Rated Care Homes

The Glen Care Home

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 4 ratings

    Rated Good at every inspection since 2017.

  • 22 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 151 of 181

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

The Glen Care Home: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 52 beds, Somerset

Rated Good in December 2024.

The Glen 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
    Ferndale Good, 2.7 miles away
  2. G
    Field House Good, 3 miles away
  3. RI
    St Cecilia Care Home Requires improvement, 3.5 miles away
  4. RI
    Blackberry Hill Requires improvement, 4.1 miles away
  5. G
    Dimensions Somerset The Maples Good, 4.1 miles away

See all care homes in Somerset

See all care homes in Shepton Mallet

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 19 December 2024 (assessment visit 9 October 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

The Glen Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and nursing or personal care to up to 52 people. At the time of our visit there were 47 people living at the home. Twenty-eight people required nursing support.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

This was the first assessment of the service since it registered to the provider, Pusajev Ltd, in April 2022. All of the quality statements were assessed on this occasion. The service has been rated ‘Good’ overall as a result of this assessment.

We visited the care home on 29 October 2024 and the 5 November 2024. During our visits we were able to carry out observations in communal areas and speak with people, staff and visitors. We spoke with the owner, registered manager, 10 staff, 16 people and 2 relatives.

The home felt welcoming, friendly and homely with people, staff and relatives sitting and chatting, eating and taking part in activities.

  1. Safe

    Good

    People were supported to be safe and were protected from the risk of abuse. The registered manager and staff demonstrated an ethos of wanting to learn and continuously improve.

    People had their needs assessed before they came to the home. People’s care plans reflected their needs and provided staff with the information they needed to manage the identified risks.

    People were living in a home where the staff were working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005), and had ensured appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty.

    Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed.

    The environment was being safely managed, with a range of health and safety checks undertaken. Improvements were being made by the registered manager to ensure signage at the home was in place to help guide people around the home.

    There were enough staff on duty with the skills required to meet people’s needs. Staff were safely recruited and received an induction and ongoing training to make sure their skills were appropriate and up to date.

    There were good infection prevention and control practices at the home. The home and equipment were kept clean and hygienic, and staff used personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriately.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Staff knew people well and how to meet their needs. People and relatives had been involved in care planning through the resident of the day process used at the home.

    People’s care was regularly monitored in line with their care plans and risk assessments. People were asked for their consent before staff provided care and support.

    People were supported to maintain their nutrition and hydration needs and had a choice about where they ate and what they ate and drank.

    People were supported to maintain good health and had regular reviews by GPs and community healthcare professionals.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Staff were caring in their approach and treated people with kindness and respect, and they promoted people’s choice and independence. Staff treated people with dignity, kindness and compassion, and there was a positive and friendly culture at the service.

    People were supported to live as independently as possible. People were encouraged to participate in activities of their choice. People were supported to maintain relationships and networks that were important to them, and visitors were welcomed at any time.

    Staff respected people’s independence and encouraged people to move as much as they could to maintain mobility.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Staff were responsive to people’s needs and provided person-centred care as they knew people well and their backgrounds. People were supported to enjoy a variety of activities at the home.

    People were involved in planning and reviewing their care, so their care plans showed what was important to them.

    People were supported as individuals, ensuring their equality and human rights were protected and in line with their needs and preferences.

    Staff worked well with other agencies and supported people to make choices about their end-of-life care.

  5. Well-led

    Good

    There was good leadership and management at The Glen Care Home. Staff understood the shared values of the provider and praised the new provider for the improvements they had implemented since they had purchased the home.

    The provider had an effective governance process, to ensure continuous improvement. Audits undertaken were effective in identifying and addressing areas for improvement.

    The registered manager and deputy manager were keen to provide the best possible service to people. They promoted a culture of continuous learning and improving the quality and safety of the service and ensured learning was shared across the staff team to help mitigate future risk.

    People and staff spoke positively about the management team, who promoted a positive, caring culture.

    The registered manager had an effective system to investigate and learn from incidents and concerns. The team worked collaboratively with people using the service, those close to them, and other professionals.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.
  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
Terri-Ann Weatherall
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Older People, Physical Disability

Inspection report

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

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Provider
Pusajev Ltd
Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
11530332 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Somerset 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 The Glen Care Home provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists The Glen Care Home as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does The Glen Care Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 52 beds at The Glen Care Home.
When was The Glen Care Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for The Glen Care Home was published on 19 December 2024.
Who runs The Glen Care Home?
The Glen Care Home is run by Pusajev Ltd.
What is The Glen Care Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 19 December 2024.

Contact

Phone
01749 830369
Address
Shapway Lane, Evercreech, Shepton Mallet, BA4 6JS Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Ferndale Good, 2.7 miles away
  2. G
    Field House Good, 3 miles away
  3. RI
    St Cecilia Care Home Requires improvement, 3.5 miles away
  4. RI
    Blackberry Hill Requires improvement, 4.1 miles away
  5. G
    Dimensions Somerset The Maples Good, 4.1 miles away

See all care homes in Somerset

See all care homes in Shepton Mallet