Archived: Lyle House

A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We found the location to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). There had been one application for a DoLS been submitted in the past year. Staff that we spoke with were aware of what constituted a deprivation of liberty and what steps they would take if they thought somebody was being deprived of their liberty.

Is the service effective?

Each person using the service had a key worker assigned to them. Relatives told us that staff involved them in care plan reviews. Care plan reviews were undertaken by team leaders. Staff working at the home were provided with training that was relevant to them and to enable them to care for people more effectively.

Is the service caring?

Comments from people we spoke with included "staff are nice", "staff are good", "its alright here", "exceedingly good", "they (staff) never get annoyed" and "(staff are) very tolerant." We observed a staff caring for people and offering them everyday choices with regards to their meals and activities.

Is the service responsive?

Where people did not have the capacity to understand decisions relating to their care we saw that their next of kin were involved in decision making regarding their care. People using the service were registered with a G.P and were visited regularly by district nurses.

Is the service well-led?

The registered manager completed a number of audits around the home including care plan and medication audits. Regular meetings were held with staff and staff that we spoke with felt supported by their colleagues and the manager.

A member of staff we spoke with said "Having extra staff in the afternoon is very good as we can be more involved in activities".

People who use the service we spoke with said "The place is clean and the bedrooms are smashing" and "The staff are great". We saw that the home was clean and the cleanliness of the bathrooms had improved due to regular checks now being carried out by staff.

We spoke with a person using the service who said "I don't know how they have the patience to look after us as some of us need a lot of help".

People who use the service we spoke with all said that their rooms were nice and clean. One person commented on the staff saying "most of them are nice, they are alright". When asked about the food one person said "there were lots of nice things" and all the people we spoke with said that they have a choice of food.

The members of staff we spoke with felt there was not enough staff to provide the required level of support. The staff we spoke with said that they received a lot of training and felt they could speak to the manager at any time regarding issues.

The relative we spoke with told us they felt "the standard of care in the home has deteriorated and has not improved".