Psymplicity Healthcare

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care.

People consistently described clinicians as respectful, professional and understanding. They told us staff listened to them, took time to understand their experiences and helped them feel comfortable discussing personal issues and concerns.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. Clinicians explained assessment findings, treatment options and recommendations clearly and provided opportunities for people to ask questions and consider their options before decisions were made.

Assessment outcomes and recommendations reflected individual circumstances and needs. Records showed clinicians considered people's experiences, preferences and personal circumstances when reaching conclusions and planning next steps.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People consistently spoke positively about the way staff treated them. They described clinicians as respectful, professional and understanding and said they felt listened to throughout assessments, treatment and follow-up appointments. Several people commented that clinicians took time to understand their circumstances and did not make them feel rushed during consultations.

People described interactions that helped them feel comfortable discussing personal experiences and concerns. They said clinicians responded to questions, explained information clearly and approached conversations in a supportive manner.

The care and treatment records reviewed reflected respectful and professional communication. Correspondence and clinical documentation were written in a manner that reflected the person's circumstances, experiences and reasons for seeking support.

Staff told us they adapted their communication according to individual needs and recognised the importance of building rapport during assessments and treatment discussions.

People described assessments and treatment discussions that reflected their individual circumstances and the reasons they were seeking support. They told us clinicians took time to understand their experiences and focused on the issues that were important to them.

Assessment outcomes varied according to the person's presentation and needs. Care and treatment records for 7 people included different diagnostic outcomes, treatment recommendations, referrals and sources of support. The records reviewed did not indicate that a standardised approach was applied across cases. Instead, recommendations reflected the findings of each assessment and the needs identified for that individual.

Clinicians considered personal history, current difficulties and the impact of symptoms when reaching conclusions and making recommendations. Records showed that recommendations were linked to the person's circumstances and included different combinations of treatment, further assessment, psychological support and onward referral where appropriate.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment and had opportunities to discuss options before deciding how they wished to proceed. They described clinicians explaining assessment findings, treatment options and recommendations clearly and giving them time to consider the information provided.

Discussions about care and treatment reflected the choices available to the person. People reported being able to ask questions, consider alternatives and discuss any concerns before decisions were made.

Care and treatment records showed that clinicians discussed options with people before decisions were made. Records reflected discussions about treatment choices, onward referrals and alternative sources of support where appropriate.

People described receiving prompt responses to enquiries and reported being kept informed about appointments, assessment processes and next steps. Administrative support was viewed positively, with people telling us staff helped resolve queries and provided information when requested.

Records showed clinicians took action to obtain additional information, arrange further review and coordinate additional support where needed. Where ongoing actions were required, records demonstrated these were documented and followed through as part of the person's care pathway.

People described being able to contact the service when they needed information or support relating to their care and treatment. Feedback indicated communication was clear and that people understood what would happen next following assessments and treatment appointments.

Regular formal one-to-one meetings were not consistently taking place across all staff groups. Information reviewed during the assessment showed that management performance discussions took place where concerns arose and that annual appraisal arrangements were in place. The provider had also developed plans to introduce structured six-monthly consultant performance reviews from September 2026. However, these arrangements had not been implemented at the time of the assessment. Assurance regarding consistent organisation-wide arrangements for supervision, reflective practice, development discussions and performance review therefore remained limited.

The provider had policies and guidance intended to support staff wellbeing and flexible working arrangements.

The provider monitored workforce governance through audits covering mandatory training, professional registration, DBS checks, onboarding documentation and professional indemnity arrangements. Human resources audits completed between January 2026 and June 2026 identified full compliance in these areas. Staff survey results from June 2026 were positive, with most respondents reporting satisfaction with the organisation, supportive management, effective teamwork and workplace culture.