Cloverdale

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We assessed 1 of 7 quality statements in the responsive key question at this assessment. The scores of these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection published 28 October 2019, which was good. The overall rating for this key question remains good. We found the provider had a recruitment plan in place and the provider had worked with external professionals to review people’s care needs where appropriate. However, the lack of employed drivers, impacted on peoples care provision. The provider had recognised this and had a plan in place to recruit appropriate staff members to the team.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Feedback from people and their relatives included a lack of drivers impacted on their experiences. One person told us they would like more one-to-one care so they could go out more.

Leaders told us they had identified when people’s lack of funded one-to-one support meant they could not be supported to access the community and this in turn, impacted how they expressed themselves at home. Reasonable measures had been taken by the provider to attract staff who could drive to allow people to be better supported in the community. In addition, reviews with relevant professionals had been held to attempt to get people’s one to one hours increased where needed.

Staff had completed training in equity and diversity and ensured advocates were in place for people, where required. Where appropriate, action had been taken to advocate for people and the provider had engaged relevant professionals to review people’s care needs.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.