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
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staff training, recruitment checks and medicine records were in place, and inspectors found medicines were recorded correctly.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and knowledge to support people effectively. People were helped with food, healthcare, communication, their living environment and decisions under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People received kind and compassionate care. Staff respected privacy and dignity, understood individual communication styles and supported people to make choices and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and goals. People were supported with activities, relationships, family visits, cultural and religious events, and raising concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and positive culture, with approachable management and regular audits, meetings and feedback. The manager had oversight of people's needs and the quality of care.
What inspectors found, November 2023
MIG House Residential Care Homes is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection over three visits. Inspectors spoke with three people, three relatives and four staff. They reviewed care records, staff files, training records, risk assessments, medicine records, surveys and management checks.
Inspectors found people were safe and supported by staff who knew them well. Staff helped people make choices, build independence, follow their interests, see family and friends, and access health services. Care was described as kind, respectful and culturally appropriate.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had a registered manager and systems for checking care quality, medicines and infection control. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 12 September 2017.
Promoting independence
Staff focused on people's strengths and helped them pursue interests, achieve goals and develop everyday skills.
“Staff focused and supported people with their strengths and promoted their independence so people could live a meaningful everyday life.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness, compassion, privacy and dignity. Staff understood people's individual communication and sensory needs.
“People received kind and compassionate care from staff who were positive, respectful and understood people well.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, communication methods, goals and cultural or religious needs. People were supported to take part in activities and maintain relationships.
“Care plans held information on people's choices and their wishes, this included relevant protected characteristics connected to their cultural or religious preferences.” from the report
Strong mental capacity practice
Inspectors found consent and best-interest processes were in place, with people supported to make decisions and access advocacy when needed.
“The provider was working exceptionally well in line with the Mental Capacity Act.” from the report
Consistent staffing
Staff absences were covered by the home's internal bank staff. Inspectors said this helped people receive support from staff they knew.
“Staff absences were covered and managed by the provider's internal bank staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you use my relative's communication plan and preferred communication methods in everyday support?
- 02What personal goals and independence skills would you help my relative work towards?
- 03How would you support my relative to maintain contact with family and take part in activities in the community?
- 04How would you involve my relative and their family in mental capacity and best-interest decisions?
- 05How do you review medicine records and respond if an error or concern is found?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including both the care provided and the premises; no areas were excluded. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 November 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, October 2017
MIG House Residential Care Homes was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
The announced inspection took place on 27 July 2017. One inspector visited the home, spoke with two people, four relatives and three staff, and reviewed care records, staff files, medicines records, audits and other documents.
The home supported four adults with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, risks were assessed, staffing was sufficient and medicines were managed safely. Staff had suitable training and support, and people were helped with healthcare, food and everyday choices.
Inspectors saw friendly and respectful relationships. Care plans were personalised and focused on building independence. People were supported with activities, family contact, faith and complaints. The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. It remained Good compared with the previous inspection in July 2015.
Personalised goals
Care plans focused on individual abilities and goals. People were supported to build skills and gain more independence, with progress reviewed regularly.
“People and relatives told us they had made good progress in achieving their goals.” from the report
Respectful relationships
Inspectors saw staff communicating positively with people and respecting their privacy, dignity, choices and individual ways of communicating.
“The atmosphere in the home was friendly and relaxed, with people interacting with staff in a way that demonstrated they liked and trusted each other.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records included instructions and reasons for medicines. Staff completed daily stock checks and the manager carried out monthly audits.
“The records and medicines were checked and were found to be correct.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider and manager completed regular checks on care, staffing, records, health and safety. Actions identified through checks were followed up.
“The provider completed monthly visits to check on the quality and the safety of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you identify and review the personal goals and independence skills that matter to my relative?
- 02How would staff communicate with my relative if they do not communicate mainly through speech?
- 03How would you involve my relative in taking medicines and record their agreement or refusal?
- 04How do you support people to keep contact with family, practise their faith and maintain cultural ties?
- 05How are actions from house meetings and family feedback recorded and checked as completed?
This was an announced inspection of the overall quality of the home, covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 October 2017 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
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at MIG House Residential Care Homes →
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at MIG House Residential Care Homes →
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
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 Waltham Forest
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 £1,200 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 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.