60 theme for 2017: supervision of those deprived of their liberty Migration detention centres During an inspection of a detention centre in Kållered, it was noted that the room used for isolation was temporarily set up, and the room only allowed limited opportunities for supervision. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen states that the Migration Agency needed to ensure that the isolation rooms used for detention activity are fit for purpose. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen also urged the detention centre to take prompt action regarding the isolation room to make it possible for the personnel to get a full view of the detainee in order to keep the detainee safe.6 Youth facilities In 2017, four LVM residential homes and three LVU residential homes were inspected. During an inspection of a LVM residential home, it emerged that there were different interpretations among the personnel regarding how frequently inmates in isolation were to be supervised. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen stated that the home needed to clarify how supervision was to be performed.7 In connection with the inspection of another LVM residential home, it was established that supervision, decided on as the result of a suicide risk, could continue for several weeks without carrying out any continuous assessment of the need for such supervision.8 Compulsory psychiatric care In 2017, two in-patient psychiatric clinics, one forensic psychiatry examination unit (RPU) and two child and adolescent psychiatry (BUP) clinics were inspected. In connection with the inspection of the RPU, it was noted that the unit’s procedures contained many different terms for supervision frequency, e.g., continuous superintendence, a lower degree of supervision, continuous supervision, extra guard and constant supervision. The terms did not provide any detailed explanation and there was a risk of them being confused. Representatives of the examination unit stated that they had commenced work on reviewing the terms, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen looks positive upon this.9 During an inspection of BUP Stockholm, it was noted that the supervision of patients spending time in their residential rooms was performed in different ways by the staff, that observations were passed on verbally and that documentation was only in writing “if something particular had happened”. In addition, there were no written procedures for what was to be documented and by whom. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen stated that the clinic needed to 6 Ref. no. 1000-2017. 7 Ref. no. 2514-2017. 8 Ref. no. 2515-2017. 9 Ref. no. 3416-2017.