Sir Ranulph Fiennes

The fact that he has moved from several care homes over just a couple of years and is now living in a 'remote' farmhouse with just his wife and a carer able to see him is what is most worrying.

It does not matter who it is, it is a very unusual situation and his friends and other relatives are right to be concerned.

The care homes in Wales come under the jurisdiction of Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, not the CQC.

Regardless, for individual patients the safeguarding process is a Local Authority responsibility, and they would have decided whether the care met the standard, I don’t know if there is any evidence to suggest that they requested support from either the CQC or Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, it would be hard to check without knowing which care homes he was in.

OldFrill

CQC was publicly deemed "not fit for purpose" in the 2024 Dash Report.

It's been trying to put that right ever since.

If you have faith in the CQC you are in lala land.

Agree with what you say.

When my Mum was in her first (not very good) care home an Inspector arrived. She asked whether we would be interviewed. We did and I pointed out a few things that were not good and Mum also told her that she did not get enough to eat and she found the staff bossy and uncaring. We were with her for about half an hour.

When the CQC report was published not one of our comments were mentioned which they should have been.

CQC was publicly deemed "not fit for purpose" in the 2024 Dash Report.

That is very sad.

CQC was publicly deemed "not fit for purpose" in the 2024 Dash Report.

It's been trying to put that right ever since.

If you have faith in the CQC you are in lala land.

CQC is a regulator ie holds health and social care providers, care homes, LAs, NHS trusts etc to account for all the national standards, not just statutory safeguarding standards.

The actual local safeguarding investigations and actions are carried out by relevant care home, LAs NHS trust etc who all must keep a detailed logs of safeguarding concerns, reports investigations and what actions they are taking.

Local Councils, social workers, the NHS, care homes, the Police all share information via a Local Multi agency safeguarding Board or whatever they call that locally. This Board must ensure that , coordination of all SG investigations. They all must share such information with the regulator CQC.

CQC does not have a fixed inspection timescale as such. It's based on a schedule of continuous risk based monitoring model.

New care homes must receive their first inspection assessment within 12 months.

If any existing care home is found to be inadequate on inspection must be reinspected within 6 months to ensure safety improvements made.

If an inspection identifies something that requires improvement must be within 12 months to ensure improvements made.

If found good or outstanding inspection takes place within a 2 to 5 ear timescale.

CQC collects large amounts data on an ongoing basis- e.g Local Safeguarding Board reports, logs and action data. NHS trust quality and safety reprots etc. If any concerns noted by CQC at any stage CQC can trigger an immediate announced or unannounced inspection of any care home, NHS care provider etc at any time.

Have CQC monitoring of care homes changed?
I recall speaking with them 3 years ago re a care home my friend was in (she has no family here) and I'm her advocate
I believe they told me that they don't visit them as often and the depth of monitoring was changing. Possibly following COVID lockdown. I noted they hadn't followed up on a few requires improvement areas.
My friend is now in a much more positive care home with better care

Agree icanholdthemback.

We all wait to see how Cheshire Police investigation continues and whether any safeguarding process shortcomings are found on any of the organisations involved.

Police investigation of step son's allegations against his estranged mother and care home visiting arrangements is quite different to a complex police investigation of alledged murder of multiple babies but I take your point.

We'll have to degree to differ, LemonJam. Nowadays, I'm not sure that the police cover themselves in glory these days and this is the same police force whose handling of the Lucy Letby (a high profile case) has been criticised.

icanhandthemback

I'm sorry, LemonJam, but I think it is naivety CQC ratings will be hit. We found it was a bit like having a medical catastrophe, they just close ranks. My Mum nearly died because of mistakes of recording in the Care Home and then ignoring the consequences. The investigator did nothing to rectify the untruths the home told and the whole thing was just a joke. I am on a number of forums about care homes and care so I read these things all the time about how inefficient the CQC are. Most of the time their inspections are woefully out of date
.

