Bluebird Care (Stockport)

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Staff respected people's privacy dignity and were described by people and relatives as being kind and caring. Staff understood the importance of delivering good quality care to people. Processes were in place to support the delivery of compassionate care, however, these required reviewing. Staff treated people as individuals and relatives felt staff knew people well. Staff were aware of different people's communication needs. Processes to support people’s choice and independence had not been regularly reviewed. People’s care plans were not consistently person-centred, however, care records completed by staff were detailed. Staff meetings, supervision and appraisal were not planned, regular and frequent. Staff were positive about changes made since our last inspection; however, it was unclear how any feedback provided by staff had been listened to, understood and acted upon by the provider. Processes were in place to support staff wellbeing, however, these required reviewing. Following the on-site inspection, the provider told us about a number of improvements made to staff support processes.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us staff respected their privacy and dignity. Most people were happy with staff and found them caring and compassionate. One person told us, “Yes, of course they [staff] respect my dignity, they do always put a towel round me.” Another person said, “Yes, they [staff] do, now that I don’t have male carers.” Another person commented, “[Staff name] is an absolute gent.” A relative told us, ”The carers always tell [person] what they are doing and are very polite and courteous.” Another relative told us, “I would definitely say [person] is treated with dignity.”

Staff felt enthusiastic about delivering good care to people they supported, and knew people well. One staff member told us, ”I like it so much, we have a laugh with people, it brightens their day.” Another staff member told us about how a group of staff had purchased a small Christmas tree and presents for a person who was low in mood, and the positive effect it had on them.” The provider told us they wanted to deliver good care to people. There were some processes and procedures in place underpinning the provision of caring and compassionate care to people; however these had not always been reviewed.

One partner agency social care professional told us, “Over recent months since the changes, I have found Bluebird to be responsive and have a sound understanding of the care needs of my client.”

People’s individual needs and preferences were understood, and staff treated people as individuals. One relative told us, ”They [staff] know [person’s name] very well and they make quite a fuss of [them].” Another relative said, “Some of them [staff] are really nice; they brush [person’s] hair etc.” Another relative commented, “They [staff] know what they are doing and how to treat [person].”

Staff recognised the importance of people’s different communication needs and how to meet those needs. We saw evidence of adapted communication aids being used to support people.

There were some processes, procedures and policies in place to support staff in treating people as individuals, however these had not always been reviewed. Feedback about the provider which we received from a health and social care partner was positive, and indicated staff knew people well.

People told us staff knew their needs well and enabled them to lead as independent lives as possible. Staff respected people’s wishes and choices. One person told us, ”We are all involved as a team when decisions are made or care needs to be altered for one reason or another.” Another person said, “I do try to do things for myself and they [staff] are very patient and help me to be as independent as possible.” Another person stated, “Yes, I think I make my own choices.”

Staff had a good understanding of supporting people’s independence and respecting their choices. One staff member told us, ”I know what my client likes and how they like it.” Another staff member told us about a person who was nervous when using hoist and how important it was for staff to know the person’s routine to provide reassurance and to ensure the person remained in control.

Processes and procedures in place to support people’s choice and independence needed reviewing.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

There was some evidence of opportunities presented to staff to provide feedback and raise concerns. Staff told us there had been positive changes in the culture within the service. One staff member told us, “The morale has got back up. There is never an issue that within minutes isn’t sorted out.” There was no evidence of staff meetings taking place. There was some evidence of staff appraisals and supervisions, however these were infrequent. There was no evidence of any other form of obtaining staff feedback or evidence of any feedback already received being analysed and acted upon.

There were processes and procedures in place to support staff well-being. However these had not always been effective or followed. Some of the policies and procedures had not been not reviewed and/or updated. Following our on-site assessment the provider told us seeking staff feedback had now been planned and regular staff meetings were to take place in the future. The provider also told us staff were to receive regular supervisions and appraisals and monitoring calls had been put in place to oversee this.