Last reviewed: 20 August 2026
ScholarshipFrontier separates discovery from evidence. A website can help us find an opportunity without being allowed to support the facts that appear in the public scholarship dossier.
Source hierarchy
Primary evidence is normally an official programme, university, government, foundation, research council, consortium or authorised application page. Official regulations, calls, handbooks and programme PDFs can also support specific fields when their programme identity is clear.
Discovery-only sources can include scholarship directories, research-opportunity websites and other aggregators. They may trigger a recheck or help identify a programme, but ScholarshipFrontier does not copy their article text into the canonical record and does not use them as a substitute for official evidence.
Structured verification
Funding, eligibility, deadlines, documents, programme scope and application instructions are treated as separate claims. Where possible, each claim retains a traceable source. Missing information is not silently guessed. A field may remain unstated or the public record may remain limited while stronger evidence is collected.
Automation and quality gates
Automated systems discover, deduplicate, parse, recheck and compare evidence at scale. Publication is separate from acquisition. New or changed information must pass identity, duplicate and evidence checks before it can become Public Ready. Index Ready and Ads Ready are stricter states and can remain off even when a record is useful enough to show to visitors.
Conflicts and uncertainty
When two official sources appear inconsistent, ScholarshipFrontier does not resolve the conflict by choosing the more convenient value. The discrepancy can be withheld from automatic publication or sent to a review state until the current rule can be established.
Commercial independence
Advertising, sponsorship and partnership activity cannot buy a change to verified funding, deadline, eligibility or application facts. Sponsored material must be visually separated from the editorial database.
Corrections
Readers can report a possible error through the Contact page. Useful correction reports include the programme name, the field that appears outdated and an official source showing the current information. See the Corrections Policy for the review process.