Background to this inspection
Updated
15 December 2023
The inspection
We carried out this performance review and assessment under Section 46 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act). We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements of the regulations associated with the Act and looked at the quality of the service to provide a rating.
Unlike our standard approach to assessing performance, we did not physically visit the office of the location. This is a new approach we have introduced to reviewing and assessing performance of some care at home providers. Instead of visiting the office location we use technology such as electronic file sharing and video or phone calls to engage with people using the service and staff.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried by 1 inspector.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
Registered Manager
This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.
At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.
Notice of inspection
The inspection was announced. We gave the service 72 hours notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
What we did before the inspection
We used the information we held about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We gained feedback from the local authority who work with the service and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. We used all this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with 8 people who used the service and 7 relatives. We spoke with 10 staff, including the registered manager and care staff. We reviewed 4 care records, 4 medicines records and 3 staff recruitment records. We reviewed a range of records relating to the management of the service.
Updated
15 December 2023
About the service
Bluebird Care (Hambleton and Richmondshire) is a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people in their own homes. The service provides support to older people and younger adults. At the time of our inspection there were 73 people using the service.
People’s experience of the service and what we found:
At the time of the inspection, the location did not 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.
Right Support
The provider had clear policies and guidance about how staff safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Risks posed to people were assessed and mitigated. Where people received support with medicines, this was safely managed. Staff were trained and understood their roles in relation to infection, prevention and control. People told us staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) as required and ensured their homes were clean and tidy. Staff worked closely with external agencies to ensure people's health needs were met.
Right Care
People were supported by enough staff. People told us staff arrived on time and they had not had any missed care calls. Call monitoring was in place, online systems alerted the management team if staff were running late. People received staff rota's a week in advance. Staff were recruited safely, and people and relatives told us staff were kind and caring. Care plans were person centred and contained information about people's preferences and needs. Care records were regularly reviewed, to ensure information about people's care and support was relevant and up to date.
Right Culture
The provider had quality assurance systems in place to monitor the service and learn lessons from accidents and incidents. Lessons learned documents were shared with the staff team. Staff felt supported in their roles and staff spot checks were regularly undertaken, to ensure staff were competent. People and relatives told us the service was well led. Feedback was sought from people and relatives and used to improve the quality of care people received. Complaints and concerns were effectively managed, people and relatives told us where they had raised a concern, action was taken to address and resolve them.
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.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 17 August 2017).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
We undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key question not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Bluebird Care (Hambleton and Richmondshire) 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.
This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.