UNHCR audit highlights Home Office Asylum Interview challenges, Calls for reform

• Written by: LawSentis
• March 12, 2026
• Comments: (0)

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has published a significant new report assessing the quality and effectiveness of asylum interviews conducted by the UK Home Office.

Titled Asylum Interviews in the UK: Audit Findings and Recommendations, the 92-page report evaluates current practices, identifies areas needing improvement, and sets out ten key recommendations to strengthen the asylum decision-making process.

The audit highlighted several issues impacting the quality of asylum interviews. Interview techniques were inconsistent, and many decision-makers lacked the skills necessary to gather comprehensive and relevant information. In a review of 60 sampled interviews, the full basis of applicants’ claims was unclear in 19 cases. The report also noted unresolved credibility concerns and limitations in interpretation standards, which sometimes affected the accuracy of information provided by applicants.

UNHCR warned: “This research indicates that there is a real risk that applicants are being refused despite being in need of international protection; and that applicants are being granted asylum even though they are not entitled to it.”

To address these concerns, the report recommends a structured and consistent interview model for all asylum cases. Key suggestions include effective questioning techniques, active listening, properly addressing credibility issues, updating training and interview support tools, and strengthening quality assurance mechanisms to ensure accurate, fair, and sustainable decisions.

The Home Office responded formally to each recommendation. Seven of the ten were fully accepted, including enhanced use of the Dialogical Communication Method (DCM), improved training on questioning and credibility assessment, revised marking standards, and updated interview support tools. Three recommendations-covering interpreter training, performance measurement, and expanding second-pair-of-eyes quality assurance – were partially accepted.

The UNHCR’s summary of its key recommendations on strengthening the quality of asylum interviews is excerpted and reproduced below:

UNHCR
The UN Refugee Agency

ASYLUM INTERVIEWS IN THE UK
Audit Findings and Recommendations
March 2026

[…]

■ The Home Office should ensure that a best practice model of interviewing is adopted and used in all asylum interviews

An overarching recommendation of the audit is for the Home Office to implement a uniform, structured methodology for all asylum interviews. Most effective interview models follow a common framework: preparation; rapport-building; free narrative; exploration of material elements; and closure.

The review found no consistent interview approach being applied by Decision-Makers. While the Dialogical Communication Method (DCM) is cited in Home Office training for vulnerable cases, it is rarely used, and many staff were unfamiliar with it.

Embedding a structured, best-practice interview model such as the DCM across training, tools, and quality assurance represents a clear opportunity to improve interview quality.

■ Interview techniques can be strengthened to ensure decision-makers gather reliable, relevant, and detailed information

Many Decision-Makers lacked the skills to effectively formulate questions and elicit detailed, relevant information. In 19 of 60 interviews reviewed, the full basis of the applicant’s claim remained unclear. As a result, material elements of claims—applicants’ identity, activities, and experiences relevant to refugee status—were often not fully explored.

Moving away from quiz-like questioning and adopting a structured approach—including free narratives, open questions, probing, and targeted closed questions—would improve information gathering. A stronger focus on active listening and analysis would help ensure all material elements are identified, reducing supplementary interviews and supporting higher-quality decisions.

■ Credibility issues should be addressed during interviews to ensure sustainable decisions

In 27 of 60 interviews, credibility concerns remained unresolved. In 17 of these cases, decisions were made without further interviews. Some refusals were based on credibility issues that had not been raised with applicants.

Focusing on identifying and resolving credibility concerns during the interview would lead to more robust outcomes. This requires training Decision-Makers to strategically explore inconsistencies, clarify information, appropriately challenge accounts, and resolve issues before decisions are made.

■ Enhancing accuracy and reliability through effective use of interpreters

Effective communication is essential, and interpreters play a critical role. Issues were identified in half of observed interviews, including summarising rather than fully translating responses, and unsanctioned interactions with applicants.

Targeted training for both Decision-Makers and interpreters on roles, expectations, and collaboration would improve accuracy, fairness, and completeness of information collected.

■ Update training materials to clearly articulate the Home Office interview model and emphasize skills development

Although some good practice was observed in the Home Office Interview Course, Decision-Makers often lacked the ability to apply these skills consistently.

Training should clearly present the Home Office’s preferred approach and dedicate more time to practical skills development. Technical Specialists and Senior Caseworkers should also be trained in best practices to support decision-makers effectively.

■ Revise Interview Support Tools to enhance interview quality

Interview Support Tools are a positive step, supporting structured preparation and effective questioning. However, their use is inconsistent and can sometimes limit the disclosure of relevant information.

These tools should be refined to align with best-practice models, encourage open questions before probing, emphasize active listening, and provide clear guidance on consistent and effective use.

■ Align operational expectations with staff capacity and capability

UNHCR welcomes the government’s progress in reducing the asylum backlog, which included 63,000 decisions by the end of 2024, a 41% reduction since March 2023.

However, perceptions among staff indicated that speed was sometimes prioritised over quality, risking incomplete or premature decisions. Reviewing performance metrics, enabling more flexible interview scheduling, and supporting the Interview-Decide model would help balance efficiency, quality, and staff morale.

■ Enhance quality assurance mechanisms in the short term

There is a real risk that applicants in need of protection may be refused, and that others may be granted asylum inappropriately. Interim quality assurance measures are essential to ensure decisions are properly reviewed while systemic improvements are implemented.

The report’s recommendations focus on improving training, refining tools, and developing Decision-Makers’ skills to deliver fair, accurate, and sustainable asylum decisions.

LawSentis Viewpoint:
At LawSentis, we welcome UNHCR’s audit as an important step toward ensuring fair and consistent asylum processes in the UK. Our experience shows that clear interview structures, robust training, and high-quality interpretation are essential for just outcomes. We encourage the Home Office to implement these recommendations fully and continue improving asylum decision-making to protect genuine claimants while maintaining system integrity.

If you are navigating the UK asylum process and need professional guidance, our expert team at LawSentis is here to help. Contact us today to discuss your case and receive tailored support.