• Ambulance service

ERS Medical North

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Unit 5, Severnside Trading Estate, Textilose Road, Trafford Park, Manchester, Lancashire, M17 1WA 07985 333303

Provided and run by:
ERS Transition - Trading as EMED Group Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about ERS Medical North on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about ERS Medical North, you can give feedback on this service.

31 May 2022 and 1 June 2022

During a routine inspection

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. The maintenance and use of vehicles and equipment kept people safe. Staff assessed risks to patients and acted on them. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
  • Staff provided good care and followed relevant national guidance. The service met agreed response times. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs. Feedback from patients was consistently positive about the care and service they received.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for transport.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

18 to 20 September 2018, and 12 February 2019

During a routine inspection

ERS Medical North is operated by ERS Medical, which in turn is owned by ERS Transition Ltd. The service provides a patient transport service throughout the north of England from five bases: Manchester, Mansfield, Leeds, Crewe and Speke (the crew and vehicles are based within a hospital in Merseyside). There are 38 patient transport vehicles split (by demand) across all five sites. The registered location address is in Trafford, Manchester.

ERS Medical was previously owned by another company which sold the business towards the end of 2017. The new company, ERS Transition Ltd has been registered with the CQC since October 2017.

ERS Medical North provides support to the North West Ambulance Service as required. It also supports several acute hospital trusts across the north of England and provides support for a GP urgent care contract to a GP federation in Leeds.

ERS Medical North can transport patients detained under the Mental Health Act 2007 in a formal and informal context.

ERS Medical North is registered to provide treatment of disease, disorder or injury, and transport services, triage and medical advice provided remotely. We carried out our inspection between the 18 and 20 September 2018, and 12 February 2019.

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.

We found the following areas of good practice:

  • The service protected patients from abuse and harm.

  • The service used suitable vehicles and ensured equipment was stored on these safely and securely.

  • The service had updated its running sheets to allow clinical handover information to be recorded.

  • Patient records were securely stored.

  • Disclosure and barring service checks were completed for all staff.

  • Staff ensured appropriate paperwork was available when transporting patients detained under the Mental Health Act.

  • The service had introduced an updated national training programme for road crews, as well as an updated observational audit to assess the competency of staff.

  • The service’s policies were up to date.

  • The service had introduced systems to monitor the quality and safety of the services provided.

  • All staff had completed training that was required to undertake their roles safely. In addition, records indicated that most staff were up to date with mandatory training.

  • The service had a clear policy for staff to follow in the event of an emergency. Staff were aware of this and knew what actions to take if needed.

  • Staff delivered patient care in a caring and compassionate way. Staff demonstrated an awareness of the need to protect the privacy and dignity of patients.

  • Sites had specific business continuity plans.

  • Patient feedback was very positive.

  • There was a good culture in the organisation, staff felt engaged, and they praised the regional manager.

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

  • Patient review forms were inconsistently completed.

  • Not all the running sheets we reviewed contained clinical handover information.

  • The service did not always record that staff returned uniforms or badges when they left the service.

  • The Leeds site did not hold regular staff meetings (albeit that new manager had plans to reintroduce meetings and to increase attendance).

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.

Ann Ford

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (North), on behalf of the Chief Inspector of Hospitals