Cygnet Hospital Clifton

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. At the previous inspection, this key question was rated good. At this assessment, the rating remained good.

Staff provided person- centred care and ensured continuity. Staff provided information to patients and carers and listed to and involved them. The service ensured equity in access and experience and supported patients to plan for the future.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service made 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.

Patients and those close to them (including carers and dependants) were regularly involved in planning and making shared decisions about their care and treatment, so it was centred around them and their needs Staff worked with patients to identify what was important to them and used this information to guide treatment, rehabilitation and recovery planning. Care was reviewed regularly to ensure it continued to reflect individual priorities, preferences and changing circumstances. 

Staff promoted shared decision-making and ensured patients and carers received clear information about treatment options, rehabilitation plans and proposed interventions. This helped patients make informed decisions and ensured care remained focused on the outcomes that mattered most to them. 

The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service ensured care remained coordinated and consistent throughout a patient's admission. Staff maintained regular communication with partner organisations and external professionals to support ongoing assessment, risk management and rehabilitation planning. Patients benefited from well-established arrangements for oversight of progression and discharge pathways. Leaders monitored length of stay, discharge barriers and placement availability through governance processes and regular commissioner meetings. Where delays or obstacles were identified, these were escalated promptly to support timely progression through the pathway. External agencies were involved throughout admission, rather than solely at the point of discharge. This helped ensure that plans for future care, accommodation, community support and risk management were developed in a coordinated way and reflected the patient's changing needs. The service maintained effective links with commissioners, local authorities, probation services, Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA), community mental health teams and advocacy providers. These arrangements supported continuity of support and helped ensure patients were able to move through the rehabilitation pathway safely and successfully. 

The evidence showed a good standard. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Patients, their family, friends, and carers were provided with information that was accessible, safe and secure and supported their rights and choices. Staff ensured information was shared in ways that patients could understand and revisited important information when required. 

Independent advocacy services were well embedded within the hospital and supported patients to understand their rights, express their views, and participate in decisions affecting their care and treatment. 

Information regarding how to raise concerns, access support services, and obtain independent advice was readily available throughout the hospital. Patients were able to access information about complaints processes, safeguarding procedures, and advocacy services and patient rights. 

The service also maintained effective communication with carers and families, where appropriate. Relatives told us they received regular updates regarding progress and treatment and felt informed about significant developments affecting their loved ones. 

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

The service actively sought feedback from patients and carers and used this information to inform service development and continuous improvement. Patients were encouraged to share their views through community meetings, surveys, feedback forums, one-to-one discussions and informal conversations with staff and leaders.

We saw evidence that patient feedback was listened to and acted upon. For example, patients requested changes to the format and frequency of community meetings. In response, leaders changed the meetings from fortnightly to monthly, which improved attendance and engagement. Patient feedback had also influenced the development of rehabilitation activities and engagement opportunities available across the hospital.

Leaders regularly reviewed information gathered through complaints, compliments, community meetings, advocacy reports and patient surveys to identify themes and opportunities for improvement. Since January 2026, the service had received 14 formal complaints. All had been investigated and resolved locally, and none were upheld. Actions and learning arising from feedback were shared with patients, helping them understand how their views had influenced service developments.

The service also received positive feedback from patients, carers and external professionals. Examples included feedback from a carer who told the service, "Over these last week’s X does now appear to be very much more settled than they have been for many years and appears to be doing exceptionally well." Another patient commented, "I want to thank the team for all their help and support after I had an incident." This feedback reflected the positive impact staff had on patients' recovery and wellbeing.

Staff ensured patients had multiple opportunities to communicate their views, seek support and raise concerns through one-to-one sessions, ward rounds, community meetings and advocacy involvement. Independent advocacy was well established within the service and provided an additional means of ensuring patients' voices were heard and represented.

Relatives and carers were encouraged to be involved throughout a patient's admission where appropriate. The dedicated Carer Lead acted as a point of contact for families, helping to maintain communication, provide updates and ensure carers could contribute to discussions about care, treatment and recovery.

The service demonstrated a strong commitment to listening to people, acting on feedback and involving patients and carers in the ongoing development of the service.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service worked to ensure patients could access the care, treatment and rehabilitation opportunities they required to support recovery and progression. Staff considered individual needs, risks and circumstances when planning treatment and worked to remove barriers that could prevent patients from fully engaging in care. The service demonstrated a commitment to making reasonable adjustments where required. Information was available in accessible formats and staff adapted communication methods to support participation in care and treatment. Patients with neurodivergent needs, communication difficulties or protected characteristics were supported in ways that promoted inclusion and equal access to opportunities available within the service. 

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Leaders demonstrated a clear commitment to promoting equality, inclusion and positive outcomes for all patients. Staff understood the importance of recognising individual circumstances, backgrounds and needs and worked to ensure patients were treated with dignity, respect and without discrimination. Staff were able to describe how they adapted care and support for patients whose personal circumstances or protected characteristics may place them at greater risk of poorer experiences or outcomes.

Patients had access to a range of therapeutic and rehabilitation-focused environments that promoted recovery, independence and wellbeing. These included communal lounges, activities of daily living kitchens and outdoor spaces designed to support treatment and rehabilitation goals. Patients had access to two outdoor courtyard areas, one allocated to each ward, which were available 24 hours a day. During the assessment, we observed patients making regular use of these spaces. Access to the Acorn Ward garden was unrestricted, whilst patients on Ancaria Ward were able to access the courtyard throughout the day with staff support and oversight where required, balancing safety with independence and access to fresh air.

The service recognised and responded to individual communication and engagement needs. A range of accessible resources was available, including easy-read information, visual materials and personalised activity timetables. Staff adapted communication approaches to maximise patients' understanding, participation and involvement in care and treatment decisions.

Leaders maintained oversight of equality, diversity and inclusion through governance processes, quality improvement initiatives and ongoing review of patient experiences and outcomes. These arrangements supported the delivery of fair, inclusive and person-centred care and helped ensure patients had equal opportunities to engage in treatment, rehabilitation and recovery.

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

When patients future care preferences were for greater independence and fewer care interventions that were likely to benefit them, professionals worked together to support them to achieve their goals. Planning for discharge and future progression was embedded throughout the patient journey. Staff focused on helping patients develop skills, confidence and independence required for successful discharge. 

Staff began discharge planning early and this was reviewed through multidisciplinary meetings, ward rounds and governance processes. Leaders monitored length of stay and worked with external agencies to reduce delays. 

Staff provided holistic support to people preparing for discharge, addressing their individual needs to ensure an effective transition Occupational therapy supported preparation for life beyond hospital through education, community access, independent travel training, activities of daily living and confidence-building