83 266. The Court notes the change in the request initially made by the representatives that the resources should be handed to OPIM. This revised claim for reparation was not made at the appropriate procedural moment; that is, in the written brief on pleadings and motions. Therefore, the Court will not consider it because it is time-barred, but will refer to the initial request submitted by the representatives. 267. In the present case, the Court underscores the importance of implementing reparations that have a community scope and that allow the victim to reincorporate herself into her living space and cultural identity, as well as re-establishing the fabric of the community. Consequently, the Court finds it pertinent that, as a measure of reparation, the State provide the necessary resources for the Me’phaa indigenous community of Barranca Tecoani to be able to establish a community center, which is set up as a women’s center and in which educational activities are held on human rights and women’s rights, under the responsibility and management of the women of the community, including Mrs. Fernández Ortega if she so desires. The State must assist State institutions and civil society organizations working in the area of human rights and gender to provide assistance for the community training activities, which must be adapted to the indigenous community’s view of the world. 268. On the other hand, the Court recalls that in the public hearing, the expert witness Hernández Castillo made reference to the living conditions of two of the daughters of Mrs. Fernández Ortega, as well as to “many of the other Me’phaa girls” as a consequence of the lack of security on the roads. She reported that “thirty girls from Barranca Tecoani, are currently studying in Ayutla de los Libres because [in said location] there is no middle school. In order to get to the middle school, these girls would have to walk three hours [to the place where they would go to Ayutla via transportation]. The risks of this route have caused the mothers to decide to send their daughters to work with middle class mestizo families in Ayutla de los Libres that take them as domestic labor without salary, [where they work] up to twelve hours daily in exchange for a home, food, and the possibility to have education. Ana Luz, the second daughter [of Mrs. Fernández Ortega], is currently in this situation, and Noemi, her eldest daughter, lived with five families like this, having to move from home to home because of the maltreatment received [there.]” Therefore, the expert witness suggested “the construction of a hostel school where the Me’phaa girls can study safely, without fear of the route taken to get there, the insecurity which they pose, and which has become a space of vulnerability given the rape of [Mrs. Fernández Ortega].” This “would be a direct reparation [in relation] to the state of vulnerability caused by the rape.” 269. In addition, in the brief that accompanied the expert report, the expert witness specified, “the proposal for a community school for the promotion and education of the rights of women be substituted for a hostel-school which will be installed and will function in the municipal capital of Ayutla de los Libres. Said hostel-school can function as a dormitory for the daughters of the [Me’phaa] whom are in middle school or high school and at the same time, and at the same time provide a non-formal education on various matters at the hands of the OPIM women.” 270. Taking into account the aforementioned, the Court deems it opportune to order that the State adopt measures for the girls of the community of Barranca Tecoani that currently carry out their middle school studies in the city of Ayutla de los Libres, to be provided with housing and a proper diet, in order for them to continue receiving an education at the institutions they attend. Regardless of the abovementioned, this measure can be complied with by the State if it opts to install a high school in the mentioned community.