Complaint·January 31, 2024

LPA tested the alarm on window identified as R1’s possible exit point, the window was observed to be three to four feet off the ground and alarm was found to be operable. LPA determined R1 would have entered a bedroom not assigned to them, approached the window, and climbed the three to four feet off the ground to exit through the window. During their interview, R1 was unable to confirm or deny if the window was secure. Interviews were conducted with Staff and Resident 1 regarding allegation facility gate is not secure. Two out of three staff stated that the gate is secure, and it would be difficult for a resident to exit that way. One out of three staff stated the gate is not secure and does not lock. During a tour of the facility, LPA observed gate to be self-latching with an operable lock; the gate has a doorknob that locks from the inside and requires a key to be opened from the outside. The gate is designed to keep people out and is not meant to lock residents or others in. LPA noted that there are no patios or doors that lead to that gate. The only way to access the gate from inside the facility would be to exit through a window. During their interview, R1 could not corroborate the allegation and was unable to confirm or deny is facility gate is secure. Due to conflicting information received during interviews conducted and after a review of facility grounds, LPA is unable to determine if facility windows were not secured or if facility gate was not secured. Although the above allegations may have happened or are valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove the alleged violation did or did not occur, therefore at this time the above allegation is unsubstantiated. An exit interview was conducted and copy of this report was provided at the end of the inspection.