Bluebird Care Harrow and Brent

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

The rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. People received personalised care and support that met their needs. Care plans included clear details about people’s individual support needs. They included clear information about people’s communication needs. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and wishes. Information was accessible and people's views were listened to and acted on. Records were updated to help ensure they reflected people’s changing needs. Complaints were managed appropriately. People’s equality and diversity needs were respected and met.

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 rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. People received personalised care and support that met their needs. Care plans included clear details about people’s individual support needs. They included clear information about people’s communication needs. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and wishes. Information was accessible and people's views were listened to and acted on. Records were updated to help ensure they reflected people’s changing needs. Complaints were managed appropriately. People’s equality and diversity needs were respected and met.

People told us they received continuity of care. This was confirmed by relatives we spoke with. People had an opportunity to get to know care staff that supported them. We did not receive feedback from staff about this aspect of the service. We did not receive feedback from external partners about this aspect of the service. People’s care plans included information about external professionals and services they needed to and wanted to access.

People and relatives told us they had the information they needed. They knew who the registered manager was, who to contact if needed. A relative said, “The [registered manager] has regular contact with me and keeps me well informed of [my family member’s] health and well-being.” Staff told us they discussed people’s care with them. The registered manager advised that they held meetings with people and relatives where they were able to review people’s care and provide necessary information. Systems were in place to hold confidential information and the provider had systems to ensure compliance with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (UK GDPR). Service records were kept locked away or password protected on electronic devices. This helped to ensure people’s private and sensitive information was only shared with authorised persons.

Staff took the time to communicate with people. People told us care staff understood their needs and were responsive to their individual needs. A person told us, “When I have been in hospital, [the registered manager] is quick to respond to any changes I require to keep me comfortable, they will change times of calls and put extra help in when needed.” People and their relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns and felt these were well responded to. The registered manager explained they had systems for asking people for their views. They were in regular contact with people using the service and relatives. Staff were responsive to feedback from people and relatives. Staff took appropriate action to help ensure people received effective care and support. There was an appropriate complaints procedure. Complaints were investigated, responded to, and learnt from.

People told us they had developed good relationships with care staff. A person said, “They are all kind and compassionate, eager to ensure I have the best of care. We have built a deep bond and trusting relationship. They provide dignity and respect, and it is a pleasure to have them in my home.” Another person said, “The carers are very friendly and kind and patient.” People and relatives told us staff could access health care support for people when needed. Staff supported people to access health care and support when needed. We did not receive feedback from external partners about this aspect of the service. A system was in place to support people to access health care providers. Information was readily available to people, relatives and staff as required. The service operated an on-call system where staff, people using the service and relatives could contact them when they needed extra support or in an emergency.

People and relatives were complimentary about staff at the agency and how the agency operated. A person said, “They keep me steady and stable, so I have a good quality of life.” A relative told us, “The carers are very kind and respectful. They have got to know [my family member] well and understand their health needs.” People's cultural and religious needs were met. For example, staff supported people with their cultural diets where required. Care staff also supported people to visit their place of worship. The registered manager explained that they moved visits times on religious dates to help support people to visit their place of worship or eat meals at specific times. Staff spoke positively about working at the agency and said they felt valued by their colleagues and management. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They were aware of the importance of treating people with respect regardless of their background or lifestyle. Procedures regarding equality and diversity were in place. Staff had completed training and understood how to meet people's diverse needs. Management had individual discussions with staff about people's needs and how to ensure staff followed best practice guidance. Care plans included a cultural and spiritual assessment of needs.

At the time of the assessment, the service did not provide end of life care to people. The registered manager confirmed that at the time of the assessment no one was being supported with end of life care or in receipt of palliative care. However, the agency had end of life champions who had the skills and knowledge to support people, relatives and staff. An end of life policy was in place.