We carried out a review of the data available to us about Aero Medical Ambulance Service on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Aero Medical Ambulance Service, you can give feedback on this service.
Aero Medical Ambulance Service is operated by Mind and Behaviour Limited. The service provides patient transport services. It is an independent provider of non-emergency private ambulance. The services covered includes short and long-distance ambulance journeys within the greater London and surrounding areas. The largest proportion of clients are transferred between hospitals or care homes and transfers to or from a patient’s home and a hospital.
The service does not provide an emergency response service.
We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced part of the inspection on 23 April 2021.
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 patient transport services.
We rated this service as Good overall.
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 provided good care and treatment. The manager 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. The service was available seven days a week.
The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and enabled people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for transfers.
The manager supported staff to develop their skills. 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.
However:
Although the manager had oversight of the service and managed performance of the service effectively these were not formalised or documented effectively. They identified relevant risks and issues and identified actions to reduce their impact but there was no formalised risk management process in place.
There were limited formalised policies and procedures although the manager did have processes in place. Not all policies we reviewed were version controlled or within review date.
The service manager was in the process of updating and formalising their governance structure; however, this was yet to be finalised and embedded. 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 one requirement notice that affected patient transport services. Details are at the end of the report.
Fiona Allinson
Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals, on behalf of the Chief Inspector of Hospitals
Aero Medical Ambulance Service is operated by Mind and Behaviour Limited. The service provides patient transport and is an independent provider of emergency and non-emergency private ambulances. The services covered include the repatriation of people from overseas, short and long distance ambulance journeys within the greater London and surrounding area.
We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out an announced inspection on 28 February 2017.
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.
Services we do not rate
We regulate independent ambulance services but we do not currently have a legal duty to rate them. We highlight good practice and issues that service providers need to improve and take regulatory action as necessary.
We found the following areas of good practice:
However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:
Following this inspection, we told the provider that 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.
Edward Baker
Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (Central Region)
The manager told us that ambulance crew were deployed as required through a recruitment agency and that regular agency staff were used. We saw that the service had carried out checks on the identity, professional accreditation and training for the doctors, nurses and drivers that had been used. There were systems in place so that people received safe and appropriate care from experienced and competent staff. The service had two vehicles in operation at the time of our visit.
The service had appropriate procedures and systems in place to ensure that people who used the service for longer journeys were not at risk of malnutrition as vehicles carried appropriate food and drink as required based on people's individual needs. The service had appropriate and safe systems in place for the handling of medicines.
There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and sought feedback from the people who used the service.
The manager stated that ambulance crew were deployed as required through a recruitment agency. We were told that regular agency staff had been used. The manager said that when an agency staff such as a nurse, doctor or driver was required, their identity, training certificates and vetting documents had been checked each time before they carried out their role. This had ensured that people received safe care from experienced and competent staff.