to agencies for confirming identity with the person present (e.g. confirming current details and signature comparison, information held by the agency, or eliciting additional information) and as such can be undertaken in this context with greater ease than in the case of some other channels. However, unless an agency has a large network of offices, in-person confirmation of identity can be inconvenient for customers. If an agency uses a third party agent to extend the network of offices and coverage available to customers, the agency should ensure that the third party agent has access to the agency's systems for identity assurance purposes. An in-person confirmation of identity process will be less effective if the third party agent does not, for example, have access to stored biometric photos of customers held by the primary agency. An in-person confirmation of identity requirement may be appropriate for services that require in-person verification for the establishment of identity, and where agencies have ongoing repeat contact with a customer because of renewal requirements for credentials, natural transition points, or touch points within a service process. In-person confirmation of identity is generally considered appropriate only for those services with a Moderate or High level of identity-related risk. * It is not recommended that an in-person process be required for services which have a Low EOI Confidence Level. However, the requirements outlined above for a Low EOI Confidence Level process should be applied if an in-person option is one of the existing channels. 7.9.7.2 Phone Phone has