complaint·October 27, 2022

Interview conducted with Administrator indicated that they noticed that fire alarm system wasn't working in July 2022. Administrator stated that they notified the home office that alarm needs to be fixed and a work order was created in July of 2022. Administrator stated that staff were conducting fire watch rounds from July 2022 to October 2022 before Metro Fire took over fire watch. LPA observed documents showing Maintenance Coordinator and NOC shift Med-Tech conducting fire watch before Metro Fire took over fire watch. Administrator stated that the facility is under contract with Matsom Alarm and has the alarm system scheduled to be fixed no later than November 1 st , 2022. Interview with staff member S1 indicated that they were made aware of the alarm system being partially inoperable sometime in the Spring of 2022 (February, March, or April). S1 stated that home office was notified at the time system was observed to be partially inoperable and staff were trained on how to use the system in its current condition. S1 stated that a technician working on the fire alarm panel caused half of the system to short out, causing half of over 300 devices not reporting to the main panel. While all over 300 devices will work individually, half will not report the location of the fire or notify local fire department that there is a fire. S1 could not identify which devices were not reporting to main panel or what portions of the facility were affected. S1 stated that fire alarm company used by facility were supposed to replace parts back in Spring of 2022, but system was too old to replace parts. Interviews with Administrator, S1, and staff member S2 indicated that the fire alarm system is still partially inoperable. As of today's inspection on 10/27/2022, the fire alarm system at the facility is still partially inoperable. LPA obtained documents regarding fire alarm system as well as fire watch documents before after and Metro Fire took over fire watch during investigation. Based on interviews conducted by the department and records reviewed, the preponderance of evidence standards have been met. Therefore, the above allegation is found to be SUBSTANTIATED. Per California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 6, Chapter 8, a deficiency is being cited on the attached 9099-D page. Exit interview was conducted with BOM. A copy of this report and appeal rights were provided. BOM's signature on these forms acknowledges receipt of these documents.