Royal College Manchester

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

The provider was exceptional at making sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Staff had strong skills and an excellent understanding of people’s social, cultural and personal preferences. They knew how to meet these needs and involved relevant professionals when necessary. For example, when staff noticed changes in a person’s behaviour, they contacted the GP and arranged a review.

People’s care plans were personalised, regularly reviewed and updated. Staff consistently went the extra mile to address people’s individual needs, including protected characteristics. Reasonable adjustments were made to promote independence. The provider supported people to take part in activities that reflected their interests and preferences and ensured they had as much control over their lives as possible.

A relative told us, “My loved one can go out whenever they want. The access to opportunities here has made such a big difference to their lives.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People received care tailored to their individual needs, wishes, strengths and abilities. Staff were trained to meet these needs, and additional training was arranged when required for example, enrolling staff on British Sign Language courses when needed.

The provider maintained strong community links and worked closely with partners to support people’s outcomes. The registered manager recognised the importance of community access, despite on‑site facilities, and ensured this was well supported.

Staff also supported people effectively during transitions between services. One staff member told us, “We want to make sure we support people to develop skills for the next step in their lives. We want them to be as independent as possible.” Another described travelling with a person to visit a new placement service in different part of the country to help them become familiar and feel more comfortable before relocating.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Care plans contained detailed information about communication needs and how these should be met. Staff demonstrated excellent communication skills and were trained in Makaton and British Sign Language.

A wide range of communication aids were used, including objects of reference, picture cards, communication boards and personalised tools tailored to each person’s needs. Staff were strongly committed to ensuring people had an active voice in their care.

Before our assessment, staff prepared social stories to help people understand the inspection process and offered them the choice to speak with us.

People with visual impairments received information in accessible formats. For example, one person had Braille labels on their bedroom drawers, and another had menus with removable pictures to support choice and understanding.

Staff also worked with external professionals such as speech and language therapists and occupational therapists to ensure communication needs were fully supported.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People were listened to, and staff supported them to express their wishes, particularly those with communication difficulties. Staff ensured people were meaningfully included in decision‑making.

Relatives told us that the provider sought their views regularly and worked with them to achieve the best outcomes for their loved ones. They felt confident raising concerns and had clear points of contact. One relative said, “I can pick up the phone and speak to staff whenever I need. We have an open and transparent relationship. There are regular meetings, and I have opportunities to provide feedback.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People received appropriate support from relevant professionals when required. Staff were responsive to emerging needs and sought additional healthcare input when necessary. Relatives confirmed this, with one saying, “My loved one sees an audiologist regularly, and their staff sorts out all the appointments.” Another relative told us, “My loved one had dental issues recently, and the team has been great at managing this.”

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The provider encouraged feedback through regular touchpoints with people and relatives. However, there was limited evidence showing how this feedback was used to improve outcomes. Following our discussion, the registered manager provided reassurance that systems for evidencing actions taken in response to feedback would be strengthened.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People were supported by staff to identify personal goals and long‑term aspirations, and this information was included in their care plans. However, these plans did not currently include people’s wishes regarding end‑of‑life care. The registered manager agreed to review this.

Staff were committed to helping people gain skills for the future, supporting them to lead fulfilling and increasingly independent lives.