5 processed, and the student will be able to begin her classes without any problems. Living expenses will be paid in advance on a semester-by-semester basis, following the commencement of the academic semester. 12. The State also added that “it would like to request that the representatives provide constant support services to the beneficiary during her student career [...] bearing in mind that she has a history of a high level of truancy from her classes, she does not respond to calls on made to her cellular phone, she has missed various exams, and, she has not attended weekly support meetings with a university professional in charge of helping her with her acclimation and providing her with academic assistance.” The State so remarked because the payment of tuition and living expenses “were ordered for the typical duration of the degree — that is, ten semesters— and the payments are subject to the student’s compliance with university norms concerning attendance, justification of attendance, and minimum grade point average requirements.” The State requested that the Court declares its compliance with the present Operative Paragraph. 13. In their communication of September 24, 2010, the representatives reported that “Myriam Zapata was accepted at the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana de Cali to study a program in psychology and [...] is currently in the second semester of her degree.” They requested that the State submit the Agreement with ICETEX so that the victims and the representatives can have knowledge of it. The representatives added that the State must guarantee the grant be provided until the culmination of the beneficiary’s studies. They also “positively assessed the advances made regarding compliance with this measure,” and requested that the Court continue to monitor compliance due to some “difficulties that have arisen [along the way].” 14. In its observations of September 24, 2010, the Commission expressed its satisfaction with the important steps taken to date in compliance with the present measure. Nonetheless, the Commission indicated that since there were still ongoing discussions as to the regulations for the operation of the fund, it deemed it appropriate to continue with the supervision of the measure, as the Commission still lacks complete information on the fund’s sustainability and internal operating procedures. 15. The Court observes that, regarding the implementation of the grant fund awarded to Myriam Zapata, the representatives indicated by way of their letter of September 24, 2010, that difficulties have arisen but they did not specify what kind. Similarly, the Commission referred to the discussion on regulations for the operation of the fund. However, in the State’s letter of October 22, 2010, it responded to various queries made by the representatives and explained the processes and procedures involved in carrying out the respective payments, from which it was possible to gain an understanding of the mechanisms in place to ensure the permanence and sustainability of the grant until the completion of the beneficiary’s studies (supra Considering Clauses 11 and 12). The State also referred to the professional support services that have been offered to the beneficiary for her acclimation and to academic support. Therefore, this Court values Colombia’s efforts in administrating Myriam Zapata Escué’s university grant and regards the State to have implemented this measure in accordance with the guidelines established in its Interpretation of the Judgment of May 5, 2008 (paras. 27, 28, and 29). Nonetheless, the Court reminds all parties that, as set forth in the aforementioned Interpretation of the Judgment, the following criteria, where applicable, must be met: 27. [...] [I]f necessary, [t]he beneficiary must receive support in the form of courses, or other academic support, that may take place before or during her university career in order to facilitate her entry or continued attendance at the university, and to avoid that she drops out [...].