Rated Care Homes

Alderlea Care Home

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 2 ratings

    Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.

  • 2 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 7 of 51

    rated care homes in North East Lincolnshire are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Alderlea Care Home: inspection record

Care home, 40 beds, North East Lincolnshire

Rated Requires improvement in August 2026, down from Good.

Alderlea 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

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Humberston House Care Home (Outstanding, 0.3 miles away) and Clarendon Hall Care Home (Good, 0.3 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. O
    Humberston House Care Home Outstanding, 0.3 miles away
  2. G
    Clarendon Hall Care Home Good, 0.3 miles away
  3. G
    Ashgrove Care Home Good, 0.4 miles away
  4. G
    Amber House Good, 0.8 miles away
  5. G
    Humberston Good, 1.2 miles away

See all care homes in North East Lincolnshire

See all care homes in Humberston

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 28 August 2026 (assessment visit 18 June 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment: 21 and 23 July 2026.

Alderlea is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 40 people, including people living with dementia. 33 people were being supported by the service at the time of our assessment. We assessed the service due to the length of time since our last visit. A manager was in post, and they had applied for registration with CQC.

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

The provider had not always ensured people received safe and well-planned care. Care plans and risk assessments did not always contain enough information to guide staff, including for wound care, moving and handling, and new admissions. Medicines were not always managed safely. Records evidenced that medicines were not being received, stored and recorded properly. Although we found no evidence that people had been harmed, the provider's systems had not identified or addressed these issues.

We found some infection prevention and environmental concerns, including items being stored on the floor, and toiletries being left unsecured in people's bathrooms. While these issues were addressed quickly, they highlighted weaknesses in oversight and monitoring. Fire safety arrangements also required improvement. The provider could not readily provide key fire safety records or evidence of recent fire drills, and staff could not recall taking part in drills. Although no immediate fire risks were identified and action was taken following feedback, the provider could not demonstrate effective oversight of fire safety arrangements.

Audits had not been completed consistently. Care plans and risk assessments lacked sufficient detail to guide staff when providing care. Incident and accident records were not analysed effectively to identify themes, trends or learning. Records relating to the provision of oral care, hydration monitoring, and wound management were not always robust. Staff training compliance required improvement to ensure staff had completed mandatory training and had the knowledge and skills required to provide safe care.

Despite these shortfalls, people and their relatives were positive about the care provided and spoke highly of staff. The service demonstrated a caring culture with committed staff. However, further work was needed to embed effective governance systems and ensure care was delivered safely, consistently and in a person-centred way across all areas of the service.

The management team were receptive to feedback and took prompt action to address concerns identified during the assessment.

The service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to the safety of the service, safe staffing, and good governance and oversight of the service. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns identified during our assessment.

  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 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 legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment; the ways people’s medicines were managed, and safe staffing of the service.

  2. Effective

    No rating

    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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

    This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

  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

    No rating

    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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

    This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. 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 governance and oversight of the service.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 28 August 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Effective was rated Requires improvement on 28 August 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
  3. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 28 August 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.

Registration details

Registered manager
Sharra Grainger
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Younger Adults

Inspection report

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

1 inspection report, latest 11 June 2019. Latest assessment published 28 August 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

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
10765210 (opens Companies House)

National Care Consortium Ltd runs 6 services in England, 4 of them in Yorkshire and the Humber. 2 are rated Good or Outstanding and 4 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate.

Other services run by National Care Consortium Ltd

  1. G
    Broom Cottage Good. Care home, Derbyshire, East Midlands
  2. G
    Sandhall Park Good. Care home, East Riding of Yorkshire
  3. RI
    Gables Manor Requires improvement. Care home with nursing, Lincolnshire, East Midlands
  4. RI
    Lower Bowshaw View Nursing Home Requires improvement. Care home with nursing, Sheffield

See all 6 services run by National Care Consortium Ltd

Getting help from North East Lincolnshire 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 Alderlea Care Home provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Alderlea Care Home as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Alderlea Care Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 40 beds at Alderlea Care Home.
When was Alderlea Care Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Alderlea Care Home was published on 28 August 2026.
Who runs Alderlea Care Home?
Alderlea Care Home is run by National Care Consortium Ltd. It runs 6 services in England, 4 of them in Yorkshire and the Humber.
What is Alderlea Care Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 28 August 2026.

Contact

Phone
01472 812588
Address
St. Thomas Close, Humberston, Grimsby, DN36 4HS Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Humberston House Care Home (Outstanding, 0.3 miles away) and Clarendon Hall Care Home (Good, 0.3 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. O
    Humberston House Care Home Outstanding, 0.3 miles away
  2. G
    Clarendon Hall Care Home Good, 0.3 miles away
  3. G
    Ashgrove Care Home Good, 0.4 miles away
  4. G
    Amber House Good, 0.8 miles away
  5. G
    Humberston Good, 1.2 miles away

See all care homes in North East Lincolnshire

See all care homes in Humberston