Bluebird Care (Rother & Hastings)

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People and relatives told us they were involved in the planning and reviewing of care provided. Relatives felt they were updated, and any changes were discussed with them to ensure they were aware and in agreement. We were told, “My [relative] normally lets me complete his reviews as he finds this hard. I feed this back to him and he’s happy with this.” And “[Person’s name] is nonverbal, but I was involved in their care planning.” Care documentation was regularly assessed and reviewed to ensure it was up to date and relevant.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Staff understood people’s needs and ensured they received support from other healthcare teams if needed. For example, when people have needed support with catheter management or become unwell. Relatives feedback included, “The staff are good at recognising if [person’s name] skin needs attention, and they will alert the DN’s. He’s not really needed a GP recently. The staff are good as they keep me informed too.” Staff received the training and support they needed to meet people’s needs. When staff highlighted a gap in their knowledge the registered manager supported them to access refresher training or further support to increase their knowledge and confidence and ensure they were meeting good practice standards. This included external training sourced for specialist feeding systems and E-learning for end-of-life care.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. People felt their health needs were well managed and staff recognised when additional specialist help was required. One person told us, “About 3 weeks ago I had my catheter changed by a community nurse. It was an emergency visit as I was uncomfortable. I told one of the carers who escalated my concern to the office, and they contacted the district nurses for me.” Staff we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs. Staff worked together well as a team and felt supported by management and office staff. They worked in collaboration with other healthcare professionals to ensure people’s care was managed safely. Care and treatment was provided following guidance from other health care professionals. Health professionals we spoke with confirmed this.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People told us care staff had helped them improve their independence. This had enabled one person to reduce their care visits each week as their health improved. People were involved in how their care was provided and had care documentation which was person centred and informed staff of their care and support needs. Tasks were included on the electronic system which care staff were required to complete during visits. This identified if any tasks were not completed. Care staff used the daily notes to record the care they provided and any medical or emotional concerns, including what action had been taken and whether the issue had been referred to the office or other health professionals.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Care needs were reviewed regularly and updated if changes occurred to ensure information was relevant and supported peoples changing needs. People and relatives told us they were listened to. For example, if visit times needed to be changed at the person’s request, or if people expressed a preference for specific staff members to visit them, this was arranged if at all possible. Health professionals spoke positively about the level of care and professionalism shown by staff and felt they worked well with them. A health professional said, “The team call up as soon as any issues with the clients arise and take advice/direction very well.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People confirmed they were offered choice and involved in decisions about their care and relatives were consulted when appropriate. Care plans demonstrated people were supported to remain as independent as possible. For example, when personal care was being provided, care tasks included in the care plan included what elements of care the person would be able to do themselves with guidance or minimal support and what tasks staff were required to carry out. People’s consent was gained at each visit and recorded in the daily notes.