La Fontana

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment and were supported to make decisions about their care in line with their needs and preferences.

Staff treated people as individuals and adjusted care where needed to suit individual needs and wishes. While care planning and person-centred approaches had improved, further work was planned to improve care quality, particularly for people living with dementia.

Person-centred care was emphasised in meetings, training courses and was reviewed as part of the quality assurance processes. Wherever possible, people were consulted about their care needs. Relatives were also involved in discussions if people needed support or lacked capacity.

Care plans included what was important to people and how they preferred to be supported. Health and social care professionals were involved appropriately, and advice was sought to ensure safe and effective care was planned for people.

People received care that was coordinated and consistent, with staff working with families and other professionals to meet people’s needs. Staff knew people well, and many relatives described continuity of care from familiar staff who understood people’s preferences.

The service worked closely with health and social care professionals, including GPs and other specialists, to support people’s health needs and follow good practice guidelines. Staff told us teamwork and communication had improved significantly in recent months, which supported continuity of care and responses when people’s needs changed.

Some relatives described “feeling uneasy” about changes in ownership and management, which had affected their confidence in the home for a period of time.

However, we found the home was calmer and more stable at the time of our assessment, with significant improvements in overall management, staff morale, care planning, staff culture and communication and coordination across the staff team.

People and relatives were given information about care and support in a way they could generally understand, and staff shared updates when concerns were raised.

Where people needed support with communication, this was recorded in their care plan, so staff knew how to communicate with them effectively. Relatives told us they knew who to contact and felt able to ask questions about care issues or the home more generally.

Managers took action when information-sharing issues were identified. For example, 1 relative’s concerns about the regularity of financial statements and clarity around charges had been followed up.

While information provision was improving, some relatives said communication had previously been inconsistent which they had found particularly difficult during periods of change. The management team had recognised this and had actions in place to improve the accessibility and sharing of information. This included sending out newsletters, holding meetings, displaying notices and more regular communication and events with people and their families.

The management team made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people and their relatives in decisions about care. Feedback from people about their care was taken seriously and acted upon.

Regular meetings were held to discuss any changes in people’s needs to ensure staff remained informed and consistent in their approach to care. Communication between the management team and staff was effective and well‑structured, meaning everyone understood their responsibilities and what was expected of them.

The provider had introduced additional ways for people and relatives to be involved, such as meetings, surveys and a “you said, we did” approach.

Some relatives said they were not confident they had always been listened to during some periods of change. However, at the time of our assessment, people and relatives spoke about improved responsiveness from the management team, and staff described a much more open, listening and supportive culture.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The management team and staff supported people to access health care services when they needed it, and this was recorded in their care records.

A GP from the local practice visited the home every week, ensuring people received prompt access to care, treatment, and support. The management team upheld people’s right to equal access to health and care services, regardless of their background.

The building had been designed to ensure accessibility. Signage was displayed throughout the home to help people and their visitors to find their way around. One person told us, “It's a lovely home and I love the gardens here. There are nice flat paths to walk on. If I'm walking around the home, I can walk around on my own. They [staff] come out in the garden with me but only to make sure that I'm safe.” One relative said, “I like the design of the home, and how all the communal and dining area are all off the resident’s rooms. My relative’s door is always open which they like."

People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood the importance of treating people fairly and supporting their human rights.

Relatives consistently described staff as caring and attentive, and people were supported to maintain their independence and wellbeing as much as possible. Outcomes for people were monitored, and improvements to care planning and staff training were underway to further support equity, particularly for people living with dementia.

Although some relatives had concerns about recent changes in the service, we found the provider was working hard to ensure people had positive and equitable experiences and outcomes.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People’s care plans contained wishes and clinical recommendations about the care and treatment they would want in an emergency, including decisions about resuscitation. This ensured staff had the information they needed to ensure care remained aligned with each person’s values and choices.

The management team recognised the need to be led by people's wishes when planning to provide end of life care. Sensitive conversations about end-of-life care were held, where appropriate, with people and their relatives. This is an area for improvement as this can be a very difficult area to discuss with people and their family members. However, the provider had started to work on this as part of the continued improvement in care planning. Advanced care planning was to be an important part of this process.