Adalena House
- Care home
- 6 beds
- No nursing
- Registered since 2011
- Central Blackpool, Blackpool, North West
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
4 ratings
Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.
4 months
since the latest rating was published.
13 of 62
rated care homes in Blackpool are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
Adalena House: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in June 2026, down from Good.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Glenthorne Rest Home Limited (Good, 0.1 miles away) and Parade Rest Home (Good, 0.2 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- RI Acorn Lodge Residential Care Home Requires improvement, less than 0.1 miles away
- RI New Victoria Nursing Home Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
- G Glenthorne Rest Home Limited Good, 0.1 miles away
- G Parade Rest Home Good, 0.2 miles away
- G Langdales Good, 0.3 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 9 June 2026 (assessment visit 2 March 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of assessment 4 March 2026 to 10 April 2026. Adalena House is a care home registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care for up to 6 people with a physical disability, learning disability and/or autistic people. At the time of the assessment 6 people were living at the home. This announced inspection was carried out to review the quality of care and compliance with legal regulations.
- Safe No rating
- Effective Good
- Caring Good
- Responsive Good
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
We assessed all quality statements for the key questions of safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well-led. We found the provider was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe staffing and safe governance and oversight.
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. We found the service demonstrated understanding of the guidance, but did not always apply it.
Staff were not always recruited in a safe manner, and we could not be assured that staffing levels were always safe. Staffing rotas that we reviewed were not always accurate and identified that some staff had been working long hours in contravention with working time regulations. Medications were not stored or managed safely. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. However, these reviews were not always documented. Care was not always based on latest evidence and good practice, and it was not always clear that people were involved in the assessment of their needs.
People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and seamless transitions when moving between services. They monitored people’s health to support healthy living; however, this was not always consistently documented. Staff made sure people with capacity understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff did not always involve those important to people, when making decisions in people’s best interests, and staff had not always documented that the least restrictive options available to people were considered.
Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and their privacy and dignity was protected. Staff did not always treat people as individuals; we witnessed people being referred to as the “the gang” and “the boys.” Staff supported people’s preferences, people had choice in their care and were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. Systems and processes were not always in place to identify concerns and drive improvements. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment
-
Safe
No rating
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed The service was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe staffing.
-
Effective
Good
Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and supportachieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.
At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating hasremained Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedbackconfirmed this.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated themwith compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating hasremained Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; andinvolved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
Good
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.
-
Well-led
No rating
Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management andgovernance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and
promoted an open, fair culture.
At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating haschanged to Requires Improvement. This meant the management and leadership wasinconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance and oversight at the service.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 9 June 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 9 June 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
- Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.
Registration details
- Registered manager
- Susan Mcgregor
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service without nursing
- Who it supports
- Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Physical Disability
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)6 inspection reports, latest 11 January 2020. Latest assessment published 9 June 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.
The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
- Provider
- Mrs S L Clayton
- Ownership type
- Individual
Getting help from Blackpool Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Blackpool Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 01253 477800, Monday to Thursday 9am to 5pm, Friday 9am to 4.30pm. Out-of-hours emergencies: 01253 477678
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Blackpool Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Adalena House provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Adalena House as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Adalena House have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 6 beds at Adalena House.
- When was Adalena House last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Adalena House was published on 9 June 2026.
- Who runs Adalena House?
- Adalena House is run by Mrs S L Clayton.
- What is Adalena House's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 9 June 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01253 391655
- Address
- 186 Reads Avenue, Blackpool, FY1 4JD Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Glenthorne Rest Home Limited (Good, 0.1 miles away) and Parade Rest Home (Good, 0.2 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- RI Acorn Lodge Residential Care Home Requires improvement, less than 0.1 miles away
- RI New Victoria Nursing Home Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
- G Glenthorne Rest Home Limited Good, 0.1 miles away
- G Parade Rest Home Good, 0.2 miles away
- G Langdales Good, 0.3 miles away