Yormed Ambulance Station

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes

On CQC’s last PTS inspection in November 2023, it rated Responsive as RI. On this inspection Responsive was rate Good. People could access care and treatment when they needed it. Staff involved and empowered patients and families in all aspects of care planning and decision making. Staff clearly explained all care and treatment options and plans to patients and their families. The service encouraged, monitored and learned from feedback. Staff tailored care and made reasonable adjustments for patients. They considered the impacts of patient’s occasionally complex care needs.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

CQC saw some positive service feedback about crew’s caring approach. They were handling a complex bariatric patient with mental health issues detained under the Mental Health Act (MHA, 1983). The patient had previously struggled to access specialist dental services. The crew stayed to allow the patient to be treated on the stretcher, avoiding a problematic transfer.

Staff could access specialist equipment to meet patient’s specific needs. For example, patient transport service (PTS) vehicles had ambulance trolley stretchers both onboard and in their storeroom which could accommodate bariatric patients. Paediatric stretcher harnesses were also stored onboard. These could reduce the stretcher’s strap size by half to safely transport children. Vehicles also had wheelchairs and all necessary straps to hold mobility-impaired patients in place in the event of emergency stops or when descending the ramp. There were user instructions which staff followed on safely positioning the wheelchair, applying brakes and attaching front tie-down straps. Staff were trained how to use all specialist equipment.

Staff knew how to ensure patients had equal access to their service. When office staff received booking information for patient transfers, they asked about any reasonable adjustments such as disability or sensory loss as part of their additional needs. This meant crews had all the necessary information in advance. The service had a reasonable adjustments policy to which staff adhered. CQC reviewed this policy. It referenced legal frameworks such as the Equality Act 2010 and NHS England’s Accessible Information Standard.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Governance leads had no concerns around information governance or data breaches. They had utilised the NHS data protection toolkit to ensure all data security processes were in place. The service’s paper-based documentation was backed up digitally wherever possible. Leads and managers were selective with IT systems and only used those which improved their service oversight. Staff used language line and could access translation services for patients with any interpretation needs. Staff had used language line to understand a Portuguese patient’s preferences after discharge.

The service complied with NHS England’s accessible information standard. Crews could use communication aids for non-verbal, speech impaired or neuro-diverse patients. PTS vehicles had pictograms onboard with phrases and smiley faces. This meant staff could ask children or people who were speech-impaired how they felt, including pain scores. However, during CQC’s assessment the service were not transporting any people under 18 years old. PTS staff completed data security awareness, handling information, information governance and data protection modules as part of their statutory and mandatory training (SMT).

The service had received no complaints in the 12 months since CQC’s last inspection in November 2023. The service received positive feedback from patients. CQC reviewed two customer feedback questionnaires from April and May 2024. Patients were satisfied or very satisfied in all their responses, had no concerns or suggestions for improvement. They found the patient transport service (PTS) crew professional, caring and patient focused. One patient would recommend the service. The service had received five positive patient survey results in 2024. This included a feedback letter from an extremely grateful patient. PTS crew had purchased them a fast-food meal. Another letter from November 2023 praised PTS staff’s professionalism, patience and understanding. They reassured an anxious patient moving house. Managers provided feedback to staff and given praise where due. They sought to gain more feedback, as patients did not always return their feedback forms. The service’s management meeting minutes from September 2024 mentioned issues with getting responses back from customers. Providers who had used YorMed’s PTS since CQC’s last inspection in November 2023 confirmed they had received no feedback from patients about their service.

The service tried to gain more feedback through other channels. For example, their transfer report form had a box for service user feedback. It confirmed if patients would agree to be contacted to provide feedback on YorMed’s service. If they agreed, office staff would then contact the patient’s family directly to seek feedback. CQC reviewed one ACA staff member’s annual appraisal form. They considered their biggest achievement in the past year was making a positive difference to their patient’s lives, as many were socially excluded. The staff member made referrals to help the less independent patients access the help and support they needed. They had conversations and listened attentively to patients describing themselves and their lives during transfers.

The service kept patients feedback forms onboard PTS vehicles, including some in different languages including Polish, Kurdish, Punjabi, Urdu, and Turkish. CQC reviewed the service’s complaints policy. This clearly outlined the channels people could use to make a complaint. The service would acknowledge within three days, then be investigated and responded to within 25 days.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.