EMED Sussex

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

We found that the provider did not consistently work effectively with partner organisations to ensure coordinated care, particularly during discharge and transport. Poor communication and booking errors contributed to delays, aborted journeys and low performance against key timeliness targets, especially for people attending renal dialysis.

The provider did not always assess, plan or deliver transport effectively. Leaders had not established a clear process for booking frequent users which meant changes in people’s needs may not always have been identified. Monitoring and use of performance data were inconsistent, particularly for subcontracted activity, limiting leaders’ ability to drive improvement.

Leaders were aware of longstanding issues affecting patient flow but had not implemented effective mitigations, and improvements to liaison roles were still at an early stage and had not yet resulted in sustained improvement.

However, staff gathered relevant information at booking, used communication aids appropriately, supported people to live healthier lives, and followed effective consent and mental capacity practices.