Daryl Lutchmaya (SCAS Chief Governance Officer) has been
invited to present a report with an update on South Central Ambulance Service’s
CQC improvement journey.
The Committee is invited to consider the report, raise any questions and AGREE any recommendations arising it may wish to make.
PLEASE NOTE: There are 9 documents attached to this item, the first being the main report submitted by SCAS, and the remaining 8 constitute additional supporting information documents provided by the Ambulance Service.
Minutes:
Daryl Lutchmaya (Chief Governance Officer, SCAS); Kirsten
Willis- Drewett (Assistant Director of Operations, SCAS); Dai Tamplin (Senior
Transformation Programme Manager, SCAS); and John Dunn (Head of Risk and
Security, SCAS) were invited to present a report providing an update on the South Central Ambulance Service’s Care Quality Commission
improvement journey.
The South Central Ambulance Service
(SCAS) Chief Governance Officer informed the Committee that the Trust had an
ambition to be an outstanding team, and to deliver good outcomes through
innovation and partnership. The SCAS mission was that ‘the right care is
delivered as best as it can’. In order to achieve
these ambitions, the Trust had 4 key values which are to be:
Ø
Caring.
Ø
Innovative.
Ø
Professional.
Ø
A
teamworking organisation.
The Chief Governance Officer highlighted that in order to achieve the results that the Trust was striving
toward, it had formulated six strategic objectives:
Ø
High
quality care and patient experience.
Ø
Partnership
and stakeholder engagement.
Ø
Sustainability.
Ø
People
and Organisation.
Ø
Technology
Transformation.
Ø
Being
well-led.
The Committee were informed that SCAS had received some
assistance from the NHS National Improvement Team, who had put together an
improvement plan for SCAS to work to.
The Assistant Director for Operations explained that SCAS
was in a challenging position in relation to the increase in volume of workload
coming through, particularly category 1 and category 2 calls (immediately
life-threatening calls). The service had to declare a critical incident on the
23 January, which occurred due to the sudden increase in category 1 and 2
calls. Over the course of two or three days, these had constituted 72 percent
of calls; which was an incredibly high number. Such
high levels of category 1 and 2 calls would have a knock-on effect on the
system, particularly the acute Trusts, as most of those patients who were
calling in would require hospital admission. This also had knock-on effects in
creating ambulance service handover delays.
The Committee were informed that there was good work within
the system to try to keep patients away from Emergency Departments. There had
been an increase, on average, in 8 patients a day who were able to be referred
into other areas or departments. SCAS were grateful for the good partnership
working that existed within the Oxfordshire system.
The Committee enquired as to whether there was any progress
in improving structures of governance within SCAS. The Chief Governance Officer
outlined that the recent CQC inspection and report rightly highlighted that
there were a number of issues that were not operating
appropriately. Whilst trying to address the issues of the improvement
programme, a governance team was being established. The service also received
support from the governance institute, which had helped the service with its
risk management solutions.
The Committee also queried whether there were independent
members on the SCAS governance board. It was explained to the Committee that
initially, the board was comprised of executive as well as non-executive
directors, which felt top heavy. The service sought to make the improvement
programme a ‘business as usual’ practice, which meant that the improvement
programme board was led by the chief executive. There was representation from a
national improvement director, who provided direct challenge to the chief
executive. There was also membership from Hampshire and Isle of Wight
Integrated Care Board (ICB).
The Committee enquired as to whether SCAS would look to
other authorities or areas for the purposes of identifying and learning best
practice. The Chief Governance Officer outlined that having previously worked
in a number of public Trusts, he had brought insights
of good practice alongside him when he initiated his role at SCAS. There was
also regular communication with other ambulance services nationwide, where
comparisons as well as identifications of best practice were made in that
context. The Trust’s terms of reference were also being reviewed.
The Committee queried as to how well resourced the internal
audit function of the Trust was, and how this had fit in the broader context of
the structures of governance in general. It was responded that the Trust had
experienced some delays in completing internal audit functions. The Trust had a
risk insurance compliance group, which oversaw audit functions and brought
executive directors into direct contact with internal auditors, where the
auditors could speak directly to directors.
In response to a query regarding patient experience and how
this was imputed into the Trust’s ways of working, it was explained that
patient experience did not actually formulate one of the Trust’s improvement workstreams, but was swept up under the patient
safety workstream. A system director was leading on this, and the Trust was
implementing a number of new measures to ensure that
the patient voice was heard all the way up to the executive level. There was a
patient panel, and various members were recruited to this. There was also work
within the Trust’s communications department to ensure that there was effective
communication regarding an honest picture of the services and the experience of
patients from the ground upwards. An observation from the CQC found that less
positive stories regarding patient experiences had not been heard at the
executive level; the Trust was actively seeking to address this.
The Committee emphasised that one concern identified by the
CQC was that the service did not consistently control infection risk very well.
