Facility Access Control Planning Checklist

Walk the full boundary and mark every gate, door and opening on a plan, including those that are never used and those permanently fastened shut.

Disused openings are the ones nobody checks, and they are usually discovered by somebody else rather than by the operator.

Note where the boundary can simply be stepped over, pushed through or walked around, and mark those points honestly on the same plan.

An access plan built on the assumption that the boundary is continuous falls apart the first time somebody takes a shortcut.

Note which openings are wide enough for a vehicle, a trailer or a mower, and record who genuinely needs to use each of them.

Machinery access dictates which gate cannot simply be locked and forgotten, and it is settled by whoever cuts the grass.

Record which entrance a first-time visitor would arrive at, as against the one the regular group actually uses.

Visitors arrive at the entrance that looks like the entrance, which is often not the one the keys were issued for.

Note which openings are shared with another occupier, a school or land the facility does not control, and who else uses each one.

Shared openings cannot be secured unilaterally, and knowing which they are shapes everything that follows.

Ask a suitably qualified professional and the local authority how locking arrangements here sit alongside getting out of any building or enclosure.

Nothing here determines how any opening may be secured; that is confirmed with the relevant authority and a suitably qualified professional.

Rebuild the list of everybody holding a key or an entry code from scratch, by asking rather than by starting from the list the group already keeps.

Inherited key lists record who was issued a key, never who still has one, and the two diverge steadily.

Note against each name why that person has access and who agreed it, marking plainly the ones nobody can now account for.

Access nobody can explain is the part of the list that needs a decision, and naming it is most of the work.

Note which keys have been copied, by whom and whether any of those copies were ever recorded anywhere.

Copies get cut for convenience during the build and by groups since, and they are invisible unless somebody asks directly.

List the people who once held access and have since stepped back, and note whether anything was actually returned by each of them.

Departures are the point at which access should be recovered, and it is the moment everybody is thinking about something else.

Note whether entry codes are passed between users verbally, and whether anybody outside the list is now likely to know one.

A code shared once has effectively been published, and treating it otherwise leaves an access record that means nothing.

Note who holds a spare set and where it is kept, including whether that place is itself locked and who can reach it.

The spare set is the arrangement everybody relies on and nobody has written down, usually held by one long-standing member.

Decide and record who is permitted to issue access, so that keys do not spread through whoever happens to be holding a spare.

Where anybody can issue access, no list can stay accurate, and the group loses the ability to say who is on site.

Agree in writing what a person is told when access is issued, including exactly what they are responsible for locking behind them.

Most locking-up failures are people doing what they were told rather than people ignoring an instruction nobody gave.

Agree what happens when a hirer, a coach or a volunteer stops using the facility, and who is responsible for asking for the key back.

Recovery only happens if somebody is named for it, because nobody volunteers to ask a departing member for a key.

Decide what happens when a key is lost or a code is believed to have spread, and who has authority to make that call.

What should follow a lost key or a compromised code at this site is confirmed with a suitably qualified professional rather than judged here.

Note the points at which access should be reviewed, such as a change of committee, the end of a hire arrangement or the completion of works.

Reviews tied to events actually happen; reviews left to a general intention do not.

Keep a written record of every issue and return, with the date, held with the facility papers rather than by an individual.

A record kept personally disappears with the person, which is precisely when an accurate list is needed.

Note how a hirer gets in when nobody from the organisation is present, and who is responsible when they find they cannot.

Access failures land on whoever answers the phone, and that person needs to have been told they are that person.

Note what a hirer is expected to do at the end of their session, and whether anybody ever checks that it happened.

An expectation nobody checks is an expectation that decays, particularly on a site nobody visits between bookings.

Note where two bookings overlap and record who is responsible for the site during the period when both groups are present.

Overlaps are where responsibility falls between two groups, and where blame later settles on whichever is easiest to name.

Agree who a user contacts when they cannot get in, and who answers that call outside ordinary hours.

A contact number that reaches nobody in the evening is the same as having no arrangement at all.

Note whether a hirer would bring participants through a gate or a route the group does not control, and who does control it.

Access across land belonging to somebody else is agreed with that owner, not assumed because a booking has been taken.

Note what the booking terms currently say about access and locking up, and whether that matches what actually happens on site.

Terms inherited from another organisation frequently describe an arrangement this facility has never had.

Decide how a contractor gets in when nobody is there, and whether anything is handed over for them to keep between visits.

Contractors are given a key for convenience during works, and the key stays with them long after the works finish.

Note where deliveries actually end up when nobody is on site, and whether anything is routinely left standing against a gate.

Delivery habits form quickly and are never agreed, which is how materials end up on a verge belonging to a neighbour.

Note which contractors from the build still hold access, and decide whether that access should continue now that the works are finished.

Access from the build period is the largest and most invisible category on most newly opened facilities.

Agree who is told before anybody attends the site, including the groups booked to use the facility at that time.

Attendance clashing with a booking is avoidable, and the avoidance depends on somebody having agreed to pass it on.

Note whether machinery would need an opening that is normally kept locked, and record who is able to open it and on what notice.

A gate that suits people rarely suits a vehicle, and that only becomes apparent when something has to be brought in.

Agree what a contractor is asked to do when they arrive and find a session under way, and record who they should contact at that moment.

Without an agreed answer contractors either work around users or leave again, and both outcomes cause difficulty.

Write down what locking up actually involves at this facility, listing every gate, store, shutter and control that has to be left secure.

People lock what they can see; anything not on a written list is left open by somebody perfectly willing to have closed it.

Note who is genuinely last out after each type of session, and whether that person changes from one booking to the next.

Whoever is last out does the locking, and on a shared site that is rarely the same person twice.

Note whether the person locking up is doing so alone and in darkness, and which parts of the site they have to cross to finish.

The route taken while locking up is the last part of an evening on site and the part nobody has looked at.

Agree what happens when equipment is left out or a store is found unlocked, and who is told about it.

Without a route for reporting, the person who notices simply closes it and nobody learns that it keeps happening.

Note where the last person out parks and how they leave the site, since that determines which gate is locked last.

The final gate is decided by where somebody left their car, which is why it varies from one evening to the next.

Note whether anybody could still be on the site when it is locked, and how that would be established before the gate is closed.

How a site is checked and secured when people may still be present is confirmed with the relevant authority and a suitably qualified professional.

Ask what happens to a coded or electronic arrangement when the power or the connection to the site is lost.

Whether any entry arrangement suits this facility is for a suitably qualified professional to establish for this site.

Ask who administers the arrangement, who is able to add or remove a user, and what happens when that person is unavailable.

Electronic access concentrates control in one account, which is convenient until nobody can reach whoever holds it.

Ask what record the arrangement keeps about individuals, where that record is held and who is able to see it.

What applies where personal information is recorded must be confirmed with the relevant authority and a suitably qualified adviser.

Ask what a user does when a code or a credential fails at the gate, and who they are able to reach at that moment.

Failures happen at the least convenient time, and the answer decides whether a session goes ahead or not.

Ask what maintenance the arrangement needs and who would attend to it, before it is adopted rather than once it has stopped working.

Entry equipment needs somebody to look after it, and community facilities adopt it assuming that nobody will have to.

Note what would remain if the arrangement were removed, such as a mechanical means of securing the same opening.

Knowing the fallback is part of choosing sensibly, and it is rarely discussed while something new is being considered.