What we check
We check specific, dated claims made by government bodies about government schemes — a figure in a press release, a statement in Parliament, a number on an official dashboard.
We do not check opinions, predictions, or statements about intent. We do not rate schemes, ministries, states, or people. A scheme spans many claims across many years, and a single grade would hide more than it shows.
Where our evidence comes from
In order of preference:
- CAG performance and compliance audit reports — cited to a page and paragraph.
- Official dashboards and ministry returns — cited with the date the figure was read.
- Press Information Bureau releases and Parliament answers — for what was claimed.
- Large official surveys (NFHS, NSS, ASER and similar) where relevant.
Every source we cite is archived at the moment we cite it. Government URLs move often; a citation that cannot be checked in five years is not a citation.
What our verdicts mean
A verdict applies to one claim, not to a scheme or to anyone who made it.
| Verdict | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Accurate | The claim matches the evidence, including its framing. |
| Partly accurate | The figure holds but the framing overstates or omits something material. |
| Lacks context | Nothing stated is false, but a reader would draw the wrong conclusion without information that was left out. |
| Not supported by audit | An audit covering this claim reached a materially different finding. |
| Unverifiable | The data needed to test the claim is not in the public domain. |
We do not use a "false" or "misleading" label. Both assert something about intent, which we cannot know and do not claim to.
Unverifiable is not a finding against anyone. It records that the evidence needed is not public. If it becomes public, we update the page.
What "no audit" means
Many schemes have no CAG performance audit, and many audits closed before the claim they appear to sit beside. We say so explicitly, and we never present an audit as assessing a claim it does not cover.
The absence of an audit is not evidence that a claim is either accurate or inaccurate.
Review before publication
No fact-check is published without a named reviewer who is not its author. Before publication, an automated check refuses any fact-check that is missing a source, an archived copy of that source, a date on every figure, a Hindi translation, or a reviewer.
Keeping pages current
Every fact-check carries three dates: when it was published, when it was last reviewed, and what date its data is current to. Pages age visibly — if the data is more than a year old, the page says so, without anyone having to remember to mark it.
Corrections
We publish our corrections. Every change to a published verdict is recorded with the date and the reason, and the count of corrections we have issued is on our homepage.
If you believe something here is wrong, tell us. Tell us what is wrong and what the correct information is, with a source if you have one. We will reply.
Right of reply
If we publish a fact-check about a claim made by a ministry or agency, and that body tells us we have made an error, we will publish their response alongside the fact-check and correct anything we got wrong.
Independence
We accept no funding from political parties, candidates, or government bodies. Our funding and ownership are disclosed on our About page.