Bluebird Care Harrow and Brent

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

The rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. Effective governance systems were in place to help monitor various aspects of the service. Management had a clear overview of the service. Systems were in place for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. Staff spoke positively about management of the service. Management sought feedback from people and relatives. They worked in partnership with others to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service. Management was open and transparent throughout the assessment process and responded to any requests positively.

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.

Staff told us they felt there was a positive culture within the agency, and they understood the values of the organisation. They said they had a positive experience working at the agency and felt they were a valued part of the team. They understood the values of the organisation and promoted these in their work. The registered manager organised regular meetings with the staff to discuss their work, the expectations of the organisation and any concerns they had. Staff completed training and used this to help ensure procedures were followed. There was regular communication between staff so that they could share their experiences and learn from one another.

Staff were positive about working at the service. They were complimentary about the registered manager and told us they felt well supported. A member of staff told us, “The current manager is the best we have had. They listen to our concerns and sort out any issues. They are always there. [The registered manager] is a very understanding and kind manager. They handle the office well.” Another member of staff said, “The manager is lovely and is very supportive. When I contact [the registered manager] they are always so helpful and polite.” The registered manager worked alongside staff. They demonstrated a good knowledge of the service; people being cared for and staff. They worked with other professionals to keep themselves updated with good practice and legislation requirements. Regular meetings and effective communication between management and staff provided them with an opportunity to discuss people’s individual support needs and the running of the service. There was an open-door policy where the registered manager was available for people, relatives and staff.

Staff told us they knew how to speak up if they had concerns. They were confident that the registered manager and the organisation as a whole supported them and listened to them. They said they would not hesitate to speak up if they needed to. The registered manager welcomed feedback from people, relatives, staff and other professionals. There was an open-door policy. Comprehensive procedures were in place for responding to concerns.

Staff said their individual needs and requests were met and supported. Staff spoke positively about working at the agency. Staff were supported with flexible working conditions and had opportunities to celebrate their individual diversity. There were procedures in place to help ensure workforce equality and support. Policies and procedures were in place for workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. These were implemented through recruitment practices, training, and support for staff.

A clear management structure was in place. Staff had designated roles and were aware of their individual responsibilities and the importance of working collectively. A member of staff told us, “I feel valued working here and part of the team.” Effective systems were in place for assessing, monitoring and improving the service. Audits and checks were carried out to monitor the running and efficiency of the service to help identify deficiencies and make necessary improvements. Audits and checks were carried out by management. These included carrying out spot checks, supervisions, reviewing people’s care and responding to complaints and concerns.

People and relatives, we spoke with were confident the registered manager and staff would make referrals to other agencies if needed. Management told us people had access and support from local teams and different community groups where necessary. We did not receive any feedback from external partners as part of this assessment. Systems were in place to help encourage good working relationships with health care professionals. These relationships helped to support people to receive joined up care.

Management was committed to making positive changes and improving the care and support people received. Staff were given feedback to help improve their practice through supervision sessions and spot checks. The registered manager emphasised that there were opportunities for staff to reflect on their work and were given feedback to help improve their practice. Processes were in place helped the service to use information from audits, feedback and care plan reviews to make improvements. Management identified trends and themes from the results of feedback and audits to help drive continuous improvement.