National Preventive Mechanism 5.3 Child and youth welfare facilities 5.3.1 Introduction Savings on child welfare The six commissions visited a total of 98 shared accommodations and residential homes for children and adolescents in 2016. There has been a noticeable rise in the number of complaints about financial problems from child and youth welfare facilities since the NPM commenced its work five years ago. As a result, necessary improvements in the facilities have to be postponed for financial reasons. The frequent response to criticism and suggestions from the NPM is that the recommended changes are also desirable from the operators’ point of view, but cannot be implemented with the current daily rates. Attempts to increase the daily rates requested with the Laender have allegedly failed. Private operators from the NGO sector report of annual losses, which can only be offset by donations. Daily rates are not increased The authorisation of new concepts designed to introduce standards compliant with contemporary pedagogical theory in the facilities is deferred. Even though the relevant departments have recognised the need for change and appraised the content of the submitted concepts as positive, the facilities are informed that there are currently no funds available to implement them. This development is a matter of great concern for the NPM. Number of special care places is still low Little has changed in recent years in the repeatedly criticised situation for adolescents with psychiatric diagnoses and post-traumatic stress disorders in particular. There are still insufficient socio-therapeutic and socio-psychiatric places. When visiting child and adolescent psychiatric wards and crisis facilities, the commissions are informed that the number of post-inpatient follow-up care places still fails to meet demand. This means that adolescents requiring intensive support remain longer in inpatient care, which contributes to an individual lack of perspective and an undesired bind to the clinic. It also unnecessarily blocks the already tight number of beds in the child and adolescent psychiatric wards. In the absence of suitable care places, minors are housed in socio-pedagogical facilities without multi-professional care. Even though their illnesses require a setting involving psychiatric medical experts, psychologists and psychotherapists, only pedagogues work there. Facilities that house adolescents from the age of 16 together with adults were visited in Styria. Housing adolescents and adults together alone is critical. Highly frequent pedagogical measures that are not applied in adult care are particularly required in the sensitive phase of adolescents becoming independent. Minors should not live together with adults who themselves, due to their chronic psychiatric illness, have left school, cannot be integrated in the employment market, have been homeless, spent long periods of time in a psychiatric ward and have taken medication, as this can have a negative role 138