A/HRC/30/24 phase of the programme, drawing out some general points, highlighting specific examples and presenting some of the challenges reported. Finally, the report offers conclusions and recommendations for further implementation of the World Programme. II. Overview of action at the national level 8. The responses received from States varied considerably in their approach. The agencies charged with submitting the responses, which were not always clearly indicated, also varied. In nine cases, a designated human rights ministry or department gathered responses from the different government organs involved in implementing the programme. In Colombia, for example, the Presidential Council for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law assembled the responses from the Ministries of Internal Affairs, Education and Defence, as well as from the Ombudsman’s Office, the Administrative Department of the Civil Service and the Presidential Advisory on Human Rights. In Honduras, the Directorate of Human Rights, Education and Peace oversaw the evaluation and reporting process. In seven States, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs assumed responsibility for preparing the response; and in five States, it was the Ministry of Education. The Human Rights Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile gathered information from the Ministry of Education and other ministries, the judiciary, the legislature and the National Institute for Human Rights, an autonomous public institution that promotes human rights among civil servants, law enforcement officials and the armed forces and at all levels of the education system. 9. It seems that not many States were able to tackle the evaluation comprehensively in line with the guidance note transmitted by OHCHR. The reasons for this appeared to be primarily lack of time and/or adequate resources. Some States limited their response to a report on training courses provided or planned for one or two of the groups targeted in the second phase: for example, higher education institutions in Estonia, or training courses to staff of the Ministries of the Interior and Foreign Affairs in Kuwait. Burundi reported on the training provided to police officials, school principals and a number of other key figures across the country, while regretting that a lack of resources prevented it from doing more. The response from Bosnia and Herzegovina was prepared by the Ministry of Human Rights and Refugees, which, in 2012, had organized a national workshop for relevant government officials on the country’s obligations under Human Rights Council resolution 15/11. It pointed out, with regret, that while it could report on a number of activities that had been carried out, it had not been able to follow through the recommendations in full, owing to lack of adequate technical support. Reporting on its progress under the World Programme, Armenia considered the first and second phases incomplete and wished for them to be retained for the third phase of the programme, which they considered should be extended to 10 years. 10. Notwithstanding the variety in the responses, it was possible to draw from them and from other material reviewed a general overview of the initiatives in each of the focus sectors of the second phase. A. Human rights education in higher education 11. A fFew States referred to higher education policies relating to human rights education. A number of States stated that higher education establishments were independent of the Government and could define their own programmes and policies without interference from the State. In Hungary, the role of the State is to ensure that freedom. At the same time, many States presented abundant evidence to show that human rights were currently taught in many universities and other higher educational institutions 4