CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bradley Resource Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home used safe infection prevention and control procedures. They checked visitor safety, social distancing, admissions, PPE, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were safe.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 25 November 2020. It focused only on infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
The home provides short-stay accommodation and personal care for up to 23 people needing rehabilitation support. Four people were living there when inspectors visited.
Inspectors found good infection control arrangements. These included accessible PPE, temperature checks for visitors, social distancing measures, extra staff training, testing and up-to-date infection control policies. People also kept in touch with family by telephone or video calls.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including testing, PPE and outbreak procedures.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
PPE and staff training
PPE was available at entry and in extra stations around the building. Staff had received additional accredited infection prevention and control training.
“Additional PPE stations were set up around the building to ensure PPE was easily accessible to staff at all times.” from the report
Family contact
People could keep in touch with their families by telephone or video calls while visiting arrangements were affected.
“People kept in touch with family members via telephone or video calls.” from the report
Social distancing
The layout of communal areas had been changed to support social distancing.
“The environment had been adapted to allow for social distancing between people in communal areas.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are visitors' temperatures, PPE and infection risks managed now?
- 03How does the home support telephone and video contact with family members?
- 04How are new admissions tested and kept safe from infection?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last updated?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only, so it did not rate the other four questions or give an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 January 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Bradley Resource Centre rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and effective rehabilitation care, but some people wanted more activities.
This was a planned, unannounced inspection on 13 August 2019. The inspection team spoke with eight people, four relatives, seven staff members and an external health professional. They reviewed care, medicine and recruitment records, as well as management information.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and were supported by kind staff. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicine systems, good training and effective work with health professionals.
People were involved in their care and rehabilitation goals. Their choices, communication needs and dietary needs were considered. Some people felt there were not enough activities, although others were mainly focused on rehabilitation and did not want more activities.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding and risks were assessed and reviewed.
“People told us they felt safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people with patience and empathy, respected their choices and promoted privacy and independence.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff.” from the report
Strong rehabilitation support
People helped set their rehabilitation goals and were supported to practise everyday tasks that could increase their independence.
“Staff encouraged people to work towards their rehabilitation goals and undertake exercises to increase their independence.” from the report
Good partnership working
Staff worked closely with therapy teams, hospitals and other health professionals to support people's rehabilitation and healthcare.
“The provider worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals to ensure people had their care needs met effectively” from the report
Learning from medicine errors
The manager introduced extra checks and changes to handovers after medicine errors, including a missed night-time medicine.
“When medicine administration errors were made, the manager implemented a new system” from the report
Limited activities
minorSome people said there were not enough activities. The manager said they would ask people whether they wanted more and try to provide them.
“Some people told us there were not enough activities for them to do.” from the report
- 01How will you provide activities for someone who wants more than the rehabilitation programme?
- 02What rehabilitation goals would you set with my relative, and how would you measure progress?
- 03What is the current position on the acting manager's application to become registered with the CQC?
- 04How do you make sure medicines, including 'as required' medicines, are given and recorded safely?
- 05How will you support my relative's communication, cultural, dietary and personal preferences?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, and it looked at both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Bradley Resource Centre
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Wolverhampton
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £950 to £1,230 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.