CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at MIG House Residential Care Homes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found robust risk assessments, safe medicines management, suitable staffing and effective infection control arrangements. Staff understood how to identify and report abuse.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed, staff had relevant training, and people were supported with food, healthcare and legal decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried forward from the last inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. The report says ratings for questions not inspected were carried forward from the last inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular audits, staff and relative meetings, monitoring of care practice and processes for reporting concerns and making improvements.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-managed care, but this was a focused inspection and not all areas were reviewed.
The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to seven people with a learning disability and autism. There were five people living there during the inspection, although one person went into hospital during the visit.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 8 December 2022. One inspector observed care, spoke with two relatives, the manager and three care staff, and reviewed care records, staff files and other management records.
Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff. They also found good training, support with food and healthcare, and systems to monitor the quality of the home.
The overall rating was Good and it had stayed the same since the previous inspection. The inspection followed concerns about food, activities and management, but inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns.
Positive risk support
Risks were assessed and managed, including risks linked to community access and distress. Positive behaviour plans aimed to reduce triggers and use the least restrictive response.
“People who used the service had robust risk assessments and risk management plans.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records were complete, with no omissions found. Medicines used to manage behaviour were reviewed regularly to reduce the risk of overmedication.
“We viewed medicines administration records (MARs) for people and found that this were all completed to good standard and found no omissions.” from the report
Choice around food
The kitchen was well stocked, meals were cooked daily and people helped with cooking and shopping. Menus reflected people's choices and dietary and cultural needs.
“The menu was discussed with people weekly and people had pictures to choose their favourite meal.” from the report
Healthcare support
People were supported to attend healthcare appointments and received input from a range of health professionals when needed.
“People had been supported to attend important healthcare appointments and their healthcare needs were monitored closely.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider and managers carried out regular audits and unannounced checks, including at night. The report says identified issues were followed up.
“There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and any risks to people's safety.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What activities are currently available, and how do you make sure each person has a meaningful choice?
- 02How are people and their families involved in planning and reviewing care?
- 03How do you review medicines used to manage behaviour, and how do you check that they are still needed?
- 04How do you respond when a person's risks or support needs change?
- 05How will you tell families about any concerns, incidents or changes in a person's care?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and ratings for uninspected areas were carried forward from the last inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 January 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found caring, person-centred support, with some medicines recording issues addressed during and after the inspection.
Inspectors visited the home on 18 December 2019. One inspector spoke with four staff members and three relatives, observed care, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records. The people using the home were unable to speak with inspectors, so observations were also used.
The home was rated Good overall and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, had enough staff, received support with food, health care and medicines, and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
Support plans were personalised and reviewed monthly. People were supported with activities, family relationships, communication and independence. The management team was described as approachable, and quality checks were used to improve the service.
There were minor problems with medicines records. One medicine record had a gap, and prescribed creams were not always signed for on the medicines record. Inspectors were satisfied the medicine had been given, and the home took action by bringing forward medicines refresher training and discussing the issue with staff.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staff were available on each shift and able to support people safely, including when people went out for activities.
“Staffing rotas showed staff were available on each shift. Staff cover for holidays, training and illness was available.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's preferences and personal histories. They supported people in a compassionate way while protecting privacy and encouraging independence.
“We observed staff supported people in a caring, compassionate manner and interacted positively with people using the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans included people's individual needs, choices and preferences. Plans were reviewed monthly to reflect changes.
“Care and support plans were personalised and detailed, with guidance for staff on how to meet people's needs.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People were supported to enjoy activities such as day centres, restaurants, the cinema and events in the community. The home kept relatives informed about activities and changes in people's needs.
“People were supported to visit their relatives. The service did not have restrictions on visiting hours.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingOne medicines record had a gap, although inspectors were satisfied the medicine had been given. Prescribed creams were also applied but not always signed for on the medicines record. The home addressed this through staff discussions and earlier refresher training.
“We found prescribed creams were applied but not always signed for on the MAR by the staff member applying it” from the report
- 01What checks are now in place to make sure every medicine and prescribed cream is signed for on the medicines record?
- 02What was covered in the medicines refresher training brought forward after the inspection, and how is staff competence checked now?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's support plan reflects their current communication, health, cultural and personal preferences?
- 04What activities and opportunities for independence could my relative take part in?
- 05How will you keep me informed about changes in my relative's health, appointments and activities?
This was an announced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including observations, discussions with staff and relatives, and reviews of care, medicines, recruitment and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 February 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of MIG House Residential Care Homes
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at MIG House Residential Care Homes →
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at MIG House Residential Care Homes →
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Redbridge
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.