We carried out a review of the data available to us about Bluebird Care (Isle of Wight) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Bluebird Care (Isle of Wight), you can give feedback on this service.
Bluebird Care (Isle of Wight) is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care for people who require this due to old age, illness or disability. At the time of the inspection the agency was providing care for approximately 110 people living on the isle of Wight.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿ We received positive feedback from people about the service. All people who used the service spoke very highly of the care staff.
¿ People told us they felt safe and secure when receiving care.
¿ People’s risk assessments and those relating to their homes’ environment were detailed and helped reduce risks to people while maintaining their independence.
¿ People told us they had been involved in care planning and care plans reflected people’s individual needs and choices. Staff were responsive to people’s needs, which were detailed in care plans.
¿ People were cared for with kindness and compassion. There were examples of when staff had undertaken extra tasks to provide people with a higher quality of life.
¿ People were supported to meet their nutritional and hydration needs and staff contacted healthcare professionals when required.
¿ Staff had an understanding of consent and were clear that people had the right to make their own choices.
¿ Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks were undertaken, which helped make sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in their own homes.
¿ There were sufficient numbers of care staff to maintain the schedule of visits. Staff told us they felt supported, received regular supervision and training.
¿ People felt listened to and a complaints procedure was in place. The provider sought feedback from people through the use of a regular reviews and a yearly survey.
The service met the characteristics of Good in all areas. More information is in the full report.
Rating at last inspection:
The service was rated as Good at the last full comprehensive inspection, the report for which was published in October 2016.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous inspection rating.
Follow up:
We will continue our routine monitoring of the service.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Bluebird Care (IOW) provides personal care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of this inspection the agency was providing a personal care service to 96 people with a variety of care needs, including people living with physical care needs or memory loss due to progression of age. The agency was providing a service to people across the Isle of Wight.
The agency 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.
We received positive feedback from people about the service. All people who used the service expressed great satisfaction and spoke very highly of the care staff.
People told us they felt safe and secure when receiving care. Staff received training in safeguarding adults, knew how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns.
People’s risk assessments and those relating to their homes’ environment were detailed and helped reduce risks to people while maintaining their independence. Staff were responsive to people’s needs, which were detailed in care plans. People told us they had been involved in care planning and care plans reflected people’s individual needs and choices.
People were cared for with kindness and compassion. People who used the service said their privacy and dignity were respected. People were supported to eat and drink when needed and staff contacted healthcare professionals when required. Staff had an understanding of consent and were clear that people had the right to make their own choices.
Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks were undertaken, which helped make sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in their own homes. There were sufficient numbers of care staff to maintain the schedule of visits. Staff told us they felt supported and received regular supervision.
People felt listened to and a complaints procedure was in place. The provider sought feedback from people through the use of a regular reviews and a yearly survey. The results from the latest survey were mainly positive. Systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service people received.
Is the service well-led?
This is a summary of what we found-
Is the service well-led?
We found improvements had been made to the quality assurance systems in place. The provider had sent out a survey to people using the service. The results showed people were satisfied with the service they received. Concerns raised were recorded and appropriate action taken in response. Staff practice was monitored and actions were recorded and carried out promptly. Audits were carried out to ensure the quality of staff practice was maintained and improved, and that records were accurate, informative and up to date.
People said they felt safe with care staff. One person said, 'no one has ever been rude or anything, they are very kind and respectful'. A relative told us, '[my relative] feels really safe with them; I can tell by the way [they are] laughing away when they are here.' Staff were knowledgeable about the signs of abuse and what to do if they suspected abuse was happening. They were familiar with local safeguarding procedures and felt confident to use them.
An appropriate infection control policy was in place and staff demonstrated they were familiar with the principles of the policy. They told us they used personal protective equipment and people we spoke with confirmed this.
People's opinions were sought about the care they received. Staff were supervised regularly and spot-checks on care staff were carried out. However, care records were not effectively audited and errors had not been identified and acted on. Complaints, concerns and missed calls were not handled according to the provider's policy. Reviews of people's care were not carried out for all people using the service.
People told us they received a regular service and were routinely provided with the same staff to meet their needs. They told us that staff knew what to do and consulted the care plan on a day to day basis and also asked them about the help that was required. Systems were in place to induct and train staff and we saw evidence that these were up to date. Spot checks and supervision were regularly carried out to ensure quality of care. Staff were aware of the local safeguarding procedures.
Quality assurance procedures were in place, including consultation with people who received the service or their relatives. People using the service and staff were confident that concerns reported to the manager were acted on quickly. This meant that people using the service and staff could influence the service provided by the agency.