Sandpiper Care Home
- Care home
- 30 beds
- No nursing
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2019
- Alford, Lincolnshire, East Midlands
Good
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
1 rating
Only one rating on record, so there is no trend to show yet.
5 months
since the latest rating was published.
177 of 254
rated care homes in Lincolnshire are rated Good, like this one.
Sandpiper Care Home: inspection record
Rated Good in May 2026.
| 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
- G The Sycamores Good, 0.1 miles away
- G Chimneys Care Home Good, 0.5 miles away
- RI Victoria House Residential Home Requires improvement, 0.5 miles away
- G Swallowdale Good, 0.6 miles away
- RI The Gables Requires improvement, 3.4 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 28 May 2026 (assessment visit 5 March 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of inspection: 7, 8 and 14 April 2026. The service is a care home without nursing, supporting older people and people living with dementia and physical disabilities.
- Safe Good
- Effective Good
- Caring Good
- Responsive Good
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
Safeguarding, medicines management, infection control and the environment were safe and well managed. Systems for transitions and risk management worked well. However, staffing levels and some gaps in skills meant people were not always supported consistently at times of distress. Records and staff knowledge about responding to distress needed improvement, although action had started.
People’s needs were assessed and care was based on evidence and good partnership working. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and consent was managed well. Monitoring systems focused more on tasks than on people’s experiences and outcomes. Records were sometimes inconsistent and relatives did not always feel involved in reviews.
Most people experienced kind, respectful care and staff were observed to be warm and supportive. People were treated as individuals and supported to maintain choice, independence and control and gave positive feedback about their care. However, the language used in some records and by some staff was not always respectful. Support to anticipate and reduce emotional distress was not always effective and staff wellbeing was not consistently supported.
Person-centred care was promoted and coordinated, with good information sharing and accessible communication. People generally felt listened to. However, feedback and involvement did not always lead to clear improvements and outcomes were not consistently shared with people. The service planned well for future and end of life needs, though staff training in this area was limited.
Leaders promoted an open and inclusive vision and worked well with partners. Governance systems identified risks and learning and leaders responded quickly to concerns. However, the culture was not fully embedded. Some staff did not feel confident to speak up, felt unfairly treated and did not always feel supported. Governance and improvement work did not clearly show how actions improved people’s experiences or supported staff wellbeing, so it was not clear if care improved quality of life.
-
Safe
Good
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.
-
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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
Good
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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 and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 28 May 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.
- Visit at different times of day, including a mealtime.
Registration details
- 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 17 December 2020. Latest assessment published 28 May 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
- Tanglewood Care Services LimitedBrand: Tanglewood Care Homes
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 09618366 (opens Companies House)
Tanglewood Care Services Limited runs 6 services, all in the East Midlands. 5 are rated Good or Outstanding and 1 is rated Requires improvement or Inadequate.
Other services run by Tanglewood Care Services Limited
- G Hunters Creek Care Home Good. Care home with nursing, Lincolnshire
- G Tanglewood Care Home Good. Care home with nursing, Lincolnshire
- G Tanglewood Cloverleaf Good. Care home with nursing, Lincolnshire
- G Toray Pines Care Home Good. Care home, Lincolnshire
Getting help from Lincolnshire County Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Lincolnshire County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 01522 782155
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Lincolnshire County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Sandpiper Care Home provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Sandpiper Care Home as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Sandpiper Care Home have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 30 beds at Sandpiper Care Home.
- When was Sandpiper Care Home last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Sandpiper Care Home was published on 28 May 2026.
- Who runs Sandpiper Care Home?
- Sandpiper Care Home is run by Tanglewood Care Services Limited. It runs 6 services, all in the East Midlands.
- What is Sandpiper Care Home's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 28 May 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01507 462112
- Address
- 16 South Street, Alford, LN13 9AQ Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
- G The Sycamores Good, 0.1 miles away
- G Chimneys Care Home Good, 0.5 miles away
- RI Victoria House Residential Home Requires improvement, 0.5 miles away
- G Swallowdale Good, 0.6 miles away
- RI The Gables Requires improvement, 3.4 miles away