Background to this inspection
Updated
13 October 2018
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.
The inspection activity started on 4 September 2018 and ended on the 10 September. This inspection included telephone interviews with people who used the service and their relatives. We visited the office location on 5 and 6 September 2018, to review care records, policies and procedures and to meet with staff members. In addition, we undertook a home visit with one person who could not talk with us on the phone.
This was an announced comprehensive inspection completed by one inspector and two experts by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who had personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
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 inspection was partly prompted by an incident which had a serious impact on a person using the service and that indicated potential concerns about the management of risk in the service. While we did not look at the circumstances of the specific incident, which was subject to external investigation, we did look at associated risks.
Before our inspection visit, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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 also reviewed information we held about the service in the form of statutory notifications received from the service and any safeguarding or whistleblowing incidents, which may have occurred. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law.
We asked the local authority and Healthwatch for any information they had which would aid our inspection. We used this information as part of our planning. Local authorities together with other agencies may have responsibility for funding people who used the service and monitoring its quality. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion, which promotes the views and experiences of people who use health and social care services.
We spoke with 21 people, three relatives, the registered manager, managers assistant, human resources manager, care coordinator and four staff members including two care supervisors. In addition, we met with three new staff members undertaking their in-house induction training with Bluebird Care (Shropshire).
We looked at the care and support plans for six people including assessments of risk and guidance for the use of medicines. We looked at records of quality checks completed by the registered manager and the provider. In addition, we confirmed the recruitment details of three staff members.
Updated
13 October 2018
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults, younger disabled adults and children. At this inspection they were providing personal care for 178 people.
Bluebird Care UK is a national franchise. A franchise is when a franchisee (the provider) has bought the right to sell a specific company's (the franchisor's) products in a particular area using the company's name. The franchise operates over two hundred locations across the United Kingdom.
A registered manager was in post and was present throughout this inspection. 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.
At the last inspection, published in September 2016, the service was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained overall ‘good.’
People received support that was exceptionally kind, caring and empowering. People were supported to maintain lifestyles they chose and to identify and achieve their goals in life. People were encouraged to take part in community and charitable events to build social integration and minimise the risk of isolation and loneliness.
People's privacy and dignity was respected by those providing assistance. People were supported at times of upset and distress.
People continued to remain safe as staff knew how to recognise and respond to concerns of ill-treatment and abuse. The provider followed safe recruitment procedures when employing new staff members. When people needed it, they were safely supported with their medicines by trained and competent staff members.
The provider followed effective infection prevention and control guidance when supporting people in their own homes. The equipment that people used was maintained and kept in safe working order and the provider undertook safety checks with people at their home addresses.
The provider learnt from incidents and accidents and worked with people and families to minimise the risk of reoccurrence if things had gone wrong. The provider worked in an open and transparent way and shared lessons learnt with other organisations to minimise the risk of re-occurrence in other care settings.
People continued to receive care that was effective and personalised to their individual needs and preferences. People were supported by staff members who arrived when expected and who knew them well. They were assisted by a staff team who were well supported and had the skills and training to effectively assist people.
People were supported to have choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff members were aware of current guidance which informed their practice and people's rights were protected by the staff who supported them.
People, and those close to them, continued to be involved in developing their own care and support plans. When changes occurred in people's personal and medical circumstances, these plans were reviewed to reflect these changes. People and their relatives were encouraged to raise any concerns or complaints. The provider had systems in place to address any issues raised with them.
Bluebird Care (Shropshire) continued to be well-led by a management team that people and staff found approachable and supportive. People were involved in decisions about their care and support and their suggestions were valued by the provider. Staff members felt involved in developing the care and support they provided and felt their opinions and ideas were listened to by the provider and, if appropriate, implemented. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of service they provided and where necessary made changes to drive improvements.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.