Cargenholm and Inverness care home services rated 'weak'
Two Scots care homes - one near Dumfries and the other in Inverness - have been told to make improvements after being rated "weak" by inspectors.
The Care Inspectorate visited the Cargenholm Care Centre in December and the Fairfield Care Home in January.
It found that the quality of care and support provided was "weak", the second lowest possible grade.
Inspectors have said they would revisit both sites soon and take further action if improvements had not been made.
At the Cargenholm Care Centre on the outskirts of Dumfries, inspectors raised concerns about staff vacancies, staff practice and environmental issues and have made a number of requirements for improvement.
"We were disappointed to find in this inspection there were very poor levels of hygiene and cleanliness, particularly in service users' own private space," they noted.
"We recognise that there is a considerable level of commitment needed from the provider and management team to ensure that the deficits identified at this inspection are addressed and positive outcomes are achieved.
"Through discussion and submission of an immediate action plan the management team conveyed an intention to make the required improvements."
A spokesman for the Care Inspectorate said it continued to have concerns about the service and would be monitoring it closely to ensure action was taken to meet required standards.
A spokesperson for the the south of Scotland home, run by Canterbury Care, said: "The feedback from the Care Inspectorate was taken very seriously and a comprehensive and robust action plan is in place.
"We are working closely with the Care Inspectorate, social services and the commissioners and are confident that our actions will meet the requirements within the prescribed timescales."
At the Inverness site - run by another operator - a previous inspection had graded the quality of care and support as "unsatisfactory".
A formal improvement notice remains in effect at the service, and some concerns raised in an earlier inspection had not been addressed, inspectors said.
In their most recent report, inspectors noted: "We have maintained the improvement notice and given extended timescales for those requirements that have not been fully addressed.
"At this inspection we found that the service had not sufficiently addressed the seven requirements and five recommendations that were highlighted within the inspection report of August 2014.
"The service had not addressed the requirements that were made from three complaints, which were made to us and which were upheld.
"Furthermore they had not provided us with an action plan within the given timescales, as highlighted within the complaint reports."