A/HRC/20/39 the fact that the first two sessions of the Working Group were held shortly after the adoption of Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, the countries reviewed at those sessions did not have the possibility to participate in training activities before their review. Many of them, however, participated in later seminars and briefings as resource countries. 18. In most cases these briefings were initiated by the secretariat and brought together both developing and developed countries; only the participation of the former was covered by the Fund in the form of reimbursement of travel expenses and DSA. 19. A few briefings were initiated at the request of States, other United Nations entities or intergovernmental organizations, such as the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie (OIF), the Commonwealth Secretariat and the Council of Europe. The initiating entity produced a detailed description of the proposed training course, information on training arrangements, including location, facilities, logistical aspects, number and position of trainees, and an itemized statement of estimated cost. The venue for the briefings was determined based on proximity for intended participants and the availability of facilities. 20. Of the 23 briefings, 17 were held at the regional level, while the others were held at the national, subregional and interregional levels. During the first cycle, four national briefings were organized at the request of the countries concerned and, in the case of Somalia, following the Human Rights Council’s call for assistance to facilitate the country’s participation in the universal periodic review 21. The briefings drew extensively on the experience of States that had already undergone the review, as well as on the expertise of OHCHR regional offices, the secretariat and other intergovernmental or regional organizations. They were a forum for the exchange of information, and were aimed at helping States to organize a broad and participatory process of national consultation, to prepare a comprehensive and balanced national report and to become acquainted with the rules of procedure of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review and the plenary session of the Human Rights Council. 22. The need to ensure a balance between the participation of a critical mass of States— to ensure effective information and experience sharing—and the timeliness of the briefing for all participants, ideally six to nine months prior to the review, was possibly the main challenge of holding regional briefings, as not all countries were reviewed at the same session or even in the same calendar year. Countries were clearly at different stages of preparation, with some of those scheduled for review two or more years later not having even constituted the national teams yet. It is for this reason primarily that the secretariat proposed shifting to an interregional format, with all countries scheduled for review at the same session being briefed together. Such an approach is also aimed at promoting the exchange of information and best practices among countries from different geographical regions. Three such interregional briefings, for States scheduled for review during the first three sessions of the second universal periodic review cycle, were held in Madrid, Bangkok and Tunis at the end of 2011. V. Conclusions 23. Throughout the first universal periodic review cycle, the Voluntary Fund for participation in the universal periodic review has been used to finance the participation of requesting Member States in the relevant sessions of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review. Assistance was also provided for Member States that do not have representation in Geneva, in order to enable them to participate in the adoption of their outcome document in the Human Rights Council 8