouraged by staff who supported them. We received positive comments from people who received support from Bluebird Care staff.

Confidential and sensitive information was safely stored and protected in line with General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).

Care records contained detailed information about people’s likes, preferences and wishes; staff were familiar with the importance of providing ‘person-centred’ care and developing positive relationships with people they supported.

The registered provider had a complaints policy in place; people were provided with complaint information from the outset and knew who to raise concerns with.

The quality and safety of the care was monitored, assessed and reviewed. The registered manager was committed to providing care that was high-quality and person-centred.

A range of different quality assurance measures were in place; these helped the registered manager to identify areas of strength but also areas of development that needed to be addressed.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection service was rated ‘Good’ (report published August 2016). At this inspection we found that the registered provider continued to provide a 'good' provision of care. The evidence we reviewed and feedback we received continued to support the rating of ‘good’; there was no evidence or information from our inspection or ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns.

Why we inspected: This was a planned, announced inspection to confirm that the service remained 'good'.

This inspection visit took place on the 11 July 2016. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. Our last inspection was carried out in September 2013 and no breaches of regulations were found at that time.

The service provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes in Uttoxeter and the surrounding areas. At the time of our visit 25 people were receiving a service.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Staff gained people’s verbal consent before supporting them with any care tasks and helped people to make their own decisions. However, where people were unable to make specific decisions, mental capacity best interest decisions had not been undertaken to demonstrate that their rights were protected.

Sufficient staff were available to meet people's needs and people received their calls as agreed. Staff had knowledge about the support people needed to enable it to be provided in a safe way. Staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and systems and processes were in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Medicines were managed safely and people were supported to take their medicine as prescribed. The provider had undertaken thorough recruitment checks to ensure the staff employed were suitable to support people.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans directed staff on how to support people in their preferred way. Staff were provided with training to enable them to meet the needs of people they cared for. People’s needs and preferences were met when they were supported with their dietary needs and were supported to maintain good health; we saw that staff alerted health care professionals if they had any concerns about people’s health.

People told us that staff treated them in a caring way and respected their privacy and supported them to maintain their dignity. There were processes in place for people to express their views and opinions about the service provided and people felt confident that they could raise any concerns with the manager. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service to enable the registered manager and provider to drive improvement.

Our inspection was discussed and arranged two days in advance. This was to ensure we had time to speak with staff, as well as people using the service.

There were approximately 40 people using the service at the time of the inspection. We spoke with five people using the service or their relatives by telephone. We spoke with two staff and the registered manager in person.

People received safe and appropriate care because their needs were assessed before care was delivered. This ensured the provider could meet people's individual needs. We saw information to demonstrate how arrangements to seek people’s consent to care or treatment had been agreed.

We were informed people were treated with care and compassion and the staff responded well to their needs. One person told us, “They are all so kind I trust them. They are all different and they are all lovely. I call them the Bluebird angels.”

We saw records to confirm medicines were managed safely and effectively.

Staff received appropriate training, supervision and appraisal. People using the service and staff told us there was sufficient training to ensure that people’s needs were understood and met.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. Some improvements in relation to auditing processes and risk assessments were needed.

We carried out this inspection to check on the care and welfare of people using this service. We visited Bluebird Care in order to up date the information we hold and to establish that the needs of people using the service were being met. The visit was short notice meaning we called the provider the day before our visit to tell them about our visit. We spoke with five people using the service and three staff about how the service was delivered and the quality of service provision.

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. People spoke well of the agency, one person told us, “I would recommend this agency, I have been amazed. They cover everything that is in my care plan and more.”

People we spoke with told us that staff were helpful and kind. One person using the service said, “They are discreet and thoughtful and I feel safe with what they are doing.”

People confirmed they had a copy of their care records, which they kept in their home. They told us the manager from the agency came to see them and talked to them about their plan, and ensured they agreed with the content and understood what would be provided.

People using the service confirmed they could speak with the staff if they had a concern or a complaint. This meant people felt able to voice their concerns and were listened to. One person said, “So far it has been very reliable, but if I had a problem I would feel able to call the office and discuss it.”