Newton Hall Residential Home
- Care home
- 34 beds
- No nursing
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2011
- Frodsham, Cheshire West and Chester, North West
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
3 ratings
Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.
This month
The latest rating was published.
18 of 69
rated care homes in Cheshire West and Chester are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
Newton Hall Residential Home: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in October 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: Hillcrest Residential Care Home (Good, 0.8 miles away) and Chapelfields (Good, 1.7 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Hillcrest Residential Care Home Good, 0.8 miles away
- G Chapelfields Good, 1.7 miles away
- G Heathercliffe Residential Care home Good, 2.7 miles away
- G Loxley Hall Good, 2.9 miles away
- G Creative Support - Bredon Respite Service Good, 3 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 15 October 2026 (assessment visit 29 July 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of assessment: 30 July to 12 August 2026. The service is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for older people and people living with dementia. The service can support a maximum of 33 people. There were 29 people living in the service at the time of the assessment.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring Good
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
We found 3 breaches of the legal requirements in relation to safe care and treatment, infection control and prevention, consent to care, medicine, staffing and good governance.
The provider did not have effective governance systems in place to monitor, assess and improve the quality and safety of the service. Quality assurance processes had not consistently identified or addressed concerns relating to care records, environmental safety, staff support and compliance with legal requirements. As a result, opportunities to identify risks and implement timely improvements had been missed.
There were systems in place to assess risks to people and ways to reduce them, but these did not always include all risks affecting people to ensure risk mitigation was in place, and guidance for staff was not readily available. The quality of risk assessments varied, with some risks being detailed whilst others were not. Records were not always accurate and/or complete. This was particularly important as the provider used agency staff who required accurate guidance to enable them to provide care which was effective and safe.
Documentation reviewed indicated consent was not consistently obtained and recorded for some people who lacked capacity. This meant there was insufficient evidence to assure care, and treatment decisions had been made in accordance with individuals' preferences, best interests, and relevant legislation.
Records showed people received their medicines as prescribed, however, we noted some gaps in the medication administration records which lacked crucial information about how to administer some medications. Written guidance for staff about some medicines prescribed for occasional use was not always available.
The environment was not always maintained well, so people were not always spending time in pleasant environment. People were not always protected from the risk of infection.
There was a range of activities available throughout the day, and everyone had equal access to participate in the opportunities provided.
Most family members spoke positively about the service and expressed high levels of satisfaction with the quality of care provided, as well as the leadership and management of the home. Family members and friends were welcome to visit at any time without the need for prior arrangement or notice.
We 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 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 people could be harmed.
The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment, Infection prevention and control, environment and the ways people’s medicines were managed safely.
-
Effective
No rating
Effective – this means we looked for evidence 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 requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.
The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to consent to care.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence 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.
-
Responsive
No rating
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence the provider met people’s needs.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.
-
Well-led
No rating
Well-led – this means we looked for evidence 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 provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation governance at the service.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 15 October 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 15 October 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 15 October 2026. Ask to see how care plans are kept up to date, how complaints are handled and what activities are on offer.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 15 October 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
Registration details
- Registered manager
- Julia Adamson
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service without nursing
- Who it supports
- Dementia, Older People
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)6 inspection reports, latest 22 April 2021. Latest assessment published 15 October 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
- Kingsview Homes LimitedBrand: Springcare Group
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 03896874 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Cheshire West and Chester Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Cheshire West and Chester Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0300 123 7034
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Cheshire West and Chester Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Newton Hall Residential Home provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Newton Hall Residential Home as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Newton Hall Residential Home have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 34 beds at Newton Hall Residential Home.
- When was Newton Hall Residential Home last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Newton Hall Residential Home was published on 15 October 2026.
- Who runs Newton Hall Residential Home?
- Newton Hall Residential Home is run by Kingsview Homes Limited.
- What is Newton Hall Residential Home's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 15 October 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01928 739270
- Address
- Kingsley Road, Frodsham, WA6 6YD Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Hillcrest Residential Care Home (Good, 0.8 miles away) and Chapelfields (Good, 1.7 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Hillcrest Residential Care Home Good, 0.8 miles away
- G Chapelfields Good, 1.7 miles away
- G Heathercliffe Residential Care home Good, 2.7 miles away
- G Loxley Hall Good, 2.9 miles away
- G Creative Support - Bredon Respite Service Good, 3 miles away