Date of assessment: inspection activity started on 17 February 2026 and concluded on 10 March 2026. This was a risk-based assessment due to the concerns received in relation to poor care and governance. As a result, we undertook a responsive assessment to review all key questions. Magic Helping Hands is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection 75 people were being supported by the service. We assessed the service against “Right care, right support, 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. We found people received care in accordance with this guidance and care workers and staff had received appropriate training relating to people with a learning disability and autistic people. The provider was working in line with these principles. There were systems in place to ensure people received the care and support they needed. Staff had a good understanding of the people they supported and respected their individual choices and wishes.The provider understood safeguarding policies and procedures, helping to ensure people did not experience abuse or come to avoidable harm. There was a robust system of audits and management oversight in place that had identified minor issues and had put plans in place to address these. We spoke with care workers, administration staff and the management team. We received feedback from professionals involved in the service. We reviewed people’s care records and documents relating to the management of the service.
PDF cached but not yet analysed by Claude; set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and re-run npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-6194028937.
Magic Helping Hands improved from Requires Improvement to Good overall following a focused inspection of safe, effective, and well-led domains, with strong person-centred care, medicines management, and staff support noted. Well-led remains Requires Improvement due to insufficient audit depth, lack of external management oversight, and disrespectful language used to describe people with learning disabilities in care records.
Concerns (4)
moderateGovernance: “the audits were not as comprehensive as they could be in cross checking staff were carrying out tasks as directed in the care plan, for example only a small percentage of the daily notes were checked”
moderateLeadership: “they did not have in place a support network or external scrutiny to help them look at their practice and offer guidance and professional expertise.”
moderatePerson-centred care: “language in the care plans and daily notes they used to describe people with a learning disability or autistic people was not always respectful. For example, "I am non-verbal, therefore I do not have the capacity."”
minorRecord keeping: “we saw in the daily notes written by a staff member the actions they had taken which were not in the care plan.”
Strengths
· People felt safe with staff and expressed high confidence in care workers.
· Safe recruitment processes in place including DBS checks and accounted employment history gaps.
· Medicines managed safely with staff trained and assessed as competent before administering.
· Staff received thorough induction, ongoing training, supervision and spot checks and felt well supported.
· Service worked effectively with GPs, social workers, occupational therapists and other professionals.
Quality-Statement breakdown (15)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Using medicines safelyGood
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
effective: Staff working with other agencies to provide consistent, effective, timely careGood
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standards, guidance and the lawGood
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceGood
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced dietGood
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceGood
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsRequires improvement
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringRequires improvement
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people, continuous learning and improving care, working in partnershipGood
Magic Helping Hands, a small newly registered domiciliary care agency supporting one person, received an overall rating of Requires Improvement at its first inspection in November 2019. Key shortfalls included inadequate infection control guidance, deficient medication recording practices, incomplete Mental Capacity Act documentation, and underdeveloped governance systems, though staff were praised for their compassionate, person-centred care.
Concerns (8)
moderateMedication management: “Medicine policies and procedures needed to be updated to reflect current guidelines, in relation to covert medication. A person required PRN medication... Protocols needed to be put in place.”
moderateInfection control: “There was a lack of information or guidance for staff to understand how to protect themselves and others from the potential risk of infection.”
moderateConsent / capacity: “One person lacked capacity to make decisions in relation to personal care. An assessment considering their decision-making ability had not been carried out.”
moderateRecord keeping: “When a best interest decision had been made by health professionals, records of this had not been retained within the care plan.”
moderateIncident learning: “Systems needed to be put in place, so learning could be cascaded if incidents, accidents, complaints or safeguarding events occur.”
moderateGovernance: “Systems and checks needed to be completed and practice embedded into to assure the quality of service people received.”
minorEnd-of-life care: “Care plans did not explore people's preferences in relation to end of life care... staff had not received end of life care training.”
minorCommunication with families: “The registered manager needed to complete training relating to the accessible communication standards. Easy read version of key policies was not available.”
Strengths
· Staff were compassionate, kind and caring; relatives and professionals spoke positively about the care provided.
· Robust recruitment processes were in place with appropriate pre-employment checks.
· Staff received regular supervision and a structured induction including shadowing.
· Person-centred risk assessments were detailed and covered a wide range of individual needs.
· An electronic monitoring system was in place to track missed or late visits.
Quality-Statement breakdown (20)
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionRequires improvement
safe: Using medicines safelyRequires improvement
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people; learning lessons when things go wrongRequires improvement
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidance (MCA)Requires improvement
effective: Staff working with other agencies; supporting people to live healthier livesGood
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough
Good
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standardsGood
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceGood
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; respecting equality and diversityGood
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisionsGood
responsive: End of life care and supportRequires improvement
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsRequires improvement
responsive: Planning personalised care; supporting people to maintain relationships and activitiesGood
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsGood
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringRequires improvement
well-led: Continuous learning and improving careRequires improvement
well-led: Working in partnership; engaging and involving people and staffGood
well-led: Duty of candour; managers and staff understanding quality, performance, risks and regulatory requirementsGood