Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 organize these programmes very frequently given the low turnout of prisoners who could form a group. The Karlovac County Prison serves as a good role model in terms of cooperation between the treatment and security departments: treatment work is carried out by one official only, so two judicial police officials help him in implementing the Driver as a Safety Traffic Factor special programme. Despite large demand, in general, programmes of completion of primary education for prisoners are not being implemented for participants over 21 because penal institutions are not legally obliged to carry them out. The Dubrovnik County Prison organizes English and IT lessons (these courses are in high demand) and plans to organize these lessons for prisoners on remand as well. This practice could be a good model to follow given the significant lack of activities for this group of prisoners. Also, the same prison allows them to join the clubs of treated alcoholics and treated addicts. Some of the prisoners are extremely dissatisfied with performance evaluation of implementation of individual programmes of execution of prison sentence because they think that the criteria is biased and the evaluation process not transparent enough. Some of the prisoners are extremely dissatisfied with performance evaluation of implementation of individual programmes of execution of prison sentence because they think that the criteria is biased and the evaluation process is not transparent enough so they do not know what aspects of their behaviour should be modified. This is understandable, given the fact that their potential benefits depend on performance evaluation (“assessment”). In some prisons, for instance the Karlovac and Zadar County Prisons, heads of prisons adopt written decisions on performance evaluation of implementation of individual programmes of execution of prison sentence for each prisoner and the accompanying benefits granted on the basis of the evaluation. This might be a good practice example, since it ensures data transparency and quick feedback to prisoners regarding the performance evaluation of implementation of their individual programmes and the scope of granted benefits. Most of the penal institutions do not prepare operational plans for prisoners at higher risk of suicide. This is not the case with the Lepoglava State Prison with 101 prisoners deemed at risk of suicide. A special operational plan has been developed for each prisoner, accompanied with intense supervision of the treatment official and increased security supervision. Nonetheless, officials working at other wards are not familiar with special procedures from the operational plan in order to prevent suicide among prisoners and/or are not familiar with risk factors for suicidal behaviour so they might deny the danger of situation and minimize the risk by describing the suicidal behaviour of a prisoner as his manipulation. Maintenance of order and security According to records of the COPSPD, 1,647 special measures for maintenance of order and security were implemented in 2017 and this represents a 7% drop compared to 2016. Records are still not being kept in a continuous manner. Plus, there are some differences in terms of how different institutions record these measures. Unlike Glina, the Lepoglava State Prison did not record the measure of increased security supervision of prisoners at risk of suicide, which does not represent a good practice example because implementation of a measure must be entered into records, regardless of the reasons for its adoption. Also, during our visits, we have noticed that instances of restraining were often not 12