Lilias Gillies House

We looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

This meant that some aspects of the service were not always safe. We found breaches of regulation in relation to this key question.

Environmental safety controls, including those relating to fire safety and self-harm behaviours, were not consistently effective. The service could not demonstrate that risks associated with fire-related behaviours were fully assessed and managed. Some staff and clients told us they did not always feel safe in communal areas.

Incidents were not always reported or investigated thoroughly. The service did not always take proportionate actions in response to the incidents, with no or limited changes to reduce the likelihood of incidents re-occurring. Staff did not always record their actions relating to safeguarding concerns.

Medicines were not all stored securely and required processes were not always completed.

Staff did not always document work with other external services that supported resident’s needs. This meant the service could not always demonstrate prompt actions when risks changed.

However, we did find areas of good practice. The service did make sure there were the numbers of planned staff on site and covered current vacancies.

Resident’s had appropriate care plans and risk assessments in place. Residents said they felt confident to raise concerns about their safety in the service.

Staff attended weekly reflective practice and were offered further training and development opportunities.

Overall, the provider could not demonstrate that risks were consistently identified, monitored and mitigated, resulting in breaches of Regulation 12 (Safe care and treatment).