decision-makers. During a semi-structured interview, the NAM+ training team190 explained that limited reference to statelessness was included in the foundation training compulsory for all new caseowners. A module on “Nationality and Stateless Persons” is provided as part of consolidation training which is usually provided to caseowners after three to six months. The content of these training notes, however, do not engage in detail with the 1954 Convention, nor the procedures necessary to identify stateless persons or the rights owing to them. Moreover, there is apparently no training on how to record or update CID or other databases where an applicant is identified as being stateless. As has been discussed, the research has already identified this as a major problem. An important component of the accurate identification of statelessness is the availability of country of origin information relating to relevant nationality laws and their application, as well as the position of particular stateless populations in foreign states. While some relevant information is contained in Country of Origin Information Service (COIS) reports and through individual information requests,191 it is not clear whether decision-makers systematically make use of this facility or fully understand how to assess nationality laws when identifying statelessness.192 During the interview with COIS193 it was explained that they are already able to reference a range of sources on nationality law194 but it was accepted that additional training might be beneficial on their specific application to the issue of statelessness. One mechanism available to the UK Border Agency to potentially better evaluate the identification of statelessness and the use of relevant country of origin information would be through the UK Border Agency’s Asylum Quality Audit Team. A semi-structured interview with the Asylum Quality Audit Team195 identified that at present statelessness was only directly relevant to two of the 97 indicators used to assess quality of asylum decisions. It was accepted that this was an area that could potentially be further developed. However, it was emphasised that currently the team’s remit is restricted to initial asylum decisions made by the UK Border Agency and, consequently, would only engage with a limited area of casework. In conclusion, it appears that there is limited policy guidance for caseworkers on assessing statelessness. Although doubts were expressed by some interviewees that statelessness was a pressing issue in asylum casework, it was also accepted that statelessness might 190 Anecdotal information from semi-structured interviews with the NAM+ Training Team (19 July 2011). 191 Anecdotal information from semi-structured interviews with the Country of Origin Information Service (COIS) (4 August 2011). 192 Anecdotal information from semi-structured interviews with a UKBA Senior Asylum Caseworker ((15 August 2011). 193 Anecdotal information from semi-structured interviews with the Country of Origin Information Service (COIS) (4 August 2011). 194 Information provided in email from COIS dated 4 August 2011 and referring to the following sources: The US Office of Personnel Management’s Citizenship Laws of the World, March 2001:, http://www.multiplecitizenship.com/worldsummary.html; also http://www.opm.gov/ extra/investigate/is-01.pdf; International Labour Organisation, http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/ country_profiles.byCountry; Law Library of (US) Congress, http://www.loc.gov/law/help/guide/ nations.php; Legislation online, http://www.legislationline.org; Richmond University (Virginia, USA), http://confinder.richmond.edu; World Law http://www.worldlii.org/catalog/215.html; University of Pittsburgh’s School of Law journal the Jurist, http://jurist.org/; Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, http://www.mpil.de/ww/en/pub/news.cfm; IDMC (more for documentation) http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpS ectionHomepages)/$first?OpenDocument&count=1000; Refworld: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/ topic/4565c2252/459d2ecd2.html; European Union Democracy Observatory, which has a useful database for European countries (including Turkey). 195 Anecdotal information from semi-structured interviews with the Quality Audit Team (1 August 2011). in the United Kingdom 81