I agree the CQC has shortcomings. I also agree care homes can make mistakes and not all adhere to care standards all the time. Safeguarding process however is statutory and cross organisations.

I stand by my 15.31 post. My post was in context of current Cheshire Police has live safeguarding investigation, with LA involvement, high profile in the media as in Ralph's (with CQC paying close attention no doubt) re stepson's safeguarding and Dols concerns. Even if that care home has a culture of money is all and for that home care fee payment takes precedence over everything else, that care home, will make sure it is fully aware of their statutory safeguarding responsibilities, seek not to be caught out and would not wish the LA to stop sending new residents or have the CQC, police on their back or the national media reporting their safeguarding process shortcomings 🤷‍♀️

Did you see the video of her hustling him along with his rollator in a dictatorial voice. Not kindly or compassionate at all. I imagine she trains her horses the same way.

Other friends of his are very concerned and have witnessed her nasty treatment of him.

So upsetting if this is all true. Please someone rescue him.

I'm sorry, LemonJam, but I think it is naivety CQC ratings will be hit. We found it was a bit like having a medical catastrophe, they just close ranks. My Mum nearly died because of mistakes of recording in the Care Home and then ignoring the consequences. The investigator did nothing to rectify the untruths the home told and the whole thing was just a joke. I am on a number of forums about care homes and care so I read these things all the time about how inefficient the CQC are. Most of the time their inspections are woefully out of date
.

Any care home that does not comply with safeguarding investigations and guidelines will not secure/sustain adequate CQC ratings. The Cheshire Police is an active partner in this investigation as a result of safeguarding and DoLs concerns etc raised by the stepson and some others.

Not complying with safeguarding standards, investigations and guidelines risks care home reputational damage and if not improved runs the risk of losing new patients , the care home license to operate and risk of possible bankruptcy as a result. Thats a motivator for many!

Money may be the root of all evil in some care homes but does not exclude such care homes from scrutiny or action if none compliant. There is active scrutiny in Ralph's case so I would imagine all parties are well aware of their statutory responsibilities and seeking not to be caught out.

This happens more than people realise.
Money is the root of all evil

😂😇😈

Yes DAR you got me, I am a terrible person and you are one of the good guys.

DaisyAnneReturns

Eleanor Roosevelt: "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."

What rubbish - I dont care if it was on the tablets Moses brought down the mountain - its still tosh

I’m not getting involved in speculation, just the published details of what his situation is.

Casdon

I know about DoLs assessments. The DCS would not have said that she was satisfied, unless there was a DoLs in place, particularly when the issue raised by family members and friends is about an aspect of the DoLs.

That doesn’t make it alright that his family and old friends are not being told where he is, can’t visit or take gifts or even send a birthday card.Including the King!

I know about DoLs assessments. The DCS would not have said that she was satisfied, unless there was a DoLs in place, particularly when the issue raised by family members and friends is about an aspect of the DoLs.

There won’t be anything wrong with his care but as a dementia resident he isn’t in a position to demand that his friends and family visit him.

I know a dementia patient who was interviewed by local TV.
The family was astounded, as they didnt know anything about it until she appeared on the news.
The family member said to me afterwards, that they were lucky they had caught her on a good day.
On a bad day, she would have told them a load of old rubbish!

I work in care homes, and the difference in what should be done and what is done are two different things I can assure you.
If the bills are paid on time is the main factor.

Yes,

‘Detective Chief Superintendent Claire Jesson said: "Police and partner agencies are aware of the concerns raised and are satisfied that Sir Ranulph Fiennes is living in an appropriate setting with suitable care and professional oversight.

"No immediate safeguarding concerns have been identified at this time.

"Any new information received will be assessed and considered through the appropriate multi-agency arrangements.’

If you’re feeling superior to ‘the gossips’ DAR don’t join in maybe.
As for Eleanor Roosevelt ….what a patronising and condescending woman she must have been.