Bluebell Support Services

Updated 10 August 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was a comprehensive inspection that took place on 28 June 2017. The inspection was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service to people living in their own homes. We needed to be sure that staff would be available to answer our questions and we would have access to records as part of the inspection.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an Expert-by-Experience. An Expert-by-Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, we looked at information we held about the service. This included notifications that the provider had to send to us by law. Prior to the inspection, the provider also completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we gathered feedback from four people and five relatives about the care provided by Bluebell Support Services. We also spoke with three care support workers, the registered manager and the business development manager who were the providers of the service.

We looked at three people’s care records, three staff recruitment and training records and three people’s medicine and care records. We also viewed records regarding how the provider assessed and monitored the quality and safety of the care they provided.

Updated 10 August 2017

This announced inspection took place on 28 June 2017. Bluebell support services is a service that provides care to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, the service was supporting 30 people.

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.

Staff were knowledgeable about how to keep people safe and to reduce the risk of them experiencing harm. However, not all risks to people’s safety had been assessed and the information in place to guide staff to do this appropriately was not always comprehensive. Appropriate support had not always been provided to people to ensure they received their medicines safely. Improvements are required within these areas.

Systems were in place to protect people from the risk of abuse and any concerns raised had been thoroughly investigated and reported to the relevant authorities.

There were enough staff to provide people with the care they needed. Staff had received sufficient training and supervision to help them deliver effective care. They were polite and asked people for their consent before performing a task. If the person could not provide consent, the staff understood the need to offer people choice.

Where people required assistance with eating and drinking, this was received. The staff understood the importance of encouraging people to eat and drink sufficient amounts to help them maintain good health. The service ensured that staff supported people with their healthcare needs where this was needed.

The staff were kind, caring and compassionate and treated people with dignity and respect. They had taken time to get to know the people they supported so they could ensure they received care that met their individual needs and preferences.

People were given choice and control over their care. They were listened to and empowered to make decisions which were respected. Where concerns had been raised by people, these had been taken seriously and investigated. Improvements had been made to the quality of care in response to these concerns.

Good leadership was in place. The staff understood their roles and responsibilities. They were valued and therefore they were happy in their work. The provider had instilled an open and transparent culture within the service where both staff and people had confidence in them.

The provider had recognised some shortfalls in how they monitored the quality of the service delivered and had put in place some improvements. This was because they were keen to drive improvement within the service. They were receptive to advice in relation to improvement and actively sought this from sources such as other providers and managers of similar services.