The recommendations included in visit reports should propose practical and verifiable corrective measures. Recommendations should be: }} well-founded (based on international, regional and national norms and practices); }} preventive (identifying and addressing systematic gaps and practices, including root causes); }} feasible and practicable; and }} focused, precise, and non-complex. The visit reports should be submitted to the relevant authorities and other bodies concerned (depending on the types of places of detention visited), published and disseminated. They should also be shared with the facilities visited. uuImplementing visit recommendations NPMs should set up procedures for regular follow-up of their recommendations. According to the OPCAT, competent State authorities shall examine the recommendations of NPMs and enter into dialogue with them on possible implementation measures.50 The follow-up steps should include: }} constructive dialogue with relevant authorities, including the directors or managers of the places of detention and the supervising authorities of places visited, as well as other relevant institutions (ministries, legislative bodies, health authorities, etc.); }} regular monitoring of implementation of the recommendations; }} follow-up visits and other engagements; }} publication of thematic, visit and annual reports, which would provide information on the implementation of recommendations; }} dialogue and cooperation with relevant actors, national and international, including civil society. NPMs should set up systems for following up their recommendations, which should be undertaken, as far as possible, in conjunction with authorities and designated focal points in relevant ministries. Ideally focal points would be identified in relevant ministries to follow up the NPMs’ recommendations and to engage with them accordingly. ÎÎADVISORY FUNCTIONS In addition to formulating recommendations aimed at improving the treatment and conditions of persons deprived of their liberty and preventing their torture and ill-treatment, NPMs exercise a more general advisory function with regard to legislative and other proposals, opinions, recommendations and reports on any issues within the mandate of the NPMs, including the review of rules and instructions concerning the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty. Legislative proposals NPMs should have the power to make proposals and provide guidance on draft and existing legislation in the light of the States’ obligations under the Optional Protocol, the Convention against Torture, and other international human rights norms and standards. States parties should inform NPMs of any draft legislation that may be under consideration, which is relevant to their mandates and allows the NPMs to make proposals or observations on any existing or draft policies or legislation. NPMs should actively seek development of procedures to ensure that they are systematically alerted to legislative proposals. The State authorities shall examine any proposals or observations received from the NPMs. In the case of federal States, these obligations would apply to all their constituent administrative units. 50 Article 22 of the Optional Protocol. KEY CRITERIA FOR AN EFFECTIVE NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM I 27