Home Instead Senior Care - Bourne

Who the service is for

The service is registered to support older and younger adults, including people living with dementia, learning disabilities, mental health conditions, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. The service was not currently supporting anyone with learning disabilities

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 16 September 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability, but the provider had regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture’.

This assessment found the service continued to provide positive outcomes for people during a period of significant change. Following the service being acquired by a new provider, there was a period of management and staff turnover. The registered manager and management team focused on building a stable staff team, improving oversight and maintaining the quality of care people received. Staff, people and relatives spoke positively about the direction of the service and the increased stability seen in recent months.

People received care from staff who knew them well and understood their needs, preferences and routines. Feedback from people and relatives was positive. People described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Several people told us they had built good relationships with their carers. Care plans reflected people's wishes, goals and support needs. Support was focused on helping people to remain living in their own homes, maintain their independence and achieve outcomes that mattered to them.

Staff had the training and skills to support people safely. They understood how to keep people safe and when to raise concerns. Staff worked with health and social care professionals when people's needs changed. There were examples of staff seeking advice and support to help people remain safe, well and independent. In one case, staff identified changes in a person's mobility and worked with an occupational therapist to introduce specialist equipment. This enabled the person to continue receiving support from one carer, in line with their wishes, whilst maintaining their privacy, dignity and independence.

Staff and managers demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the importance of gaining consent before providing care. People were supported to make their own decisions where possible and records showed consideration had been given to issues of capacity, lasting power of attorney and best interest decision making where required. Managers told us no one using the service was subject to a community Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation at the time of our assessment. People had choice, control and freedom over their lives.

Some people and relatives told us previous staff changes had affected consistent care and communication. A small number of people said they would like more information about who would be visiting them. There were isolated examples where care visits had not gone as planned and concerns about new staff being introduced. However, people told us managers responded quickly to resolve issues and several people said they had seen improvements in recent months.

The registered manager and management team had strengthened quality monitoring through care plan reviews, incident monitoring and quality assurance visits. They understood the importance of having enough staff to meet people's needs safely and had limited new care packages when staffing levels were reduced. Staff felt able to raise concerns, share ideas and contribute to improvements within the service.

The provider was making use of digital and AI-supported systems to strengthen quality monitoring and care planning. These systems were being used to review records, support care plan development and help identify where further action or professional input may be needed. This demonstrated a willingness to explore new approaches to improve oversight and support positive outcomes for people.

Some improvements were still needed in medicines management. The registered manager and management team were aware of these issues and had started taking action to address them. People received safe, personalised care from staff who treated them with kindness and respect. Despite a period of significant change within the service, the evidence showed people continued to experience positive outcomes and receive good quality care.