Clement Court

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

There was mixed feedback about the variety of food on offer for those who needed a modified diet.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff also told us they did not always feel there was enough choice of meals for those who had a modified diet. Staff could not always tell us what the modified diet food was, when they were supporting people to eat. This meant staff were not always explaining or describing the food to those who needed staff to support them to eat. This was not dignified. The registered manager said they and kitchen staff had been working on a new menu, to improve choices for people, but this had not yet been fully completed and embedded.

There was mixed feedback about the food. People who had a modified diet did not always feel there was enough choice. One person said, “The food is not always good.” Another person told us, “Some food looks sad, that’s okay, I eat it.” For those less able to communicate with us, we observed a mealtime so we could understand people’s experience. Staff would show people who were able to eat a normal consistency diet the meal choices. However, rather than leaving the meal choice with the person, they would take away both options before returning with the meal the person had chosen. This caused confusion for some people and 1 person became distressed by this.

People had their food and drink preferences in their care plans. However, one person had conflicting information about the consistency their food should be. Menus shared with us showed people who needed different consistency food did not always have a wide variety of choices over a week.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.