The inspection took place on 4 November 2016. At the last inspection in November 2013, we found the provider was meeting the regulations in all the areas we reviewed.

Bradley Resource Centre is registered to provide accommodation for people who require personal care. The service provides short stay reablement services and accommodation for up to 23 older people some who may have a physical disability. People generally lived at the centre for a period of four to six weeks. On the day of the inspection there were 19 people living at the centre.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

People told us they felt safe. Staff knew how to protect people from the risk of harm or abuse. Staff were aware of people’s individual risks and how to minimise these. People’s medicines were managed safely. People felt there were adequate numbers of staff available. People felt staff had the skills and knowledge to meet their individual needs.

Staff obtained consent from people before they provided care. People had a choice of meals and were supported to meet any specific dietary needs. People had access to other healthcare professionals to ensure their healthcare needs were met. People told us they felt involved in their care and treatment.

People said staff were kind, caring and treated them with dignity and respect. People had access to a number of different professionals and services to support their independence. People and relatives felt listened to and were able to provide feedback about the service. People and relatives said if they had any complaints these would be addressed by the registered manager.

People felt the management team were approachable and visible within the home. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The provider had management systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service provided.

During our inspection we spoke with four people, one visitor, four members of staff and a healthcare professional. We looked at three people’s care records.

There were 15 people staying at the centre at the time of our inspection, in order to receive rehabilitation services to assist with issues such as improvement in their mobility. Stays lasted a maximum of six weeks in most cases.

We found that people’s consent to care was sought. We observed staff offering choice to people and respecting their decisions.

People received care which supported their needs. One person told us, “If there’s anything you can’t manage they always help”.

People received enough food and drinks throughout the day, including snacks. People were happy with the quality of the food they received. One person told us, “The food is pretty good”.

Staff were skilled in delivering care to people. We saw that call bells were responded to promptly and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

The home had a complaints procedure in place. Most people we spoke with were aware of how they could make a complaint.

During our inspection we spoke with five people, three visitors, four members of staff and the manager. We looked at three people’s care records.

We found that people were supported in making day to day decisions about the care they received. One person told us, “They help me to set things to help myself”. People’s values and diversity were respected and promoted.

The care people received was reflected in their care plans. One person told us, “I’m so happy here. The care is marvellous”. People’s health needs were supported.

Staff were clear about their responsibility to report issues which might affect people’s safety and wellbeing. People told us they felt safe staying at the centre.

We found that staff were recruited in a safe way and correct checks were carried out to ensure their suitability to care for people. People we spoke with told us that staff were skilled. One person said, “Wonderful staff. I wish I could take them home with me”.

Quality checks and audits were in place to ensure people were receiving a good standard of care. We found that people’s opinions were sought about the service.

We spoke with four people who were staying at the centre, an occupational therapist, and staff working within the centre. Everyone felt that the staff were helpful and polite. We observed positive interactions between staff and people staying at the centre. Staff were clear about their role in rehabilitation and re-enablement.

We saw that everyone had a written care plan. People told us they or their relatives had been involved in agreeing their care plans. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual care needs.

In the majority of cases we saw that care plans were detailed and risks to people’s health and well being had been considered. We also saw that care plans and risks to people’s health were reviewed but further work was required in some areas such as falls management.

We saw that the quality of care was reviewed by the manager, but further work in this area was required to show how people were involved and that systems were in place to monitor that they met the law.