III. INSPECTION VISITS During the reporting year, the Chancellor made four inspection visits to child care institutions. Two of the visits were announced and two were unannounced. The Chancellor’s visit to Jõhvi Youth Treatment and Rehabilitation Centre was described in more detail in Part I of the Overview. In addition, the Chancellor visited three substitute homes: Tilsi Children’s Home; Imastu Residential Educational Institution and Lasnamäe Centre of Tallinn Children’s Home. Similarly to the previous years, during the reporting year the Chancellor paid special attention to the activities of providers of the substitute home service in ensuring the fundamental rights and freedoms of children separated from the family. For this, the Chancellor conducted inspection visits to Tilsi Children’s Home and Imastu Residential Educational Institution and a follow-up visit to Lasnamäe Centre of Tallinn Children’s Home. The first of the visits was announced and the other two unannounced. The following part contains an overview of the main problems found upon the inspection. 1. The number of staff in families All three substitute homes had problems with complying with the requirements for the substitute home service as regards the number of educational staff in families. Tilsi Children’s Home and Imastu Residential Educational Institution only had one member of staff on duty for several families although according to the law each family should have at least one staff member. In addition, all three substitute homes had families with children with a severe or profound disability in which only one staff member was present during the day although according to the law there should be at least two staff members on duty. In Tallinn Children’s Home the Chancellor found the problem of shortage of staff already during the previous inspection visit and drew the attention of the substitute home to it already in 2013 but the situation had not improved as compared to the previous visit. The Chancellor explained to the substitute homes that even if the statutory requirement may seem too harsh in certain situations, this cannot be a justification for not complying with the law. The legislator has established specific requirements in order to ensure the well-being of each child, i.e. sufficient care, complete safety and individual attention. In any activities concerning children the best interests of the child should always be placed first. Thus, the underlying presumption should be what is best for the child in view of the child’s individual situation, and not what is most convenient in terms of organisation of work. On this basis, the Chancellor proposed to the substitute homes to comply with the requirements established by law with regard to the required number of educational staff on duty. 2. Qualification of the staff Tilsi Children’s Home and Imastu Residential Educational Institution also had shortcomings in complying with the qualification requirements for educational staff. In Tilsi Children’s Home four staff members on duty at night did not have any qualification for educational work. Two 58