Bluebird Care (Teignbridge) provides care and support to mostly older people, who live in their own homes. The services provided include personal care and domestic work for people living in Newton Abbot, Teignmouth, Dawlish, Ashburton and the surrounding areas.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

We visited the office on 30 November 2016. We carried out home visits on 5 December 2016. We carried out phone calls to people and their relatives on 6 December 2016. At the time of this announced inspection 83 people were receiving personal care from the service. The service met all of our regulations at the previous inspection in December 2013.

Since our last inspection, the provider had introduced a new electronic system. Prior to our inspection, we received a concern from a relative about the new system and not being able to access the care plan. We looked at the system during this inspection. People and relatives we spoke with did not raise any concerns and told us it had not made any difference to them. Relatives told us they were able to access up-to-date information using an app on their phone. People had a paper copy of their care plan in their home. We saw where other healthcare professionals needed access to records for monitoring purposes; these were kept on paper records in the person’s home. Staff told us they felt more empowered as they could read people’s care plans on their phones before they visited them and information was updated promptly. The provider had identified an issue that meant if staff turned off their internet connection, the information did not update on the system straight away. They told us they planned to get all staff a phone so the internet was on all the time.

People were happy with the staff who visited them. Comments included “Excellent” and “They’re always so kind”. Staff spoke about the people they cared for with compassion and concern. Staff told us they enjoyed getting to know people and enjoyed chatting with them. Staff commented “Best part is making people smile, like to make them laugh” and “I absolutely love my job”. People told us staff were respectful and polite. We saw staff and people interact in a friendly way. People were pleased to see the staff. The staff knew people well and chatted with them with warmth. Staff checked if they could do anything else for people before leaving.

People told us they felt safe and comfortable when staff were in their home and when they received care. People told us "I feel totally safe" and "I have no worries". Staff knew how to recognise signs of potential abuse and understood how to report any concerns in line with the service's safeguarding policy. Safe staff recruitment procedures were in place. This helped reduce the risk of the provider employing a person who may be a risk to people. People told us staff knew how to meet their needs. People said "They’re absolutely spot on, I don’t have to worry” and “They just know what to do and do it well”. Staff told us they were happy with their training. Comments included “The training is very good. I know what I can and can’t do”; “I completely understand everything”; and “We’ve had lots of training in dementia which was helpful”. Staff told us they felt well supported and had regular opportunities to discuss their work.

Care plans were developed with each person. They described the support the person needed to manage their day to day health. People told us they were involved in their care and able to make choices about how they wanted things to be done. One person told us “I’ve had lots of input about how I like my care. That helped quite a lot”. Staff knew

This was a responsive inspection to follow up the compliance actions we made at the previous inspection in July 2013. These related to consent, quality assurance and records. We found that the service had made the required improvements. We also looked into information received prior to the inspection. This information alleged that staff recruitment checks and training were not carried out and there were not enough staff to cover people’s visits. On 3 December 2013 we found no evidence to support these allegations.

People who used the service told us they had been able to make choices and decisions in relation to their care planning. One person told us "staff tell me what they're going to do, and check I'm happy with it". Where the provider had identified people may lack capacity, they had carried out a mental capacity assessment. Best interest decision making had improved.

The provider had carried out appropriate checks to ensure staff were suitable. The service employed enough staff to cover all of their visits. Staff had received appropriate training so they could carry out their job role effectively.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. People were asked to give their views about the care and support they received. People told us “I have no problems at all” and “if I had any worries I could ring them up”.

Records were accurate, kept securely and could be located promptly when needed.

On the day of our visit, the service was providing care to 140 people. We spoke with five people who used the service, five relatives of people who used the service, seven care workers and one healthcare professional.

Where people were able to make their own decisions, we found that consent had been obtained for care and treatment. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were not in place for some people who were not able to make decisions.

People who used the service and their relatives told us they were happy with the care they received. They said "I’m very happy” and “when I needed more care they rallied round and sorted it out”. Two people told us they had not received their visit when care workers were not available. The provider told us that all visits had been assessed on a risk basis and essential visits were always covered.

People told us they felt safe when care workers came into their homes. Care workers knew how to report concerns to ensure people were protected from the risk of harm. Care workers told us they had completed training in how to meet people’s needs.

The service had quality assurance systems to ensure they were able to assess and monitor the quality of the service. However, we found concerns relating to consent, quality assurance and record keeping that had not been identified and put right by the service’s monitoring systems. Records were stored securely. We found records that had not been updated and were not accurate.