Bluebird Care Braintree and Uttlesford

About the service

Bluebird Care Braintree and Uttlesford is a domiciliary care agency. The service was providing personal care for 19 people at the time of this inspection.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Right Support:

People received support from consistent care workers who knew them well and understood how they liked to be supported. People's needs were assessed, and care and support plans were developed with them, and their relatives where appropriate.

Care records were reviewed and updated regularly. People’s medicines were managed safely and staff were appropriately trained, supervised and recruited.

People and their relatives were comfortable that safe infection control measures were taken including care workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) and following infection control procedures to reduce the risks of infection.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Right Care:

People and their relatives, where appropriate, were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support needs. People and their relatives said care workers were kind and caring towards them. Care workers used a range of communication techniques to help ensure people could be involved in decisions about their life.

Right Culture:

The registered manager’s systems for the oversight of the service were well embedded. This helped to ensure people received consistent safe care and support. Staff were proud to work for Bluebird Care Braintree & Uttlesford and people and relatives said they would recommend the service to others.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 25 November 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.

There was a registered manager in post. 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. The registered manager had appointed a branch manager to assist them in the daily running of the service.

Whilst the service was relatively small it benefitted from its links with the larger branch, based in Colchester. The registered manager covered both branches and other senior staff such as training and human resources managers supported the Braintree and Uttlesford branch. The service was well run and was growing slowly in a sustainable manner while focussing on providing good quality and safe care.

The branch manager was approachable and communicated well with people, families and staff. The manager was hands on and made effective use of the systems in place to check the quality of the service. People, families and staff had opportunities to provide feedback and felt able to speak to the manager about any concerns they had.

People were safe at the service. Staff were focused on people’s safety and raised alerts when they were concerned about a person they were supporting. Risk was communicated clearly to staff and managed well across the service. Staff had been safely recruited and there was a focus on selecting staff who had the right values and attitudes. People received their medicines safely and the electronic monitoring of the support staff meant senior staff could efficiently check for gaps in the administration of medicines and in the support provided.

Staff were well supported to develop their skills and knowledge. Staff communicated effectively as a team to ensure consistency in the support provided. The manager had developed the role of mentors to minimise the isolation of care staff working in the community and to promote best practice across the service.

Staff and people were matched to ensure were well suited. They developed positive relationships and staff had enough time to get to know people and treat them with kindness and compassion. They were respectful and communicated well with people to make sure the support they received met their preferences.

People made choices about the support they received. The manager had an understanding of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet, in line with their preferences. Staff enabled people to maintain good health and to access health and social care professionals, where necessary.

Care was person centred and adapted flexibly to people’s needs and preferences. Care plans were detailed and presented to staff in an accessible attractive manner which ensured they focused on people’s current needs. The care people received was reviewed and adapted as necessary.