(d) Cooperation with other actors; (e) Resources budgeted; (f) Strategies and working methods to be adopted when implementing activities; (g) Recommendations submitted to authorities; (h) Follow-up action and an assessment of the implementation of recommendations, including dialogue with authorities; (i) Systematization of observations, recommendations issued and the responses received from authorities, including information on implementation, as well as analysis of how and why successes and failures in effective change have occurred; (j) A description of all other national preventive mechanism activities in addition to visiting, output and impact assessments; (k) Resources spent; (l) Consideration of the need to develop alternative strategies or approaches. 19. Working strategies are subject to periodic evaluation and improvement. A national preventive mechanism might wish to include its partners in reviewing and taking stock of its activities. It may also wish to seek input from international stakeholders, such as the Subcommittee. 20. The work of the mechanism should be understood as an ongoing, context-based process of development that takes into account not only the experience of the mechanism itself but also information and advice from and the experience of other relevant and reliable sources. Members, staff, external experts and other potential contributors should receive ongoing training on mechanism activities and torture prevention, including on methodological, strategic and ethical issues, and should participate in the development of working methods. The involvement of the Subcommittee in such capacity-building activities could be beneficial. ÎÎV. Implementation of visiting activities A. Planning 21. In the framework of its visiting activities the national preventive mechanism should actively seek information in order to ensure that it has data and background information for all places of detention and should keep an archive of all relevant information about places of detention and the treatment of persons held there. 22. The mechanism should ensure that it has criteria for selecting the places to be visited and for deciding on thematic visits that ensure that all places of detention are visited regularly, taking into account the type and size of institutions, their security level and the nature of known human rights problems, while leaving room for flexibility in the allocation of resources to ensure that follow-up and urgent visits can be undertaken. Such criteria should be transparent, clear and published. 23. The composition of a visiting team should take into account the necessary knowledge, including with respect to languages, groups with special needs and vulnerable groups, the experience and skills of members, gender balance and the adequate representation of ethnic and minority groups. The team should have sufficient human and technical resources and time to enable it to properly carry out its tasks. B. Visit methodology 24. On an ongoing basis, a national preventive mechanism should develop guidelines for visits to the various categories of places of detention, including instructions for selecting the theme of a visit, for conducting private interviews, for developing policies for dealing with vulnerable groups of detainees and for ensuring that information from all available sources, such as the administration and staff of the institution visited, detainees from all areas and units, other visitors, if appropriate, and outside actors, such as civil society and other monitoring mechanisms, is collected. 25. All facilities within institutions should be visited and existing registries, examples of case records and activities and services for the detainees should be assessed, unless the visit is thematic only. If a visit is thematic, its coverage of the facilities can be only partial. 26. Practices and tools should be developed to cross-check, test and assess observations and to ensure that recommendations are based on rigorous analysis and are factually well grounded (see CAT/ OP/12/6, para. 5 (f)). The national preventive mechanism should put in place an effective data management system. 48 I PREVENTING TORTURE: THE ROLE OF NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISMS – A PRACTICAL GUIDE