• Ambulance service

Archived: OMNI Healthcare Limited

Unit 3 Mundells Industrial Centre, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, AL7 1EW

Provided and run by:
OMNI Healthcare Limited

All Inspections

16th November 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a focused unannounced inspection on 16 November 2015, to review Omni Healthcare’s arrangements for the safe transport and treatment of patients following the suspension of their service on 16 September 2015.

As this was a focused inspection, we did not inspect every key line of enquiry under the five key questions.

Are services safe at this service

Arrangements for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children had improved, with evidence of staff completing safeguarding training to ensure competency in recognising potential safeguarding concerns.

Risk assessments in relation to building and fire safety had been completed.

Security arrangements for equipment and vehicles were suitable and ensured that emergency equipment and compressed gas was not accessible to anyone not employed by the service or at risk of being tampered with.

All equipment had been serviced and safety checked to ensure its suitability for use.

Are services effective at this service

We did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services caring at this service

This was a responsive inspection and we did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services responsive at this service

This was a responsive inspection and we did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services well led at this service

A range of policies and procedures had been introduced by the provider to ensure safe working practices were in place.

Staff were aware of these polices and where to locate them if needed. Governance arrangements to monitor and ensure quality had been introduced; due to the short timescale since previous inspections we could not see the longevity of these quality measures.

We found that the service had introduced more effective recruitment procedures to ensure that all staff were appointed following a check of their suitability and experience for their role.

Professor Sir Mike Richards

Chief Inspector of Hospitals

26 October 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a focused unannounced inspection on 26 October 2015, to review Omni Healthcare’s arrangements for the safe transport and treatment of patients following the suspension of their service.

As this was a focused inspection, we did not inspect every key line of enquiry under the five key questions.

Are services safe at this service

There were serious concerns that care and treatment was not being provided in a safe way for patients.

We found inadequate arrangements for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children, with a lack of safeguarding training to ensure staff were aware of their responsibilities.

There was a lack of effective risk assessments being carried out, including fire safety to ensure the safety of patients and staff.

We found a recruitment processes in place which ensured all staff were of good character and had the required competence to carry out their roles. However, it was not followed.

We found inadequate governance processes in place which did not monitor and assess the quality of service provided in carrying on the regulated activities.

Are services effective at this service

There was a new system in place to ensure staff were suitably appraised or received clinical supervision which had not been implemented.

There was an induction policy, which was new, but was planned to be used within the service.

Are services caring at this service

This was a responsive inspection carried out during the service’s suspension period and we did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services responsive at this service

This was a responsive inspection carried out during the service’s suspension period and we did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services well led at this service

We did not see any evidence of effective governance arrangements in place to evaluate the quality of the service and improve delivery.

During the inspection we were not provided with evidence of effective policies and risk management and control systems, including audits.

The management team had not taken sufficient measures to identify, assess and manage risks throughout any aspects of the service.

We identified areas of poor practice and we informed the provider that they needed to make urgent improvements in order that their suspension could be lifted.

In summary, we consider that people may be exposed to the risk of harm due to:

  • Inadequate governance to monitor and assess the quality of service provided in carrying on the regulated activities.
  • Recruitment processes were not followed to ensure all staff were of good character and have the required competence to carry out their roles.
  • Inadequate procedures for ensuring the safety of children and vulnerable adults.
  • Inadequate maintenance of vehicles.
  • Lack of effective risk assessments, including fire safety.

The service must take action to ensure that:

  • Effective governance and risk management systems including fire safety are in place and understood by all staff.
  • The service has effective and current policies in place that are understood by all staff.
  • Recruitment processes are followed so all staff employed have the experience and competence required for their role, together with pre-employment checks.
  • Staff are supported in their roles by effective supervision, appraisal systems and ongoing training.
  • All equipment is fit for use and required checks and maintenance is carried out.
  • Effective safeguarding adults and children procedures are in place and understood by all staff.

Importantly, the provider must take urgent action to ensure compliance with regulations 12 (Safe care and treatment), 13 (Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment), 15 (Premises and equipment), 17 (Good governance), 18 (Staffing), and 19 (Fit and proper persons employed) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. On this basis, the registered provider was subject to a Notice of Decision issued by CQC continuing suspension its registration until 25 November 2015 and was not permitted to carry on any regulated activities until that time.

Professor Sir Mike Richards

Chief Inspector of Hospitals

09 September 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a focused unannounced inspection on 09 September 2015, to review Omni Healthcare’s arrangements for the safe transport and treatment of patients, because we had received information of concern about this service.

The Care Quality Commission had received information, from several different sources, which stated that Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks had not been routinely carried out on employees and that some staff were working without these checks in place.

