A/HRC/11/8 page 22 Disability Rights Service, the Centre for Study of Violence and Reconciliation, Advoc Aid, Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Organization, the Centre pour la promotion de la photographie, Fundación Somos Familia, World Vision International (and partners), Sisters Inside Inc. and the African Prisons Project.59 71. The responses had a wide geographical spread and provided independent comment on the provision of education for those in detention in specific States, filling some of the gaps in information provided by the States themselves. Increased communication and the sharing of experiences between such organizations and the States within which they work is strongly encouraged. 72. While it is not possible to comment individually on all contributions, they were all considered in the report. Only a summary of the responses is given below, together with a small selection of specific experiences and initiatives. 73. Civil society, domestic and international non-governmental and intergovernmental organizations are well placed to contribute to the quality and relevance of the global debate on education. Even where they do not actively provide educational services themselves, they see and/or specifically experience the practical day-to-day realities of life in detention and of legislative and policy implications, together with their long-term consequences. The submissions received in answer to the questionnaire offered a very different perspective to that of States, a perspective that clearly suggests the need for States to involve such organizations closely in legislative and policy developments and in their practical implementation. 74. Each submission offers a “snapshot” of the situation of a particular area covered in the questionnaire, concerning specific groups of detained persons (children, women or non-nationals) in a particular State or geographic region, some of which are mentioned briefly below. Most submissions related to States that had not responded to the questionnaire and therefore were not confirmed by the Government concerned. 75. Regarding access to education for non-nationals in detention, UNICEF drew attention to the exclusion of non-citizens in certain States to education programmes offered free of charge and to non-nationals awaiting deportation, and UNHCR to the sometimes prolonged detention of juveniles in immigration facilities without access to education. 76. Concerning policy and legislation frameworks, non-governmental organizations reported on the situation in a number of African States. Among examples of efforts being made, they mentioned that Côte d’Ivoire and Mali make specific legislative provision for education in detention. In Mali, education was available in one school for detained persons in the capital city and followed the mainstream curriculum. Where education is not provided within the school, juveniles are permitted to attend schools outside the detention facility, which is also the case in Togo. 59 Additional inputs were received from individuals not named.