• Care Home
  • Care home

Glanmor

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Bath Road, Chippenham, Wiltshire, SN15 2AD (01249) 651336

Provided and run by:
ABLE (Action for a Better Life)

Assessment report published 20 May 2026

On this page

Well-led

Good

20 May 2026

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

 

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Shared direction and culture

Score: 3

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The provider had appropriate policies and mission statements in place to ensure people knew what the culture of the organisation was.

Staff we spoke to could discuss the values and vison of the provider and said they were encouraged to deliver services in line with these values. Staff told us leaders lead by example and ensured the values of the service were upheld by staff.

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score: 3

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

People told us the registered manager was approachable and ensured the service was being run safely. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and fair and a person who led by example. The registered manager ensured they were present in the service to support both people and staff. The registered manager supported staff who wanted to develop their skills and knowledge, and the provider had opportunities for staff to lead in areas of care which interested them. One member of staff told us: “I wanted to be a mental health champion and the provider paid for me to undertake a course to be a mental health first aider”. The registered manager attended networking groups and courses that enabled them to keep their skills up to date.

Freedom to speak up

Score: 3

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The provider had the policies that were accessible to staff to ensure staff knew they could speak up. Staff we spoke to said they were confident if they raised anything with leaders that they would be listen to and that appropriate action would be taken. People told us they were encouraged to share their experiences of the care and support they were receiving.

Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion

Score: 3

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff told us the provider had a flexible approach to accommodating staff needs, for example 1 person had with child-care needs which the registered manager accommodated. The provider had a relevant policy to support workforce diversity.

Governance, management and sustainability

Score: 2

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. However, they did act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider had failed to recognise the need for consent to the locked kitchen and the CCTV within the house, however when this was discussed during the inspection leaders ensured they acted swiftly to open the kitchen up and to get agreement from people relating to the CCTV.

The provider had ensured adequate measures had been put in place to request timely repairs from their landlord for issues related directly to health and safety. However the landlord had failed to follow these requests up in a timely way when work had not been completed. For example, it had taken the landlord over 3 months to rectify a concern with some fire doors. However, the provider could not assure themselves they had regularly requested an update in terms of a date of repair for this. This meant the provider lacked sufficient oversight and assurance that health and safety risks were being promptly addressed, which could place people at increased risk of harm.

However other governance systems were in place.

We saw audits were being completed regularly and were effective at identifying and addressing issues. We saw leaders identified and learnt from good practice. For example by sharing through staff meetings what went well for people.

 

Partnerships and communities

Score: 3

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

Professionals told us leaders and staff had a proactive approach to support they provided to people. This included seeking some specialist training to enable them to support an individual, arranging meetings in relation to 1 person’s risks in the community and supporting another person to review their options to move to a different home.

Learning, improvement and innovation

Score: 3

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people.

Staff told us they attended all mandatory training and were encouraged to attend further training to advance their skills and knowledge. Leaders could demonstrate they had oversight of staff training. Staff were encouraged by leaders to adapt support around the needs of people. Supervision records demonstrated that staff and leaders discussed best practice and learning points from their engagement with people.