50 A review of the use-of-force records showed that most of the decisions to use force at Sole concerned limiting the detainees’ freedom of movement outside the institution. In practice, this type of decision is a deprivation of liberty and a highly invasive measure. International guidelines underline that depriving adolescents and children of their liberty shall take place as a last resort and for as short a period as possible. This type of measure is only to be used in exceptional circumstances. Research has documented a high incidence of mental illness in children at child welfare institutions and in foster homes. Good cooperation between the child welfare service and child and adolescent psychiatry services is important to ensure that children receive the help they need. At the time of the visit, Sole stated that it was preparing an agreement with the child and adolescent psychiatry service, but that it did not have an agreement in place at that time. After the visit The visit report was published in February 2017, and the Parliamentary Ombudsman has asked to be informed about the follow-up of the report's recommendations in June 2017. The child welfare service's emergency institution for young people 6-8 December 2016 The child welfare service's emergency institution for young people is a municipal child welfare institution, organised under the head of the child welfare department in the City of Oslo. The institution receives adolescents aged between 12 and 18, and is approved to accommodate eight adolescents under the Norwegian Child Welfare Act Sections 4-4 sixth paragraph, 4-6 first and second paragraphs, 4-12, 4-24 first and second paragraphs, 4-25 and 4-26. NORWEGIAN PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN National Preventive Mechanism ANNUAL REPORT 2016 Main findings The institution has two units, one open and one shielding unit. During the visit, the NPM focused in particular on the conditions at the shielding unit. Adolescents were only placed in the shielding unit under Sections 4-24, 4-25 and 4-26 of the Child Welfare Act when they had an administrative decision limiting their freedom of movement. The outer doors of the shielding unit were locked and adolescents have to be accompanied by adults outside the institution and, in some cases, also inside the institution. In practice, the conditions in the shielding unit constitute a deprivation of liberty. In general, the institution appeared to have a pleasant design. The admission rooms in the shielding unit were however bare and unpleasant, and not conducive to a good first impression of the institution. Well-designed physical surroundings for the adolescents, including the admission rooms, are an important prevention measure. When the NPM came back to the institution for the final meeting with the management, the institution had implemented measures to make one of the admissions rooms more welcoming. The institution appears to have some good practices in place for addressing the adolescents’ rights on admission and during their stay there. However, findings showed that the institution could have clearer procedures and guidelines in place to reduce the risk of the adolescents being subjected to degrading treatment. Body searches, in particular involving full removal of clothing, is an invasive measure and can result in human rights violations. Findings during the visit indicated that the institution did not have a clear procedure for how staff should proceed in instances where the removal of clothing is considered necessary during a body search. National guidelines do not provide any concrete instructions on how a body search is to be carried out in practice to ensure it is as considerate as possible.