11 beneficiary had been provided with full health coverage by the EPS SURA. The required medical care was being provided even though the "corresponding studies certification necessary to formalize [her] relationship" had not been submitted. It indicated that the beneficiary has received, inter alia, the following medical care: psychological consultations,16 general practitioner consultation, nutrition and dietitian consultation, and the carrying out of various medical examinations, whose results, according to the latest information provided by the State, remain pending analysis. 31. With regard to the situation of the aforementioned beneficiary, the representatives indicated that the State has committed to finding specialized medical care for her, as her health is fragile due to the gunshot wound she suffered during the incident that took place on February 13, 2006, that, among other things, led to the adoption of these measures. Likewise, in July of 2010, they confirmed that the beneficiary had been included in the national health system through the EPS SURA; that she was attended to by a general practitioner; and that, two months after certain medical exams were carried out, she had been attended to once more when the results were received. They argued that four years after the facts took place, “The medical care provided by the State as a measure for reparation of the violations of which Luisa María was a victim has been neither fast nor efficient toward counteracting the grave damage she suffered to her health [and] quality of life," for which reason her rights to a dignified life and health are being violated. 32. Additionally, the representatives indicated in December of 2008 that because the State did not have any program to protect citizens at risk who were not in leadership positions, the transportation support provided in the name of Ms. Mery Naranjo (supra Considering 8) had been granted to beneficiary Luisa María Escudero Jiménez so that the minor could be transported on a daily basis to her place of study due to her health. At the same time, they indicated that the minor had gone to live at the home of her grandparents and that she was no longer residing in the home of Ms. Mery Naranjo due to the alleged incidents of threats that took place at the residence of that beneficiary. 33. In this regard, in March 2009, the State indicated that the transportation support provided to the benefit of Ms. Mery Naranjo was of a collective nature, for which reason her niece Luisa María Escudero Jiménez also benefited. The State also indicated that this beneficiary and her father expressed that they did not want police to carry out patrols in the area of their residence. 34. For its part, the Commission expressed appreciation for the State’s willingness to provide medical care for beneficiary Luisa María Escudero Jiménez and found it "necessary for [Colombia] to take whatever measures are available toward guaranteeing effective provision of health services for the beneficiary." However, it expressed concern because "the State continu[ed] without providing information on the protection provided to Luisa María Escudero Jiménez, solely making reference to the provision of health services." It therefore asked the Court to order the State to provide information on this. 35. The Tribunal takes note of the information submitted by the State with regard to beneficiary Luisa María Escudero Jiménez, who had been injured as a consequence of the incidents leading to the presentation of these provisional measures.17 The Court views security regime.” In its brief with comments dated May 6, 2010 (supra Having Seen 3), the representatives indicated that contrary to what the State indicated, what they had requested was "its intervention so that the EPS would provide the necessary medical attention in an immediate and urgent manner,” because although Luisa María has been a beneficiary of the contribution regime since the facts took place, “POS and the EPS SURA had not offered adequate medical care." 16 In October of 2008, the State reported on the provision of psychological care through the Colombian Institute of Family Well-Being (ICBF). 17 Cf. Matter of Mery Naranjo et al. Provisional Measures regarding Colombia. Order of the Court of July 5, 2006, Having Seen 3(c).