Grimsby Office

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We assessed 5 quality statements in Effective and rated it as good. The service did not always meet their key performance indicators in timeliness of arrival to, and pick up from hospital, but had plans to improve. Staff followed guidelines and had an up-to-date suite of pertinent policies and procedures. Staff worked well together and there was an audit programme designed to maintain and improve standards.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We were unable to speak with people using the service at the time of assessment. However, the service had a feedback mechanism which showed people had positive views about staff and the service provided.

Managers had clear plans in place to improve service performance against key performance indicators (KPIs). Managers were able to talk about actions taken to improve performance.

The service did not meet all KPIs. The service was tasked with making sure patients arrived at their destination within set timescales. Managers deemed that increased patient numbers, discharge flow from hospitals and patients requiring more support owing to severity of their illness contributed to not meeting all journey times. At the time of assessment, the ICB had renewed a contract that necessitated operational changes to help improve performance.

We were unable to speak with people using the service at the time of assessment. However, the service had a feedback mechanism which showed people had positive views about staff and the service provided.

Staff followed national guidelines where they were available and relevant for the service provided. These included national infection prevention and control guidelines and safety and vehicle roadworthiness national guidelines. Audits measured how well systems worked. These audits included, cleaning of vehicles, timing of journeys and reasons for delays. This helped staff to identify improvement actions. Staff reported incidents, managers identified improvement actions and shared this with staff.

Policies and standard operating procedures included national guidelines. Staff knew where to find these and when to seek further support. Staff were encouraged to report any concerns they had and share good practice across the whole service. Managers used audit processes which identified that staff were compliant.

People were complimentary about the team and how they worked together using feedback processes.

Staff received the information via their PDA. There was a central location in Lincoln where bookings and job allocations were coordinated. Information was then shared with transport staff to provide continuity and care for the patient. Staff completed documentation and made sure they gave the receiving staff at destinations travelled to the information they needed.

Partners stated that the team worked collaboratively and professionally at the monitoring meetings they attended.

Staff understood their remit and were enthusiastic about delivering safe care. Staff worked collaboratively and understood how to meet the needs of patients during transfers.

Staff were rostered to work with the same team which enabled good working relationships. Digital tools allowed staff to communicate remotely. Managers held team meetings and offered support as required. A recent rota change had seen increased support on site for staff.

We were unable to speak with people using the service at the time of assessment. However, the service had a feedback mechanism which showed people had positive views about staff and the service provided.

Staff provided information on support that was available for the patient and carer pointing them in the direction of relevant third parties and social care services.

Carers were able to travel as escorts with patients. Staff supported patients and careers throughout their journey and continued assessing their needs until they handed over to a health professional.

People using the service were invited to give feedback and results were positive.

There was an audit programme. Meeting minutes reviewed showed that managers discussed the results of audits and were continuously looking to improve.

Staff completed monthly site compliance audits. The overall audit score was generated from eight measures, such as building, environment, waste management, vehicle cleaning area, vehicles, notice boards, governance, compliance and fire risk and identified staff were compliant.

The electronic records system held information about patients with identified special needs and requirements which included people living with dementia and learning disabilities.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They knew how to support patients who lacked the capacity to make decisions about their care.

The service provided training upon induction on the Mental Capacity Act, Deprivation of Liberty Standards and consent. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of consent and mental capacity. Control centre staff contacted safeguarding leads for advice when requests were made to transport patients without capacity or who may have behavioural difficulties due to their condition.