Archived: Mi Casa

Updated 17 September 2014

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process under Wave 1. Before our inspection, we asked the provider to complete an information return. We reviewed the information we held about the service including the last inspection report from May 2013. At the service   was meeting all national standards covered during the inspection. We spoke with the general practitioner, psychiatrist, occupational therapist, and staff member of commissioning team. They gave positive feedback about the service.

We visited the home on 01 May 2014. We spent time observing care and support in communal areas. We looked at all areas of the premises, including some people’s bedrooms (with their permission). We also spent time looking at records, which included people’s care records and records relating to the management of the home. We spoke with two people living at home, three relatives, four health and social care professionals, five members of staff and the manager. 

Our inspection team was made up of an inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Updated 17 September 2014

MI CASA provides accommodation, personal care and support for up to three people with learning disabilities and associated challenging needs, including autistic spectrum disorder. When we visited, three people were living in the home. The home is run by Precious Homes Ltd.

People told us they felt well cared for and safe living at the home. Their comments included “I like my house it’s good” and “I like all my staff they are nice.”  We found staff recruitment practices were safe and that relevant checks had been completed before staff worked at the home. Staff had the training and knowledge they needed to make sure people living in the home were cared for safely.  The care records we looked at demonstrated that people had access to external health care professionals’ support as required.  We found the arrangements for the management of medicines were safe.

We saw all communal parts of the home and some people’s bedrooms (with their permission) and found the premises and equipment were safe and well maintained. The provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service.

The service had a registered manager. She provided strong leadership and people using the service, their parents, care staff, health and social care professionals told us the manager promoted good standards of care. However, one parent told us whenever they tried to talk in relation to the care of their relative with the senior member of staff they found them uncooperative.

All the people we spoke with told us staff always asked them what they wanted to do before they received support with their care or treatment.  We found the location to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).  However, the majority of people who needed an assessment of their mental capacity had not received one in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) Code of Practice, to assess their capacity to make specific decisions about their care and treatment. The problem we found breached one health and social care regulations (Regulation 18). You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.