Introduction secondarily the EU agencies, structures and services for the management of migration flows and refugee populations in the country. The Ombudsman's report follows two main parameters in its separate chapters: on the one side, the evaluation of the administrative procedures and the institutional framework for the management of populations on the move. In this context, the overall process for access to legal protection for the refugee status is examined, from pre-registration, registration and identification of persons that belong to vulnerable groups, up to the completion of the administrative asylum process, at both instances. Also, the implementation of the arrangements regarding administrative detention is being investigated, as well as the return and readmission procedure, for those third-country nationals whose asylum applications have not been upheld. On the other side, it focuses on the provision of services, based on assuring human, acceptable living conditions, "normalising" the daily life of the refugee/migrant populations and laying down the ground for their smooth inclusion and integration into society. Provision of nourishment, housing, health services and education, as well as security problems are the main themes of the second parameter. The report also reflects on the most recent developments, up to the end of the first quarter of the present year, and concludes with a broad-spectrum presentation of the principal assumptions of the Authority. The shortcomings, deficiencies and the impression of an administration striving to meet demands that appear to constantly overwhelm it, in each one of the areas which this report examines, have a common background; the fact that key national and European stakeholders fell short of realising in good time and interpreting in accurate political terms the situation unfolding in the field during the past two years, as well as before that. The phases mentioned above, of the initial denial in recognising the emerging situation, followed by confusion and surprise, when the phenomenon had taken explosive dimensions, and the current management characterised 10 by putting emphasis on creating a climate aiming to deter intended migrants and refugees and an asphyxiating living environment for those already here, in order to encourage them to decide to return to their home country or at least to their country of origin, are different aspects of the absence of political forecasting that ran through the reaction of the European and Greek administration. It largely overlooks that fact, of course, that the populations stranded on the islands of the East Aegean, arrived there -in their overwhelming majorityafter arduous, often exceptionally dangerous migratory and underground routes, attempting to escape from even more strenuous conditions; war and civil conflict, or absolute poverty. The view that by maintaining rather uncomfortable -with substandard services and lacking any realistic prospects- living conditions in Greece these populations would voluntarily opt to return -return to where?- , while others would be discouraged from entering, is rather myopic, and does not seem to take into account, even today, self-evident factors: the root causes of the movement of the populations and the primitive instinct of self-preservation. The diffusion and overlap of competences, on the one hand between the services of the -newly formed and lacking a conventional administrative infrastructureMinistry of Migration Policy, while on the other between the primarily competent ministry and the other competent ministries and involved public bodies and services, international organisations and NGOs, are impediments to the coherent, all-inclusive and effective management of the problems, and renders accountability and the fair attribution of liability quite blurry. An improved coordination of services and agencies operating in the accommodation facilities and the effective supervision of their operation by the General Secretariat for Reception, must be a top priority for Administration. Despite a regulatory inflation, institutional arrangements are still absent in areas most needed, such as the modus operandi, the (re)distribution of competences and adequate coordination in open accommodation facilities