Background to this inspection
Updated
13 November 2020
The inspection
This was a targeted inspection to check whether the provider had met the requirements of the specific concern we had about staffing levels. We will assess all of the key question at the next comprehensive inspection of the service.
Inspection team
This inspection was undertaken by one inspector.
Service and service type
Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland is a domiciliary (home care) care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland provides a service to younger adults, older people, people living with dementia, people with a physical disability and people with sensory impairments. Not everyone using Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland receives the regulated activity of personal care. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.
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
This inspection was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice. This was to ensure we only spoke with people and relatives who had mental capacity to understand our questions. We also needed to be sure the registered manager or nominated individual was available.
What we did before inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. The provider also sent us records to show how they planned, coordinated and audited care visits. We looked at the information we had requested from the provider prior to the inspection and this information was used as part of the inspection plan.
During the inspection
We spoke with nine people, five relatives of people who used the service, eight members of staff including the registered manager. We also spoke with the nominated individual who has overall responsibility for the quality of service provision.
Updated
13 November 2020
This announced inspection took place between the 11 and 16 January 2019. At our last inspection in October 2015 we rated the service good. This is the service's first inspection at its current address. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland is a domiciliary (home care) care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. This also includes a ‘live-in’ care service where staff cared for people in the person’s home for most of the day. Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland provides a service to younger adults, older people, people living with dementia, people with a physical disability and people with sensory impairments. Not everyone using Bluebird Care, Newmarket and Fenland receives the regulated activity of personal care. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
At the time of our inspection there were 106 people receiving the regulated activity of personal care.
A registered manager was not in post. They left in November 2018. A new manager had been in post for two weeks and had already applied to us to be registered.
People continued to receive a safe service. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding systems and how to report any concerns. Staff continued to be recruited in a safe way with checks undertaken on their suitability. Only staff who successfully passed pre-employment checks were recruited. Sufficient staff were employed and they met people's needs safely including the safe administration and management of their medicines. Staff helped people to keep a clean environment in their homes. Risk assessments relating to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service were completed. Lessons were learned when things went wrong.
The service remained effective. Staff were supported to have the right skills to meet people's needs. Staff supported people to eat and drink well. People were enabled to access health care services. People were given choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive ways possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The registered manager worked with other organisations involved in people’s care to help ensure when they moved between services, they received consistent care.
The service remained caring. People received a service from staff who showed compassion, kindness and respect of people's dignity. Procedures and policies were in place to help people to access and use advocacy services. People were involved and had a say in how their care was provided. People were treated with fairness whatever their needs were and could be as independent as they wanted to be.
The service remained responsive. People received person-centred care that was based on their individual needs. Staff used technology to record their care visits to people. Monitoring of this helped identify the need for prompt deployment of additional staff resources. This helped improve the quality of people’s lives. Concerns were found and responded to effectively and this helped drive improvement. People, when needed, were supported with end of life care by staff who had the necessary knowledge and skills to do this with dignity. Procedures were in place to support people with their end of life care wishes when needed.
The service continued to be well-led. The operations' manager and the manager led by example and ensured the staff had skills relevant to their role. Staff worked as a team and promoted the values of the provider to help people live fulfilling lives. People contributed to how the service was run. An open and honest staff team culture was in place. The provider and staff team worked in partnership with others involved in people’s care.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.