Whatever educational aims are prioritised, the proclaimed methods are the same: personalised educational support, schooling and/or raising of professional awareness, varied activities and psychological support, all of which are conducted with the clearly stated aim of respecting the place of families. The compulsory character of the minor’s participation in the whole of these activities is rarely approached from the point of view of concern for the latter’s interest. In many institutions, the teams have not truly assimilated the service plan (often considered complex) and actual practice is far removed from it. This plan is neither passed on to the young people nor to their families. Moreover, in all CEFs, the director has to draw up “rules of operation” for the purpose of fixing the practical details of collective life, as well as the rights and obligations of the minors accommodated; it has to be appended to the booklet for new arrivals. In general, the rules of operation and booklet for new arrivals are supplemented by the charter of rights and liberties of persons committed to institutions (charte des droits et libertés de la personne accueillie). The whole of these documents are handed over to the young person and, in principle, to their family. In practice, the rules of operation often consist of a statement of rights and prohibitions, more attention being devoted in general to the latter than the former. A rare few institutions give a real place to minors’ rights by clearly setting out the right to information, respect of privacy, private life and family bonds, freedom of expression, religion and access to personal files, all of which are rights whose exercise constitutes support towards becoming autonomous. Article 8 of the charter of rights and liberties of persons committed to institutions expressly mentions the right to autonomy; however, this right comes within the limits set by the court and the framework of the measures provided; its scope is therefore limited as far as CEF placements are concerned. In general, the booklet for new arrivals provides elements of information of a practical order concerning the life of the institution, daily organisation and the operation of the measures put in place to deal with the minor. Although it mentions the notions of social rehabilitation, in particular through schooling and training, it makes little reference to the notion of autonomy, giving priority to that of control. Finally, the specific and personalised objectives of the placement should, for each person, be shown in a “document of individual measures for dealing with young offenders” or “personalised educational project”, the drafting of these documents having been recommended by the director of the judicial youth protection service (DPJJ), by means of the note of 7th March 2007. In practice, the inspectors have observed that these documents are completed in a very irregular manner, that the objectives thereof are relatively stereotyped (“think about the foolish things I’ve done, take up my schooling again” etc.) and that they are not subject to any formalised updating. Although there is an underlying concern with the search for autonomy, it is rarely specifically mentioned as such and accompanied with appropriate objectives and means. By way of comparison, it is to be noted that the internal documents governing life in an EPM are comprised of the internal rules and regulations – a prison document of which the framework is set by the prisons administration –, and an institutional project drawn up jointly by the prisons administration and the educational department of the PJJ in order to define the organisation of the EPM, and service plans by means of which each department determines its methods of organisation and the intentions of its action with young people 91. In practice, the institutional project is often slow to appear, as a result of the difficulty of putting a real “prison 91 Cf. circular of 24th May 2013. 110