Lyle House

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 13 September 2024 (assessment visit 14 May 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

1. Safe

   GGood Good

   Our rating for the "Safe" key question has improved from "Requires Improvement" to "Good" based on our recent assessment. More details will be provided in the evidence category sections.

   Lyle House demonstrated a strong commitment to safety. A well-established culture of learning ensured that staff and managers received regular training, and lessons learned were shared in meetings. The service effectively assessed people’s needs before admission, involving residents, families, and healthcare professionals in the process.

   Staffing levels were adequate, with enough staff and managers present throughout the day and night. Recruitment processes were thorough, ensuring that staff were well-suited to their roles. Ongoing training, supervision, and appraisals equipped staff to meet people’s needs safely.

   Safeguarding procedures were followed rigorously, with the manager engaging with the local authorities and the Care Quality Commission (CQC) when incidents occurred. People were involved in managing risks through comprehensive and regularly updated assessments.

   The care home environment was safe, with regular health and safety checks conducted. Infection control measures were strictly adhered to, with proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and hygiene practices. Medicines were safely managed by trained senior staff. Overall, Lyle House provided a secure environment where residents received good quality care.

2. Well-led

   GGood Good

   Our rating for the "Well-Led" key question has improved from "Requires Improvement" to "Good" based on our recent assessment. Detailed findings will be provided in the evidence category sections.

   Lyle House now benefits from a strong leadership presence, supported by the provider and recognised by staff, people who used the service, and external partners, including the local authority, Integrated Care Board (ICB), and faith groups. The manager demonstrated a deep understanding of the service and the needs of the people in their care.

   Staff reported feeling confident in the leadership team, noting that the manager and senior staff foster a shared direction for the service. Regular supervision meetings and appraisals were conducted, ensuring that staff were well-supported and aligned with the service’s goals.

   The senior leadership team’s inclusive approach had cultivated a positive culture within the home, where staff felt listened to and valued. The provider’s commitment to governance and continuous improvement was evident in the structured oversight and support provided to the management team.

   Overall, the leadership at Lyle House had strengthened significantly, contributing to the improved rating in this area and ensuring the service was well-led and responsive to the needs of the people who used the service.