Desk research. Initial desk research covered the existing methodologies used worldwide to study nationality laws, as well as the existing literature on nationality laws and practice in the three countries, with a focus on the historical constitutional and legislative amendments to nationality laws. This research encompassed reports and documents that analyzed the right to nationality in the Americas, as well as similar studies from other regions. Mapping of key stakeholders. The initial desk research identified each country’s institutional infrastructures and competent authorities that grant access to rights and services related to citizenship and identity documentation, determining the key officers and units within the ministries and government agencies that should be contacted. This effort also included a list of possible civil society organizations that might have identified cases where access to nationality was restricted, drawing on existing networks of NGOs working on migrant and refugee rights. Lastly, the desk research identified members of academia, both globally and locally in each country, who could potentially serve as sources of information. Survey. Data was gathered initially through questionnaires drafted for each country, posing questions specific to that nation’s legislation and applicable regulations. A questionnaire was tailored for each of the administrative authorities that control nationality and identity documentation and for civil society organizations working with potential stateless populations, including unauthorized migrants, ethnic minorities, and displaced persons.10 The EUDO model was incorporated in the pilot questionnaires, addressing the five aforementioned factors in the implementation of nationality laws. A version of the questionnaire was shared with members of academia working on nationality and migration issues in the region. The questionnaires were then amended several times in response to feedback, in order to produce clearer answers. Semi-structured interview study. Civil society organizations working with potentially stateless populations have limited time and resources, and the response to the questionnaire was sparse in some of the areas of greatest interest to this study. This also reflects the fact that advocacy for the right to nationality has not traditionally been a in any of the three focal countries, and only recently has civil society started to mobilize around the issue.11 Thus, whenever possible, interviews were scheduled and carried out in a semi-structured format, covering much of the content of the questionnaire. This format allowed the researcher to explore participants’ experiences and identify key cases from the perspective of civil society groups. Freedom of information (FOI) requests. The researcher used FOI requests to query governments on their citizenship legislation and administrative orders, training procedures, oversight and cooperation among competent entities, the procedures for establishing nationality and obtaining identity documents, alternatives to required evidentiary information, fee exemptions, data management policies, available statistics, and special- 12 METHODOLOGY