The Committee enquired as to the measures the Trust were taking to address
this, and how confident SCAS was that equipment, vehicles and premises were
kept clean and that there was consistent monitoring of this throughout the
service. It was responded that the Trust were actively monitoring infection
risk and control, which was also a crucial element of the CQC improvement
journey. The Trust’s IPC service was working closely with operational
colleagues to minimise risks of infection and to ensure cleanliness. A company
named Churchill had been contracted to provide a rolling rota of cleaning on
the Trust’s vehicles; including deep cleans. The Assistant Director of
Operations confirmed that every frontline vehicle was required to be cleaned
once every 24 hours as part of a standard clean and restock service.
Additionally, vehicles received a deep clean every 6 weeks. There had also been
an observed process of handwashing for frontline staff, and staff were being
trained and educated in cleanliness and infection control.
The Committee referred to the importance of risk
assessments, and queried how extensive and sophisticated the Trust’s risk
assessments were, as well as the level of frequency with which such assessments
were undertaken. It was responded that the Trust carried out task
based assessments in operations. The risk assessments had to legally
identify all foreseeable hazards for patients. Therefore, some of the risk
assessments could be relatively extensive in their nature and scope. In terms
of how risk assessments were reviewed, it would be ideal to have annual reviews
with some of the task-based risk assessments, although the Trust had not
managed to undertake such a review in over two years. In terms of the display
screen equipment work station assessments, these had
to be - and had been - undertaken annually.
The Committee referred to page 142 of the report, which
highlighted that the Information Technology supporting SCAS’s operational
function (including safeguarding) remained a significant concern, challenge and reputational risk. The Committee Chair
therefore enquired as to what the enablers and barriers were in relation to
resolving this area of risk. It was responded that one of the significant
challenges with safeguarding referrals was that there were server facilities on
the premises that handled such data transmission. This had begun to fail, and
in November 2023 the Trust had transitioned to a cloud-based server, which was
designed to resolve many of the outages and delays to referrals experienced
previously. However, since early December 2023, the Trust then suffered a number of outages not with the server, but with the actual
transmission process. The Trust currently utilised a mailbox system,
and had undertaken due diligence. The Committee were informed that the
Trust had been actively exploring ways to improve the process around the above.
There was a risk of patient harm if safeguarding referrals were delayed, but
that significant enhancements in the safeguarding service had been made. The
safeguarding service was operating smoothly and efficiently,
and monitored the occurrence of outages to minimize harm to patients.
All delayed referrals also received risk assessments. The Committee queried as
to whether patients and their families who were affected by such IT challenges
were clearly communicated with, and the Trust responded that any affected
patients were clearly communicated with.
The Committee queried how effectively staff were being
provided with training to equip them with the basic skills of how to deal with
patients who may be mentally ill. All frontline clinicians were trained to
support people experiencing a mental health crisis. Call handlers also had the
ability to pass calls onto clinical staff within the control room. It was
emphasised that the service would always act with immediacy in circumstances
where it dealt deal with mentally ill patients. From a force negotiation perspective,
the service would also engage and liaise with the Police force.
The Committee highlighted that the CQC inspection outcome
outlined that some people were not given the necessary pain-relieving
medicines. It was queried as to whether staff had been sufficiently trained in
this regard, particularly given the importance of ambulance staff being able to
provide pain-relieving medications promptly and appropriately. It was responded
that paramedics were trained in what is known as a step-wide approach in the
management of pain, and that the Service was ensuring that paramedics would be
adequately trained in pain management and in the administering of pain relieving medications.
The Committee referred to how the report outlined the
Trust’s commitments to staff wellbeing, and enquired as to whether the Trust
had sufficient resources
to maintain or potentially enhance the support provided to staff.
It was outlined to the Committee that there was a comprehensive support package
for staff, and that there was a fully-staffed health
and wellbeing team that supported staff; including staff who required
additional interventions such as Occupational Health. Trauma risk management
was also prevalently utilised to support staff members who may have had to deal
with traumatic incidents. The Committee were also informed that the Trust had
good access to psychological medicines, and that there was an unfortunately
high uptake of these amongst some of the Trust’s staff.
The Committee enquired as to how the Trust was performing in
the realm of staff recruitment and retention. It was responded that the Trust
was widening its recruitment drive in order to attract
and recruit staff from oversees. There were a cohort of SCAS personnel who
would be travelling to Australia in March to help facilitate further
recruitment of staff from Australia and New Zealand. It was explained to the
Committee that in Australia in particular, there was a shortage of employment
opportunities for ambulance service staff, and that SCAS were utilising this as
an opportunity to enhance recruitment from that region.
The Committee AGREED to finalise a list of
recommendations offline subsequent to the meeting, and
to then issue these recommendations to SCAS.
Supporting documents: