Rated Care Homes

Clarkson House Residential Care Home

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 5 ratings

    Its last inspection improved it from Requires improvement to Good.

  • 15 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 25 of 34

    rated care homes in Tameside are rated Good, like this one.

Clarkson House Residential Care Home: inspection record

Care home, 28 beds, Tameside

Rated Good in July 2025, up from Requires improvement.

Clarkson House Residential Care Home: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Acer Mews Good, 0.5 miles away
  2. RI
    Holme Lea Requires improvement, 0.7 miles away
  3. G
    Stamford Court Good, 0.7 miles away
  4. RI
    Firbank House Requires improvement, 0.8 miles away
  5. G
    Kings Park Nursing Home Good, 0.9 miles away

See all care homes in Tameside

See all care homes in Ashton-under-Lyne

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 8 July 2025 (assessment visit 5 June 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

We visited the service on the 10 and 16 of June 2025.

Clarkson House is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 28 people in one adapted building with bedrooms over 2 floors. At the time of our inspection there were 23 people using the service.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

At our previous inspection we found breaches of regulation as medicines and risk were not being managed effectively; and systems of governance were not operated effectively to ensure the quality of the service. At this inspection we found the necessary improvements had been made and the service was no longer in breach of these regulations. However, we did note there were some areas for improvement in relation to the management of medicines and record keeping.

People felt safe and systems were in place to ensure risks were assessed and mitigated. We noted some occasions where records were not completed accurately but the registered manager was in the process of addressing these. Staff knew and understood people’s needs. People did not always feel there were enough staff to meet their needs. We noted some improvements were needed to the management of medicines; including medicines used occasionally, medicines prescribed at a variable dose and patch medicines. There was an ongoing programme of environmental work, with some areas, such as the laundry to be addressed shortly after our visit.

People’s needs were assessed and people were supported to access health care services as needed. Staff worked together to meet people’s needs. Further work was needed to ensure systems of oversight and accurate record keeping were in place, but staff knew people well and were able to identify any changes in people’s wellbeing. Consent was requested and, where people lacked capacity, the service was working in line with the Mental Capacity Act.

People and relatives spoke highly of the staff team, who were kind and caring. We observed positive interactions between people and staff, and that staff were responsive to people’s needs. People were supported to make choices around their daily lives and independence was promoted.

People’s preferences and wishes were respected. People were supported to access services where needed. Staff were effective in communicating with people and resources were available to support this. Further work was needed to ensure people were supported to plan for their future if they wished to.

The registered manager felt well supported by the provider and they worked together to invest in the service and drive improvement. There were systems for oversight, which identified areas for improvement, but further action was needed to ensure all concerns were fully addressed. Staff felt well supported in their role and we received positive feedback from people and families about how the service was managed.

  1. 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement.

    This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety at the time. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. 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.

  5. Well-led

    Good

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 8 July 2025. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.
  3. Visit at different times of day, including a mealtime.

Registration details

Registered manager
Claire Allwood
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

1 inspection report, latest 8 June 2023. Latest assessment published 8 July 2025; 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

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
13353334 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Clarkson House Residential Care Home provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Clarkson House Residential Care Home as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Clarkson House Residential Care Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 28 beds at Clarkson House Residential Care Home.
When was Clarkson House Residential Care Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Clarkson House Residential Care Home was published on 8 July 2025.
Who runs Clarkson House Residential Care Home?
Clarkson House Residential Care Home is run by Tulsi Homes Limited.
What is Clarkson House Residential Care Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 8 July 2025.

Contact

Address
Clarkson House, 56 Currier Lane, Ashton-under-lyne, OL6 6TB Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Acer Mews Good, 0.5 miles away
  2. RI
    Holme Lea Requires improvement, 0.7 miles away
  3. G
    Stamford Court Good, 0.7 miles away
  4. RI
    Firbank House Requires improvement, 0.8 miles away
  5. G
    Kings Park Nursing Home Good, 0.9 miles away

See all care homes in Tameside

See all care homes in Ashton-under-Lyne