Paul Murphy Centre

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

The provider 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.

People were actively involved in planning activities through accessible tools, including a pictorial planner used during meetings with people. The registered manager regularly reviewed these plans to ensure scheduled activities were delivered.

Although transport limitations occasionally restricted the scope of outings, staff demonstrated creativity in maintaining choice and variety. This included sourcing charitable donations and family contributions to support larger group trips.

Changes in people’s needs were clearly documented, with new or emerging needs identified and agreed upon with the individual and/or their representatives. A staff member told us, “Usually the deputy manager updates it. On weekends, team leaders make sure everyone is aware. It’s treated seriously.”

Staff showed strong awareness of emotional triggers, communication preferences, and cultural needs. Improvements had been made to embed communication tools, such as pictorial books into daily care routines, ensuring that people who relied on these aids were consistently supported in a meaningful and inclusive way. A staff member told us, “Care plans are updated with relevant details from social workers, etc.” Another staff member told us, “I am learning Makaton (sign language) with one of the residents. We have learned a few things so far about food. [Name] knows how to ask for cake now.”

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.

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 given regular opportunities to provide feedback or raise concerns about their care and support. Regular monthly meetings with people were held to capture views, during which activities and menus were discussed, and individuals were informed of the process for raising compliments or concerns.

Since the last inspection, no formal complaints had been received by the provider. However, robust systems were in place to investigate and respond to any issues raised. Staff explained the registered manager delegates responsibility to team leaders to address concerns, with outcomes discussed at the next staff meeting to ensure transparency and shared learning.

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.

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.

People were supported in line with right support, right care and right culture guidance for autistic people and people with a learning disability. Care had been tailored to people’s individual needs and people received health and social care support from a range of professionals in their best interests.

Staff recognised and responded to diverse cultural backgrounds and embedded these considerations into daily care. Accessible tools such as pictorial planners and easy-read formats enabled residents to participate meaningfully in decision-making and activity planning.

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.