National Preventive Mechanism The report concludes with a long list of all recommendations of the NPM since July 2012. This part of the report is sub-divided according to the type of institution or facility and the thematic area (e.g. infrastructural fixtures and fittings, living conditions). These recommendations relate not only to individual facilities but also to all facilities of this particular type. They thus set a standard that should be guaranteed in these institutions and facilities from a human rights perspective. 3.2 Recommendations as human rights standards Overview of the National Preventive Mechanism 3.2.1 Mandate As the NPM based on authorisation granted under the Constitution and in a general legal context, the Austrian Ombudsman Board (AOB) and its six multidisciplinary commissions monitor and control public and private institutions and facilities that are classified as “places of deprivation of liberty within the meaning of Article 4 of the OPCAT” nationwide and on a regular basis. The main responsibility of the NPM is less to examine isolated cases of maladministration, but rather to detect structural deficits that can lead to such cases. Overlaps with the additional competencies of the AOB pursuant to Article 16 (3) of the UN CRPD and with the monitoring and concomitant examining of the authorities empowered to exercise direct administrative power and coercive measures cannot be entirely avoided. Setting uniform methods and standards Last year, the commissions completed 522 visits. In line with the mandate of carrying out comprehensive controls across Austria, most initial visits were made to so-called “less traditional places of detention” (psychiatric institutions, hospitals, retirement and nursing homes, child and youth welfare facilities). When planning visits of these types of facilities, the NPM had to pre-select the institution to be monitored and weigh the necessity of follow-up visits due to capacity reasons. On the other hand, it was possible to visit the classic places of detention (correctional institutions, police stations, police detention centres) on a number of occasions. A total of 533 visits by the commissions After having clarified in 2015 that accompanying forced returns by air was indeed within the scope of the NPM mandate, members of the commission accompanied a forced return to Croatia (see chapter 5.8.2). Forced return by air The efficacy of the NPM also depends on its acceptance by the institutions and their responsible operators or owners. The competent authorities and administrative departments, but also the management of private institutions and facilities, have as a rule willingly complied with their obligation to engage in constructive dialogue with the NPM (under Article 22 of the OPCAT). The Increased dialogue 83