• Ambulance service

Archived: 19 Green Way

PO Box 6888, Eastbourne, East Sussex, BN21 9LG (01323) 486888

Provided and run by:
Ms. Judith Appleton

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

17 October to 30 October 2017

During a routine inspection

19 Green Way is operated by Wealden Ambulance Service. The service provides patient transport services and event services. This inspection only looked at the provision of the patient transport service as that is subject to regulation by the CQC.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced part of the inspection on 17 October 2017 along with an unannounced visit to observe direct patient care on 30 October 2017

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led?

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Services we do not rate

We regulate independent ambulance services but we do not currently have a legal duty to rate them. We highlight good practice and issues that service providers need to improve and take regulatory action as necessary.

We found the following areas of good practice:

  • The condition and the cleanliness of the service’s vehicles was noted to be of a high standard.

  • The service had proactively used findings from other CQC inspections of similar services to carry out a gap analysis and make changes to how they were operating.

  • Policies in key areas such as safeguarding, cleanliness and infection control were robust, effective and well embedded with staff.

  • The availability of clinical advice from experienced paramedics ensured that staff had the confidence to carry out their roles safely.

However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

  • There was a lack of formal recording of meetings held amongst the management group which in turn did not demonstrate how decisions were made and communicated.

  • Records of training were not always dated and original certificates were not always retained on personnel files.

  • The depot environment where the vehicles were kept had no CCTV coverage and the surfaces were in a poor state of repair.

Amanda Stanford

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals, on behalf of the Chief Inspector of Hospitals

15 April 2013

During a routine inspection

We were told that the service provided patient transport to and from hospitals and care homes, as well as providing paramedic service services at horse shows, cycling events and fetes. The provider does not offer any "blue light" or emergency services.

We were unable to speak with patients who used the service due to the nature of the service provided. However we did speak to one of the organisations which commissions services from the provider. They told us that they were "absolutely satisfied" with the

service provided and that the service "works well with us". It was described as "operationally efficient".

We saw that patients were involved in the decision to use the service. We found that treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured patients safety and welfare and the equipment used had been maintained and was used safely. There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place and staff records and other records relevant to the management of the service were accurate and fit for purpose.

16 December 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

We were unable to speak with patients treated by the provider due to the nature of the

service provided.

We received information from a member of the public that indicated essential standards of quality and safety may not be being met.

We arranged this responsive review of

compliance and made a site visit to see if appropriate arrangements were made for the

care and welfare of patients who used the service.

We were unable to speak with patients treated by the provider due to the nature of the

service provided.

We received information from a member of the public that indicated essential standards of quality and safety may not be being met.

We arranged this responsive review of

compliance and made a site visit to see if appropriate arrangements were made for the

care and welfare of patients who used the service.