UK Event Medical Services Limited

Updated 29 March 2022

UK Event Medical Services is registered with the CQC to provide the following regulated activity;

• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury
• Transport services, triage and medical advice provided remotely

The provider has had a registered manager in post since December 2018.

The service was subject to a CQC focussed inspection in February 2020. The inspection looked at the safe and well-led domains. The service was not rated and there were no regulatory breaches identified.

UK Event Medical Services provided a full range of services including Non-Emergency Patient Transport Services, High Dependency Patient Transfers (Urgent Care), Secure Patient Transport, and Medical Repatriation. Medical Repatriation is not regulated by CQC.

The providers main operating base was in the Darnell area of Sheffield providing patient transport services. This was where the main administrative function of the provider was carried out. In addition to the main operating base the provider has five satellite stations listed below;

• Woodbourn Road in Sheffield providing emergency and urgent care and mental health patient transport. This satellite station is the location where staff received face to face classroom training.
• Cottingham providing patient transport services.
• Bridlington providing patient transport services.
• Elland providing emergency and urgent care and patient transport services.
• Barton-Upon-Irwell providing urgent emergency care, patient transport services and mental health patient transport.

The provider was on a framework agreement with an NHS ambulance provider for patient transport services (PTS) and urgent emergency care (UEC) services. Private providers on the framework have opportunities to bid on mini tenders which the NHS ambulance provider offered to independent providers as and when there was a business need.

The provider had a contract in place with an NHS ambulance provider and as part of that contract they carried out General Practitioner initiated patient transfers with technician support. The provider worked for another NHS ambulance provider through a digital broker system.

Transfers of mental health patients were arranged through the North of England Framework for Secure Patient Transport and a digital broker system.

The levels of regulated activity carried between September and December 2021 were as follows;

• Framework agreement with an NHS ambulance provider: Service provided seven days a week, on average 276 hours per day Mon-Fri and 200 hours per day over the weekend covering all areas of Yorkshire. On average 805 PTS journeys were made per week and 2679 UEC calls attended.
• NHS ambulance provider through a digital broker system: PTS ran five days per week, 60 hours a day. UEC ran seven days a week and 12 hours per day covering the Greater Manchester area. On average 220 PTS journeys were made per week and 2679 calls UEC calls attended.
• North of England Framework for Secure Patient Transport: This service is nationwide on behalf of a South Yorkshire social care partnership, an NHS hospital trust and a Yorkshire teaching Hospitals partnership. Transfers could be completed 24 hours a day. Generally, the provider did not take `on the day` bookings’ after 10pm, however if the transfer was pre-booked for a specific time after 10pm it would be completed. Between 1st August and 1st February 2022 there were 657 secure transfers and 53 non secure transfers made.
• GP transfers with technician support: This service was provided Monday to Friday between 9am and 7 pm covering the South Yorkshire area. Between September and December 2021 there were 758 calls attended.

The provider did not offer paramedic crews for any of the services provided.

Overall, the provider had a fleet of 60 vehicles, 15 of these could be used for higher dependency patients.

The provider employed on average 250 staff.

The main service provided by this provider was urgent and emergency care. Where our findings on urgent and emergency care for example, management arrangements – also apply to other services, we do not repeat the information but cross-refer to the urgent and emergency care service.

Updated 29 March 2022

This service had not previously been rated. 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. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well.
• Staff provided good care and treatment and gave patients pain relief when they needed it. 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 and had access to good information.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• 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.
• 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 receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities.

Updated 29 March 2022

This service had been inspected before but not rated. 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. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. 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 treatment and assessed patients’ food and drink requirements. 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, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• 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 treatment.
• 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 receiving care. 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.

Updated 29 March 2022

This service had been inspected before but not rated. 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. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well.
• Staff provided good care and treatment and gave patients pain relief when they needed it. 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 and had access to good information.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• 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.
• 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 receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities.

The main service was urgent and emergency care. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the patient transport section.

We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, responsive, and well-led. Caring was not rated.

However:

• We saw evidence some mandatory training course attendance was below the providers attendance target. We did see a comprehensive plan to raise compliance which was planned to reach 85% by April 2022.
• We saw evidence overall staff appraisal rates were below the providers completion target. We did see a comprehensive action plan to raise the levels of staff appraisal completion to 85% by April 2022.
• Staff files for those recruited prior to September 2021 were not always complete. Although, since the appointment of a new compliance lead, a new process had been implemented and all new staff files were complete.