National Preventive Mechanism without recourse regulations). Persons with disabilities working in (sheltered) workshops should be entitled to regular wages and acquire entitlement under statutory social insurance. Transition solutions here will probably be unavoidable, but the elimination of public transfer payments must not be a financial disadvantage for the persons affected. The reports by the commissions make problems inherent in the current legal situation clear. In at least one Land, persons with disabilities are repeatedly urged to sue their parents for maintenance. It was also reported to the NPM that at least individual workshops that take on external jobs generate surpluses while the workers do not profit directly from this. In such cases, a “wage” in the form of pocket money runs the risk of being equal to exploitation of the individual workers. Too little promotion for integration into normal jobs At the same time, integration into normal jobs must be driven forward. The prerequisite for this would be, for example, an expansion of personal assistance services, specifically, but not exclusively, for persons with learning disabilities. However, at this time, an attempt to undertake integration is associated with significant risks. Public transfer payments previously received do not go dormant, but underlying entitlements expire. The essential prerequisite – beside targeted promotion – is therefore the possibility that entitlements to public transfer payments are revived. The commissions have repeatedly criticised that in some facilities the offerings barely go beyond “occupational therapy”. Integration into “normal jobs” does not occur, because the care staff views such jobs as practically unattainable. From the perspective of the UN CRPD, the greatest possible self-determination for persons with disabilities is a main focal point, which is why at a minimum inclusion goals should be defined and pursued to the greatest degree possible. In contrast, in the requirements for the operator organisations in one Land, the promotion of integration into “normal jobs” is not mandatory. While it is defined as a possibility, clear, unambiguous goals are lacking. ¾¾ Payment of regular wages in occupational therapy workshops should be pursued. ¾¾ Acquisition of entitlements under social insurance law should be pursued. ¾¾ Integration into normal jobs should be adequately promoted. ¾¾ The right to work in accordance with the CRPD must be ensured. 128