However, it should be possible to verify the justifications for the administration of a medication and it should be ensured that the need to administer a medication is assessed by a medical staff, not by an activity supervisor who lacks the relevant competence. On this basis, the Chancellor proposed to stop the administration of medications to the clients against their will and ensure that records of the medications administered according to the need are kept in a way that it is clear under which client’s treatment scheme the medication was administered and for what reason. In addition, the Chancellor proposed to ensure that administering of medications is decided by health care staff who have received the relevant training and that it is documented in way as to maintain an effective and realistic possibility to verify retroactively the activities of a health care staff who is not a doctor. 7.2. Threat to human dignity Inspection visits to special care homes during the reporting year revealed that the clients might not always be treated in line with human dignity in these institutions. For example, in a department in one special care home68 the washing room was cold and damp and in another department the sanitary facility had not been cleaned. Also a bathtub with a broken and sharp edge had been given at the disposal of the clients for washing. Conversations with the staff also revealed that the quantity of the food provided was not always sufficient for the clients. In another special care home69 several clients complained of boredom which made the Chancellor ask whether the institution paid sufficient attention to providing opportunities for spending free time for the clients. Therefore, the Chancellor proposed to ensure good repair of the equipment and cleanliness in the sanitary facilities and to assess the sufficiency of the food provided. In addition, the Chancellor recommended to ensure that the opportunities for spending free time and therapeutic activities offered to the clients are of the kind which take account of the specificity of the clients. In this regard, the Chancellor also found that in order to contribute to achieving the aims of the service (including personal development), it should be analysed what kinds of free time activities should be provided to the clients and how to find opportunities to involve clients in joint activities (inter alia, the age, gender and other specific features of the clients should be taken into account). 7.3. Restriction of the liberty of persons Similarly to the inspection visits in 2012 and 2013, it was found that in some special care homes the clients’ fundamental right to liberty could be unlawfully restricted. During the tour of one institution70 it was found that in the evening at least two clients using the service under a court ruling had been locked in their rooms. In another institution71 one client had been locked in their room during the inspection visit and the doors of several rooms had locking devices which allowed locking of the doors from the outside without the possibility to unlock them from the 68 Valkla Home of Hoolekandeteenused Ltd. Erastvere Home of Hoolekandeteenused Ltd. 70 Valkla Home of Hoolekandeteenused Ltd. 71 Paunküla Care Centre. 69 39