Lyles House

Staff were recruited safely, with the correct checks being made to ensure they were suitable for their role. Staff had a thorough induction and completed ongoing training. The environment and equipment was regularly checked for safety. Risks relating to people's care needs had been identified and assessed thoroughly. Medicines were managed safely and staff had received appropriate training and competency checks. The service was working to embed improvements since our last assessment to ensure long term sustainability.

Staff understood peoples needs, and worked well with external professionals to achieve good outcomes for people. The service used recognised tools to monitor areas of concern in people’s health and implemented changes promptly to support people. Peoples wishes and choices were sought and respected. Whilst uptake was limited, the service offered a variety of activities based on people’s feedback. There were very few opportunities for people to go on trips or outings. People enjoyed the food, and the service understood peoples individual dietary needs.

Staff and leaders treated people in a kind and caring way. People's life histories were recorded in great depth, and staff knew people well. People told us staff were friendly and treated them with respect. We observed interactions between staff and people to be mostly warm and positive. We observed one interaction at breakfast where a staff member served a person's food without acknowledging them. However, the manager took action to rectify this.

People's care needs had been assessed thoroughly, and action was taken in response to any changes. Information in care records was kept up to date and regularly reviewed. People and their relatives were involved in the creation and updating of their care plans. Incidents and accidents were monitored, and action taken to avoid recurrence in a responsive way. People's end of life care wishes had been explored and recorded with sensitivity.

Leaders at the service treated staff with respect and value. The manager was visible throughout the home and knew people living at the service well. The provider had good oversight of the home. Audit processes were in place and managers completed these regularly. A development plan was in place to help drive improvement. This required updating at the time of our visit, however the manager was aware of this. The provider told us they plan to reduce the frequency of auditing now that improvements were started to become embedded within the service. This was to enable the manager to spend more time with people and staff.