Magic House
Home care, Enfield
No overall rating
No overall rating: this location offers more than one kind of service, so the CQC rates each service separately.
Magic House: inspection record
This service has no overall rating at present. The squares show its earlier ratings.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
Inspected and rated 4 times since 2015. Rated Good in 2015, 2017 and 2020, then Requires improvement in June 2023.
Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement. The latest rating was published 17 months ago.
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 16 May 2025 (assessment visit 13 September 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of Assessment: 7 to 10 October 2024. This assessment was prompted by information we held about the service, including existing and emerging concerns. The assessment covered the entirety of the safe and well-led key questions, and parts of the effective, caring and responsive key questions. The service is a supported living service providing care and support to people with varied physical and mental health needs, including people with a learning disability and autistic people. The service consisted of several supported living schemes in and outside of London. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Safety was not always adequately managed. We found concerns in relation to assessing risks to people, ensuring people were protected from abuse or neglect, management of medicines, monitoring and reducing incidents, and staff training. In some cases, the way the service assessed people’s needs was not always efficient which could potentially impact the care provided to people. There were gaps in how the service managed complaints. We found inconsistencies and shortfalls in the governance of the service, including the effectiveness of quality assurance systems. Where improvements had been made, these were not always maintained across the different parts of the service. These concerns resulted in 3 breaches of regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding and staffing, and 1 repeated breach of regulation regarding good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against the provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded. However, we also found a number of examples of good care and good practice. For example, people received person-centred care and staff responded positively to their individual needs. There was an open culture where people and staff felt comfortable to raise concerns. There were also good support systems for staff.
-
Safe
No rating
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk people could be harmed. Under this key question, we found breaches of regulations in relation to safe care and treatment of people; safeguarding people from abuse, avoidable harm and neglect; and staffing.
-
Effective
Good
Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. When we last assessed this key question, we rated it good. At this assessment we only looked at parts of the key question and the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. When we last assessed this key question, we rated it good. At this assessment we only looked at parts of the key question and the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
Good
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. When we last assessed this key question, we rated it good. At this assessment we only looked at parts of the key question and the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
-
Well-led
No rating
Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. Under this key question, we found a repeated breach of regulation in relation to good governance.
Questions to ask the service
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 21 June 2023. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 21 June 2023. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
- Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.
Contact and registration details
| Address | 5-11 Green Lanes, London, N13 4TN |
|---|---|
| Neighbourhood | Palmers Green, Enfield |
| Phone | 020 8826 4348 |
| Website | www.magiclifeuk.com |
| Registered manager | Pawel Gawronski |
| Registered with the CQC since | |
| What it provides |
|
| Who it supports |
|
| Inspection reports | 4 inspection reports, latest 21 June 2023 (opens the Care Quality Commission website) Latest assessment published 16 May 2025; CQC's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports. |
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
| Provider | Magic Life Limited |
|---|---|
| Ownership type | Organisation |
| Companies House number | 08285062 (opens Companies House) |
Nearest alternatives
- – Blue Cliniczoid Ltd Home care, 0.3 miles awayNot yet rated
- G Medstar Care & Support Ltd Home care, 0.5 miles awayGood
- G Head Office - The Grove Home care, 0.6 miles awayGood
- G North London Adult Care Ltd Home care, 0.7 miles awayGood
- O Bluebird Care Highgate & Haringey Home care, 0.8 miles awayOutstanding
Getting help from London Borough of Enfield
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at London Borough of Enfield
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 020 8379 1001
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: London Borough of Enfield
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Magic House provide nursing care?
- The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Magic House.
- When was Magic House last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Magic House was published on 16 May 2025.
- Who runs Magic House?
- Magic House is run by Magic Life Limited.
- What is Magic House's CQC rating?
- No overall rating: this location offers more than one kind of service, so the CQC rates each service separately.