A/HRC/11/8 page 24 85. Organizations also highlighted the lack of comprehensive and accurate data at the national and local levels on the accessibility and quality of education programmes in prisons or juvenile facilities. They noted gender discrimination in respect to quality and breadth of education for girls, to discrimination for persons with disabilities and within immigration detention. In detention facilities, in one example of a Western country, it was found that educational opportunities offered to girls did not correspond to those for children outside. Vocational training for girls was found to be based on gender stereotypes and differing to the training for boys; where offered, it was subject to prohibitive administrative prerequisites. In another example, young students were placed in classrooms based on correctional rather than educational needs, and disciplinary policies often had a negative impact on the quality of education available to students. 86. Some positive examples were also mentioned, however, such as in North Carolina (United States of America), where a high rate of participation is indicated in junior college programmes, enabling detainees to pursue higher education, with an extended coursework offer and fiscal support through a partnership between the correctional authorities and the college system. 87. Consistent educational support for groups with particular needs was also lacking, such as for indigenous persons and women, those from cultural and linguistically diverse backgrounds and those with mental health issues who comprise a large percentage of the prison population. Often, education and rehabilitation programmes in prison were not adapted to accommodate the needs of persons with mental or intellectual disabilities, which would in effect exclude them from the full benefits such programmes might offer. 88. Finally, it was reported by non-governmental organizations that, in some countries where women were found to be the fastest growing prison population group, prison systems that were typically designed in response to men’s profiles and needs now had to change to reflect appropriately also those of women. VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 89. The Special Rapporteur thanks all States that responded. As noted above, international and comparative prison research, learning and cooperation have become even more imperative. By contributing to the present global report, those States have responded in part to this need. For those who have not been able to contribute, the Special Rapporteur makes a further and specific request that they do so for future reports. If the “snapshots” provided by the responses to the questionnaire are a reflection of the actual state of education in detention, States individually, in regions and globally must come together with the shared aim of fulfilling the right to education for persons in detention to a greater extent than now seems to be the case. 90. To this end, the Special Rapporteur addresses the following recommendations to States: (a) Education for people in detention should be guaranteed and entrenched in Constitutional and/or other legislative instruments;