general observations in connection with inspections 36 nel at youth facilities exercise, over children and youths, will be investigated in a complaint case.46 During an inspection of two LVM residential homes, it emerged that there were different interpretations among the personnel regarding how frequently inmates in isolation were to be supervised. This is a matter that the management of the homes should clarify, e.g., in a procedural document. Certain shortcomings in how supervision was performed were also noted and recorded, and the residential home was so forth recommended to take action.47 The physical environment During an inspection of an youth facility, it was noted that the premises were neglected. The rooms where inmates spent time were scribbled on, that suggested the staff had stopped keeping the premises in good conditions. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen emphasised that the need for radical improvement of the premises does not exclude cleaning the premises. The management of the residential home was encouraged to ensure that the premises were cleaned regularly and the graffiti removed.48 At another residential home, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen noted a positive aspect, namely that measures had been taken to counteract the negative effects of the operation being placed at a prison establishment.49 One LVM residential home was encouraged to equip its exercise yard with a shelter, with reference to recommendations provided by the CPT, to a psychiatric clinic. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen also questioned the fact that the same LVM residential home lacked equipment for the physically disabled. In the absence of such equipment, the personnel lifted a wheelchair-bound inmate in and out of a wheelchair. This procedure was seen as not just a risk but could also, in the opinion of the Parliamentary Ombudsmen, infringe on human dignity.50 Conclusions LVU and LVM residential homes The inspections of LVU and LVM residential homes carried out since 2011 show that care is conducted in different ways, and on different conditions. In several cases, the homes have no premises for, e.g., care in isolation. There are also differences in the local procedures. Another reason for the differences in the care is the difficulty the homes have drawing a clear line between care in isolation and keeping an inmate in isolation. There are therefore reasons for continuing to monitor how SiS deals with questions regarding requirements for basic legal security when an inmate is cared for in isolation 46 Ref. nos. 5903-2017 and 5902-2017. 47 Ref. nos. 2514-2017 and 2515-2017. 48 Ref. no. 5672-2017. 49 Ref. no. 5903-2017. 50 Ref. no. 2515-2017.