Complaint Investigation Report

The administrator stated my staff has not reported that to me.

During staff interviews, S4 stated yes, R1 was having a behavior and was out in the front yard, when I checked on R1 he was in the vacant lot next door. S3 stated R2 went for a walk and came back 5 minutes later saying R1 is in someone’s back yard. Staff stated I went outside and witnessed R1 walking back from the dead end of the street on the sidewalk.

During the client interviews R2 stated yeah I was out for a walk and saw R1 walking out of the neighbor’s yard. When R1 was asked if they had left the property unassisted, R1 stated oh yeah, that was before. R1 stated I was just used to walking where I wanted and when I wanted, I could go anywhere. R1 stated I have to get used to not going wherever I want by myself.

Review of a video recording on 11-29-25 recorded R1 north of the facility property at the end of the cul-de-sac on the vacant lot near the property line of the house on the East side of the vacant lot. In the recording S3 was walking towards R1 from the facility with R2. The recording recorded S3 stating R1 you get back to the house right now, you’re not supposed to be over here, you’re not allowed.

Record review revealed R1 and R2 are not able to leave the facility unassisted.

Based on investigation observations, record review(s) and interviews which were conducted the preponderance of evidence standard has been met, therefore the above allegation is found to be Substantiated . California Code of Regulations, (Title 22), is cited on the attached LIC 9099D. Appeal rights were explained and provided to the facility representative listed above and exit interview conducted. If any of the cited deficiencies are not corrected by the noted due date, civil penalties may be assessed.