Beaumont Manor
- Care home
- 103 beds
- Nursing care
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2017
- Kirby Cross, Essex, East of England
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.
14 months
since the latest rating was published.
56 of 361
rated care homes in Essex are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
Beaumont Manor: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in August 2025, 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: Ducks Halt (Good, 0.9 miles away) and The Firs (Good, 1.1 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- RI Winchester House Requires improvement, 0.3 miles away
- G Ducks Halt Good, 0.9 miles away
- G The Firs Good, 1.1 miles away
- G Mid Meadows Good, 1.2 miles away
- RI Peter House Requires improvement, 1.2 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 19 August 2025 (assessment visit 1 May 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of Assessment: 10 June 2025 to 8 July 2025. The service is a residential care home with nursing care, providing support to adults over 65 years including those living with dementia, mental health needs, a physical disability or a sensory impairment. We found 1 breach of regulation relating to the safety of medicines management and risk assessments.
- Safe No rating
- Effective Good
- Caring Good
- Responsive Good
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
The service can support a maximum of 82 people. At the start of our assessment, 61 people were living at Beaumont Manor.
We carried out a responsive assessment following information of concern shared with CQC. We found people felt safe with staff, and told us the staff were kind, caring and compassionate. We saw staff treated people with dignity and respect, and their choices, preferences and individuality were respected. The provider had inherited an electronic care planning and risk assessment system which was not intuitive to use and did not allow staff to easily cross reference documents or to enter fully personalised information. This meant records did not reflect the quality of care being provided in practice. However, the provider was working to resolve this. The service had been through a period without consistent permanent leadership. At the time of our inspection, there was a new management team joining the service. Leaders were open and transparent about the need for improvements to some areas of the service and had invested heavily in new systems and renovations to the environment to support the continued delivery of high-quality care. Changes to the service still needed to be embedded, sustained and monitored to ensure they were effective going forwards. Leaders told us they were committed to this, and to a collaborative approach to the future of the service, working alongside people, their relatives and other stakeholders. There was evidence of some innovative practice, including staff-led initiatives to support wellbeing and inclusion.
-
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 the ways people’s medicines were managed safely and in relation to assessing risks.
-
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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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. 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
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 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.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 19 August 2025. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 19 August 2025. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
- Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.
Registration details
- Registered manager
- Ionela Boldeata
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service with nursing
- Who it supports
- Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)1 inspection report, latest 8 August 2018. Latest assessment published 19 August 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
- Provider
- Care Concern (Frinton) LimitedBrand: Welltower
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 10204887 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Essex 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 Essex County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0345 603 7630, Monday to Thursday 8.45am to 5pm, Friday 8.45am to 4.30pm
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Essex County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Beaumont Manor provide nursing care?
- Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Beaumont Manor as a care home with nursing.
- How many beds does Beaumont Manor have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 103 beds at Beaumont Manor.
- When was Beaumont Manor last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Beaumont Manor was published on 19 August 2025.
- Who runs Beaumont Manor?
- Beaumont Manor is run by Care Concern (Frinton) Limited.
- What is Beaumont Manor's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 19 August 2025.
Contact
- Phone
- 01255 388500
- Address
- Kirby Road, Great Holland, Frinton On Sea, CO13 0FB Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Ducks Halt (Good, 0.9 miles away) and The Firs (Good, 1.1 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- RI Winchester House Requires improvement, 0.3 miles away
- G Ducks Halt Good, 0.9 miles away
- G The Firs Good, 1.1 miles away
- G Mid Meadows Good, 1.2 miles away
- RI Peter House Requires improvement, 1.2 miles away