• Mental Health
  • Independent mental health service

Lilias Gillies House

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

169 Tollers Lane, Coulsdon, Surrey, CR5 1BJ (01737) 668112

Provided and run by:
Community Housing and Therapy

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Assessment report published 14 August 2026

Ratings - Community-based mental health services for adults of working age

  • Overall

    Requires improvement

  • Safe

    Requires improvement

  • Effective

    Requires improvement

  • Caring

    Good

  • Responsive

    Good

  • Well-led

    Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Lilias Gillies House is a residential Mental Health Rehabilitation service. The service had capacity for up to 15 residents and was staffed with 24/7 waking night support. There were 8 clients residing at the service at the time of this inspection. The accommodation was mixed sex. Each resident had their own bedroom and en-suite bedroom.

The service was registered with the CQC to provide Treatment of Disease Disorder or Injury. There is a registered manager in place.

The service used a therapeutic programme as their treatment model, which included individual and group psychotherapy.

The service accepted service users within the local borough and nationally. Referrals were mainly from local authorities or from NHS mental health services.

We carried out an unannounced inspection on Wednesday 4 March 2026. This was a scheduled assessment that we brought forward due to information of concern received. The service previously had an inspection looking at the areas of Safe and Well-led in 2022. They were both rated as good. The previous comprehensive assessment where all the domains were inspected and rated was in 2019. The service was rated as good overall.

Following this current inspection, we rated the service as Requires Improvement overall. Safe, effective and well-led have been rated requires improvement. Caring and responsive have been rated good.

We found breaches of regulations in relation to safe and clean environments, monitoring and managing people’s safety, managing risks, effective governance processes and oversight of the service.

After our visit, the service sent us an action plan to address immediate areas for improvement and had paused admissions whilst an internal review of the service took place.

We have asked the provider for an overarching action plan in response to all concerns found at this assessment.

Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary

The service did not detain service users using the Mental Health Act. However, staff were trained in working with people with mental illnesses and understanding the Mental Health Act.

We identified examples of poor practice in the assessment and recording of capacity in resident notes. One resident had fluctuating capacity, and we saw that capacity assessment documentation was not always recorded clearly or in line with requirements. This has been identified as a priority area for improvement by the service, who had a plan in place to improve practice.

People's experience of this service

During our visit we received mixed feedback from residents who used the service. Overall feedback was positive, with residents giving a range of positive feedback. Residents commented on their care, stating overall most staff were caring and treated them with dignity and kindness.

One resident said that ‘there are lots of staff, there is always someone to speak to if needed.’

Another said that ‘staff are very hospitable’.

However, residents told us that there some areas of the service that could be further improved. Two residents expressed that they do not feel safe in the service due to incidents of violence and aggression they had witnessed or experienced. Two residents said staff could not deal with the challenging behaviour in the service and felt that the staff did not understand their needs. One resident said, ‘I don’t think staff understand emotional wellbeing and think there could be a lot more offered and things are done half-heartedly.’ One resident had left the service and was refusing to return. One resident described the service as ‘chaotic and unstructured.’

We reviewed feedback received through ‘share you experience’ forms from the last 12 months These highlighted concerns over incidents of violence and aggression and drug and alcohol use in the service.