The Care Quality Commission
  • Ambulance service

PTS-247 Limited

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Unit 65, Basepoint Business & Innovation Centre, Metcalf Way, Crawley, RH11 7XX 0345 004 0504

Provided and run by:
PTS-247 Limited

All Inspections

5th April 2022

During a routine inspection

Our rating of this service went down. We rated it as requires improvement because:

  • Managers did not always monitor the effectiveness of the service or ensured staff received a proper induction.
  • Leaders did not have the skills and abilities to run the service. They did not always understand or manage the priorities and issues the service faced. Leaders did not operate effective governance processes and did not use systems to manage performance effectively. The recruitment process was not robust. Staff were not clear about their roles and accountabilities. Leaders did not always identify or escalate relevant risks or take action to reduce their impact. The service did not collect or analyse reliable data. Leaders did not actively engage with staff or patients.

However:

  • 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 assessed patients’ food and drink requirements. The service met agreed response times. 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. 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.

18 February 2020

During a routine inspection

PTS-247 is operated by PTS-247 Ltd. The company provides a non-emergency patient transport service. PTS-247 is sub-contracted by a large NHS ambulance provider and conveys patients throughout Surrey and Sussex. The service is managed from one office location. Drivers and vehicles are based at the hospital trusts that use the service. The service provides patient journeys seven days a week between 5:30am and 11:30pm.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced part of the inspection on 18 February 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.

The main service provided by this service was non-emergency patient transport services.

We inspected the service once before in January 2018 but we did not rate the service at this time. However, we issued them with two requirement notices for the regulated activity of patient transport services.

  • Regulation 13 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment13 (2) - Systems and processes must be established and operated effectively to prevent abuse of service users.
  • Regulation 18 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Staffing 18 (2) A-Staff must receive appropriate support, training, professional development, supervision and appraisal as is necessary to enable them to carry out the duties they are employed to perform.

Since our last inspection, the service had trained staff at level 2 safeguarding vulnerable adults and children and had implemented a safeguarding policy.

Since our last inspection, all staff received mandatory training and completed appraisals to enable them to carry out their jobs.

We rated the service as Good overall.

  • The service provided mandatory training in key skills to all staff and made sure everyone completed it.
  • The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.
  • The service made sure all new staff completed disclosure and barring service (DBS) checks and renewed them every three years.
  • Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it
  • Equipment and vehicles kept people safe and staff knew how to use them.
  • Staff reviewed risk assessments for each patient at handover and removed or minimised risks. Staff identified deteriorating patients and knew how to call for help.
  • The service had enough staff with the right skills, training and experience to keep patients safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.
  • Staff transported patient discharge summaries securely and handed them over to all staff providing care.
  • The service managed patient safety incidents well. Staff recognised and reported incidents and near misses. Managers investigated incidents and shared lessons learned with the whole team.
  • The service provided care based on national guidance. Managers checked to make sure staff followed guidance.
  • Staff regularly checked if patients were drinking enough to stay healthy.
  • The service met agreed response times so that they could facilitate good outcomes for patients.
  • Staff monitored the effectiveness of care. They used the findings to make improvements and achieved good outcomes for patients.
  • All those responsible for delivering care worked together as a team to benefit patients and communicated effectively with other agencies.
  • Staff supported patients to make informed decisions about their care. They followed national gained patients’ consent when required. They knew how to support patients who lacked capacity to make their own decisions or were experiencing mental ill health.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness.
  • The service planned and provided care in a way that met the needs of local people and the communities served. It also worked with local NHS organisations to deliver care.
  • The service was inclusive and took account of patients’ individual needs and preferences. Staff made reasonable adjustments to help patients access services.
  • People could access the service when they needed it. Waiting times from referral to pick up and met contractual standards.
  • Leaders had the, skills and abilities to run the service. They understood and managed the priorities and issues the service faced.
  • The service had a vision for what it wanted to achieve and a strategy to turn it into action, developed with all relevant stakeholders. The strategy focused on sustainability of services and aligned to local NHS ambulance trust planning within the wider health economy.
  • Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They focused on the needs of patients receiving care. The service promoted equality and diversity in daily work.
  • Leaders operated governance processes with partner organisations.

However, we found areas for improvement:

  • The registered manager should maintain level 3 safeguarding training in line with Safeguarding Children and Young People: Roles and Competencies for Healthcare Staff Fourth edition: January 2019 requirements for registered managers.
  • The provider should review the recruitment process and records reference feedback for all potential staff.
  • The provider should make sure that all vehicles have access to clinical waste bags to safely dispose of clinical waste.
  • The provider should review its governance arrangements so that it can independently assess the safety and quality of the service, analyse data for themes and trends and improve communication of between to front-line and senior staff.
  • Following this inspection, we told the provider it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.