Lyle House

Ratings

• Overall

  Good

• Safe

  Good

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Good

Our view of the service

Lyle House is a residential home providing personal care for up to 70 people; at the time of our inspection, 64 people who use the service were present, many of whom were older adults living with dementia. Previously rated as "Requires Improvement" in November 2022, our latest assessment, conducted from 1 to 11 July 2024, focused on the "Safe" and "Well-Led" key questions. The inspection involved an inspector and 2 assessors on-site, with additional evidence gathered from partners like the Local Authority and the Integrated Care Board. We observed notable improvements since the last inspection. The service fostered a strong learning culture, with staff and managers engaging in regular training and discussions on lessons learned. Safety was prioritized through consistent health and safety checks, comprehensive risk assessments, and effective infection control practices. People's needs were thoroughly assessed prior to admission, involving their input as well as that of their relatives and healthcare professionals. Adequate staffing levels were maintained, supported by robust recruitment processes and ongoing training. Safeguarding procedures were effectively managed in collaboration with local authorities, and medicines were safely administered by trained senior staff. Leadership at Lyle House was stable and proactive, with the manager progressing towards the Care Quality Commission (CQC) registration and receiving support from the provider. The leadership team promoted an inclusive culture, ensuring staff felt valued and heard. Strong partnerships with local authorities, health services, and community groups enhanced the well-being of people who used the service. Overall, Lyle House demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement and delivering safe, person-centred care.

People's experience of this service

People’s experiences at Lyle House were largely positive. People who used the service felt safe and well-cared for, appreciating the clean and comfortable environment. The service maintained sufficient staffing levels throughout the day and night, which contributed to people's sense of security. The staff were described as attentive and compassionate, and their ongoing training, supervision, and appraisal ensured they were well-equipped to meet the needs of the people. Family members and external professionals echoed these positive views, expressing confidence in the care provided. The provider’s commitment to robust recruitment processes and continuous staff development further reinforced the quality of care. While some people who used the service noted that staff could be rushed during busy periods, the overall feedback reflected a supportive and well-managed environment where people felt respected and safe.