DHL PTS Ponders End

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We rated caring as good. We assessed three quality statements. People said they felt the staff treated them with care and as individuals and this was observed by inspectors. We were not assured all staff felt valued or were listened to by the service.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People felt they were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity when using the service. All patients spoken to were happy with the service provided. Although some said the service can be delayed sometimes. People told us “The way the staff treat him is just really great - to see them talking to him and actually listening to his perspective on things”. “The most important thing is staff are people centred here”.

Staff told us they like working for the service because it was important to them to care for people who needed help. A leader told us he wanted patients to be cared for how he would expect his Nan to be treated. However, a staff member told us if they could speak with management they would say “These are patients not parcels – I feel like I’m working for Amazon”.

We saw staff were caring and attentive throughout a person’s journey. We saw staff transport a person home. Throughout the journey staff explained to the person what was happening and on arrival were mindful of people’s dignity and safety. We saw staff safely move a person at their home where no manual handling equipment was available which was dignified, caring and reassuring.

People said staff were professional and understood what they needed. One person said “My husband is a very private, proud man. The way the staff treat him is just really great”.

Leaders told us that the service sub-contracted some journeys if people needed more specific support. Managers told us they had provided training in autism and learning difficulties for staff to understand peoples’ needs.

We saw call takers who made initial assessments identify what people needed to be transported safely and enabled planners to make effective decisions on

what sort of transport would be suitable. We saw people were transported and supported according to their needs in a kind and professional way to appointments and returned home. Road staff were seen to treat people as individuals on their journeys.

The service assessment process records peoples needs to support road staff transportation. The service holds a regular patient experience meeting inclusive of renal patients and care home leads, however we did not see any minutes or actions from these meetings. The service showed that 21% of Road Staff had received training in Learning Disability and Autism Spectrum Disorder.

.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Leaders said increased staff engagement and recognition had reduced sickness levels and staff turnover. Leaders told us they recognised the needs of staff and had developed engagement days to value staff and improve relationships. They said they prioritised staff engagement and tried to be visible. They said the prioritised staff engagement but leader attendance was not always possible. However, we were told by leaders that other leaders attended those meetings and in fact staff told us no leader attended at the time of the inspection and that staff did not feel heard. Office based staff said leaders were approachable and supportive, however road staff said leaders were not visible. A leader told us they had increased annual leave that could be carried over to the next year. However, we saw an email from DHL human resources that said no annual leave could be carried forward. Leaders told us they had a trauma support process for staff which was allocated to a manager, though we saw no documentation to support this. Some road staff said they could raise concerns with line managers but felt that no action would be taken. A staff member told us they had reported a concern to a line manager two months ago. There had been no investigation, feedback or outcome and they didn’t feel confident to pursue it. However, some staff based in an office environment told us they were happy working for the service, felt valued and able to raise concerns. Some road staff said they could raise concerns with line managers but felt that no action would be taken. A staff member told us they had reported a concern to a line manager two months ago. There had been no investigation, feedback or outcome and they didn’t feel confident to pursue it. However, some staff based in an office environment told us they were happy working for the service, felt valued and able to raise concerns.

The service held an employee of the month process and a “you said we did” with posters of actions that had been taken and feedback displayed. When staff had been involved in traumatic events a manager is allocated to support them. Staff had one-to-one meetings with line managers. The service provided access to legal support and counselling and a concerns contact line.

The 2024 staff survey said staff felt the service was committed to health and safety, promoted diversity and inclusivity, but did not implement customer feedback on processes, staff did not feel supported by digitalisation, the service had not made positive changes as a result of feedback or cared about their wellbeing. Leaders had an action plan which responded to the staff survey where some progress had been made. We saw action taken on five areas of concern, however, seven areas for actions documented a delay or why something could not be done. We were not provided with minutes of any engagement meetings showing if leaders had attended or any issues that had been raised. We saw a document that showed issues raised at engagement meetings between April 2024 and July 2024 which had been allocated to managers, but half had no outcomes or updates.