National Preventive Mechanism of operations. However, after half a year the situation remained unchanged. Out of the eleven persons living there, five were entitled to care and nursing allowance level 5. They were no longer independently mobile and required nursing care during the night. Four residents with restricted mobility were entitled to care and nursing allowance level 4. The building was not barrierfree and nursing staff was not always in situ. During the second commission visit, one resident was in an extremely critical situation and constantly calling out for help. The NPM made it clear that it would not tacitly tolerate amateur nursing care. Four weeks after the second commission visit, the residents with the highest nursing care needs were transferred, administrative penalty proceedings were initiated against the operator and the official closure of the illegally operated nursing facility was ordered. The situation was known to the authorities and the court In Tyrol Commission 1 encountered ten elderly men who were mentally ill and/or disabled. They were living in an isolated two-storey residential situated on an extremely steep hillside, with the consent of their legal guardians. The double rooms were furnished in a Spartan manner and none of the men had a key to his own room or the building. The structure was not barrier-free. Mobile phones were prohibited in the facility, and contact with the outside was not encouraged. Confidential discussions between the residents and the Commission were ended by the owner of the house after a short period of time. In most cases the men had already been receiving care for a number of years (and in some cases for decades) from the owner of the house, now aged 70, her spouse and her daughter-in-law. However, none of these had completed training in nursing or any other qualification in dealing with psychiatric patients. There was no doubt for Commission 1 from the documents consulted that various authorities and the Guardianship Court were aware that former psychotropic patients were being housed here. The NPM saw a need for action also in this case. Other accommodation options were sought out, in coordination with the legal guardians of the residents, the regional hospital and the competent district authority. Suitable places have already been found for some residents. In Upper Austria, Commission 2 found three women and four men suffering from mental illness in an isolated residential building which could not be reached by public transport. Care was being provided to the residents aged between 56 and 79 by a woman aged 69 and her son, who jointly owned the house. The son distributed psychotropic drugs and provided support in relation to bodily care. However, neither he nor his mother, who cooked and carried out basic cleaning, had received any nursing training. The three women were forced to share a very small room. As there was not enough space for a wardrobe, this was contained in the men’s room. There was only one shower for everybody, which could only be reached through the room of a male resident. Except for their clothing, nobody had any personal effects. The commission observed how the persons needing care were provided with food on plastic 112