Archived: Meditransport Ambulance Service

Updated 19 May 2020

Meditransport Ambulance Service is operated by Meditransport Ambulance Service Limited. The service opened in 2013 and this location was registered in 2018. It is an independent ambulance service in Wymondham, Norfolk. The service primarily serves the communities of the Cambridgeshire region and transported patients of all ages.The service has had two separate registered managers in post since registering the location in 2018.

The service employed two members of staff directly; this included the registered manager and the operational manager.

The service employed all other staff on zero hour contracts; this included emergency technicians and ambulance care assistants. The provider held one contract with a local NHS trust and was subcontracted by another independent patient transport service. They operated two types of non-emergency patient transport service vehicles, including two ambulances and one car from a dedicated ambulance station.

The provider did not hold any controlled drugs therefore no controlled drugs accountable officer (CDAO) was required.

Updated 19 May 2020

Meditransport Ambulance Service is operated by Meditransport Ambulance Service Limited. The service provides patient transport services.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced part of the inspection on 12 March 2020.

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.

This was the first time we had inspected this location. We rated it as Inadequate overall.

• The service did not have enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff did not have training in key skills. Not all staff had received training to enable them to understand how to protect patients from abuse and manage safety well. The service did not manage infection risk well. Staff did not always have enough information to assess risks to patients and act on them. Information contained in care records was not comprehensive. The service did not always manage safety incidents well. There was little evidence of lessons learned from incidents. Staff did not collect safety information to improve the service.

• Staff did not always provide good care and treatment. Managers did not monitor the effectiveness of the service or make sure staff were competent to undertake their role.

• There was little evidence of service planning to meet the needs of local people that took account of patients’ individual needs. Staff did not gather feedback from patients, families and carers or make it easy for people to give feedback.

• Leaders did not run the service well using reliable information systems. Leaders did not support staff to develop their skills. Staff did not feel respected, supported and valued. Staff were not always clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service did not engage well with patients and the community to plan and manage services. Senior staff did not commit to improving services continually.

However, we also found:

• Staff ensured vehicles for transporting patients were serviced, received up to date MOT and used appropriate serviced equipment to keep people safe. Staff made sure they were competent drivers and undertook assessments to improve their skills and keep people safe.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations and that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. We also issued the provider with six requirement notice(s) that affected patient transport services. Details are at the end of the report.

We have taken enforcement action against this provider and have issued an urgent suspension notice because we identified significant concerns.

We will add full information about our regulatory response to the concerns we have described to a final version of this report, which we will publish in due course.

Heidi Smoult

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (Central Region), on behalf of the Chief Inspector of Hospitals

Updated 19 May 2020

The main service was patient transport services. During our inspection on the 20 March 2020 we found concerns in relation to the training and competency of staff, a lack of quality auditing, governance and risk management. We rated the service as inadequate for safe, effective, responsive and well-led. We were unable to rate caring as we did not have enough evidence to rate this domain.

• The service did not demonstrate if they had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff did not always have training in key skills. Not all staff had the training and qualifications to understand how to protect patients from abuse and manage safety well. The service could not evidence controlling infection risk well. Staff did not have enough information to assess risks to patients and act on them. Information contained in care records was minimal. The service did not always manage safety incidents well. There was little evidence of lessons learned from them. Staff did not collect safety information to improve the service.

• Staff did not always provide good care and treatment. Managers did not monitor the effectiveness of the service or make sure staff were competent.

• There was little evidence of service planning to meet the needs of local people that took account of patients’ individual needs. Staff did not gather feedback from patients, families and carers or make it easy for people to give feedback.

• Leaders did not run the service well using reliable information systems. Leaders did not support staff to develop their skills. Staff did not understand the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff did not always feel respected, supported and valued. Staff were not always clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service did not engage well with patients and the community to plan and manage services. Staff did not commit to improving services continually.