Institutions for persons with disabilities 2.3.13 Positive observations During the last year, the commissions also observed developments in some facilities that the NPM considers good practice. In a Styrian facility, it was welcomed that the “New Authority” system is being practised in the shared accommodation. The principle of making amends was also established in school and kindergarten. “New Authority” is a systematic approach that empowers managers, pedagogues as well as parents, and gives them the opportunity to build up a respectful relationship culture and stimulate development processes. The manager of the facility who is also a New Authority coach presented these concepts on information evenings, which also triggered a positive reaction for the shared accommodation. This also contributed to the children being better integrated in the village community. 2.4 Integration thanks to exceptional dedication Institutions and facilities for persons with disabilities 2.4.1 Introduction The NPM visited 89 institutions and facilities for persons with disabilities in the year under review. The commissions observed deficiencies in the following areas in particular: measures that restrict freedom, living conditions, educational and occupational opportunities, health care and personnel. Some shortcomings were discussed during the visits and subsequently rectified. For example, Commission 6 recommended a facility to contact the competent representatives of the residents to discuss the application of measures that restrict freedom and possible alternatives. The facility followed the recommendation without delay. In several facilities – after the respective recommendations of the NPM – improvements were promised immediately and implemented quickly. Complaint boxes were installed or house rules revised. Some problems were solved quickly Problems that cannot be solved immediately are formally addressed by the NPM to the operators of facilities or to the supervisory authorities. For example, Commission 2 reported about maladministration in a facility in Salzburg. The NPM confronted both the operator and the Land with the observed deficiencies. The management of the facility then hired more care staff, installed a support psychological service, established a psychiatric conciliar service, introduced regular supervision, revised the house rules and organised care measures based on individual needs. A workshop was held with the clients in which the criticism of the NPM was dealt with. In other cases, inadequacies in the application of measures that restrict freedom were removed. In one facility 83