This report renders account of the activity performed by the National Preventive Mechanism against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (NPM) in 2014, as was done also in years 2010 to 2013, while it reviews the work of this institution performing this function throughout the first five years of its career. As mentioned in the first report, Organic Act 1/2009, of 3 November, introducing a single final provision in the Organic Act on the Ombudsman, designated this institution as the NPM, which position it held since 5 November 2009, when said organic act entered into force. Since then, the Ombudsman’s Office, as NPM, made a total 485 visits and prepared the relevant reports, in compliance with the Optional Protocol of the Convention of the United Nations against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (OPCAT), made in New York on 18 December 2002. The previous report, which contemplates the activity carried out in 2013, was filed for entry on the Register of the Parliament on 27 May 2014, and was sent also to the Subcommittee of the United Nations on Prevention of Torture in compliance with the obligations established by the OPCAT. Finally, the Ombudsman appeared on 17 June 2014 before the Mixed Committee for Relations with the Ombudsman of the Spanish Parliament to submit said report, and also the report on Injury reports on people deprived of their liberty, which was then published on the website of the Ombudsman’s Office. In 2014 the pace of the visits made in previous years was maintained, a total 61 inspections having been made. As in previous years, the immense majority of the visits were made without prior notice. In addition, photographs were taken of all the visited facilities and centres, which were attached to the records, some of which are included in this report. This report also maintains the practice of including the list of visits made, in addition to the conclusions drawn, the follow up of visits of previous years and other data of interest in the annexes to this report, although this time the annexes will only be included in the digital version. As on previous occasions, various external experts in fields such as legal and forensic medicine, psychiatry and psychology have also cooperated, participating in some of the visits and making contributions from their respective fields of work. This practice affords added value to the assessments, providing them with a multi-disciplinary and much more complex focus. Thus, after the external experts joined, 30% of the visits were made in their company. In 2014, these experts participated in 20 visits. 11