The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Imperial Nursing & Employment Agency

Unit 1, Leaside Regeneration Business Centre, 45 Gillender Street, London, E14 6RN

Provided and run by:
Imperial Nursing And Employment Agency Limited

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile
Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All Inspections

13, 19 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We carried out two inspection visits to this service. We spoke with the care co-ordinator and administrative assistant on the first visit and spoke with the registered manager on the second visit. We also telephoned the relatives or representatives of three people who use the service and three care workers. The relatives or representatives told us they were pleased with the quality of care and support provided by their care workers. People described their care workers as being, "excellent", "very reliable" and "caring".

The care workers told us how they gained the verbal consent of people but the service's own assessments of people's mental capacity was incomplete.

Some people told us they were not happy with how the service was being managed. For example, one person said the manager did not clearly communicate some changes to their relative's care package. Another person was concerned about the way the service operated when the registered manager was away.

We found that the service had not made suitable arrangements to cover the absence of the registered manager for a period of 58 days. The service was being managed on a day-to-day basis by a care co-ordinator and administrative assistant, who both yold us they had no experience or training for this level of responsibility.

Staff had not received the training, supervision and support they needed for their roles and responsibilities. There were some systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service although this did not happen during the prolonged absence of the registered manager.

28 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with one person using the service and the relative of another. Both people said they were pleased with the quality of care provided by the agency. One person said, “it is very good. I like my care worker and have no complaints with how I am looked after.” The relative told us, “the care workers are all excellent and really understand my relative’s complex needs.”

Both people told us they were consulted about how the care should be delivered and the care workers offered choices.

We saw that people’s care needs were assessed and recorded in their care plans. Risk assessments had been carried out and information was updated as required.

The agency had systems in place to make sure that staff were safely recruited, so that people using the service were protected.

The person using the service and the relative of another person said they had been provided with information regarding how to make a complaint and any complaints had been responded to.