As this was a focused inspection, we did not inspect every key line of enquiry under the five key questions.

Are services safe at this service

There were serious concerns that care and treatment was not being provided in a safe way for patients.

We found inadequate recruitment processes in place which did not ensure all staff were of good character and had the required competence to carry out their roles.

We found inadequate arrangements for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children, with a lack of safeguarding training to ensure staff were aware of their responsibilities.

There was a lack of effective risk assessments being carried out, including fire safety to ensure the safety of patients and staff.

We found inadequate security arrangements for equipment and vehicles. We found vehicles open and unlocked and that equipment, including defibrillators, oxygen cylinders and, airways equipment and first aid were all accessible and at risk of being tampered with.

There was a risk of harm to patient safety due to insufficient equipment maintenance. We found a number of items of equipment throughout the service where the servicing had lapsed. We found equipment that had not been calibrated to ensure its safe and accurate use.

We found inadequate governance processes in place which did not monitor and assess the quality of service provided in carrying on the regulated activities.

Are services effective at this service

There were no systems in place to ensure staff were suitably appraised or received clinical supervision.

There was no evidence of an induction policy or process was being used within the service.

Are services caring at this service

This was a responsive inspection and we did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services responsive at this service

This was a responsive inspection and we did not consider this as part of the inspection.

Are services well led at this service

We did not see any evidence of effective governance arrangements in place to evaluate the quality of the service and improve delivery.

During the inspection we were not provided with evidence of effective policies and risk management and control systems, including audits.

The management team had not taken sufficient measures to identify, assess and manage risks through any aspect of the service.

On the day of the inspection, we found that the service did not have robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure that all staff were appointed following a check of their suitability and experience for their role, together with robust pre-employment checks carried out.

We identified areas of poor practice and we informed the provider that they needed to make urgent improvements.

In summary, we consider that people may be exposed to the risk of harm due to:

  • Insufficient equipment maintenance.
  • Inadequate governance to monitor and assess the quality of service provided in carrying on the regulated activities.
  • Inadequate recruitment processes to ensure all staff are of good character and have the required competence to carry out their roles.
  • Inadequate procedures for ensuring the safety of children and vulnerable adults.
  • Inadequate security of premises, equipment and vehicles.
  • Lack of effective risk assessments carried out, including fire safety.

The service must take action to ensure that:

  • Robust governance and risk management systems including fire safety are in place and understood by all staff.
  • The service has effective and current policies in place that are understood by all staff.
  • Recruitment processes are in place so all staff employed have the experience and competence required for their role, together with robust pre-employment checks.
  • Staff are supported in their roles by effective supervision, appraisal systems and ongoing training.
  • All equipment is fit for use and required checks and maintenance is carried out.
  • Vehicles and premises security must be maintained.
  • Robust safeguarding vulnerable adults and children procedures are in place and understood by all staff.

Importantly, the provider must take urgent action to ensure compliance with regulations 12 (Safe care and treatment), 13 (Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment), 15 (Premises and equipment), 17 (Good governance), 18 (Staffing), and 19 (Fit and proper persons employed) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. On this basis, the registered provider was subject to a Notice of Decision issued by CQC suspending its registration until 28 October 2015 and was not permitted to carry on any regulated activities until that time.

Professor Sir Mike Richards

Chief Inspector of Hospitals

11 August 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an inspection in February 2014 and found that the provider needed to take action to meet the following essential standards:

• Requirements relating to workers

Omni Healthcare Ltd submitted an action plan stating they would be compliant with the outstanding regulation by the end of April 2014. We carried out this inspection on 11 August 2014 to ensure the action plan had been put into place.

In addition, we had received a number of concerns regarding staff working/driving for long hours and that equipment was not being maintained to a standard to ensure patient safety was assured.

When we inspected the location, we found that procedures had been put into place to ensure that pre-employment checks were in place and that staff were fit for their roles.

We found no evidence of staff working excess hours, so that they were unsafe to drive. One member of staff told us, “We do work long days sometimes, but we get breaks and there are always two of us in the ambulance who can drive, so we swap.”

The equipment and records we saw demonstrated that equipment was maintained appropriately.

14 February 2014

During an inspection in response to concerns

The manager told us that the service currently had a fleet of seven ambulances. There were four permanent ambulance crew members on the staff, although there were also currently 70 people who were registered with the service as bank staff.

We found that the service's recruitment processes were not robust. We noted that the service's application form only requested details of people's employment history for the last 10 years. This meant that the service did not hold a full employment history for any of the staff members. We noted that at least one person had started work with the service before the required criminal record checks had been completed and references had been supplied for candidates by one of the two people who had carried out their recruitment interview.