How the Eligibility Check Decides

"Am I even eligible?" is the question that kills more applications than any essay. Students spend evenings drafting for awards that were never open to them, and skip awards they would have qualified for because the rules read like a legal document. The eligibility check exists to answer that question early, honestly, and in plain words. This guide explains exactly how it decides — because you should never trust a verdict you cannot interrogate.

In short

• The check compares an opportunity's published rules against the facts in your eligibility profile.
• Three possible verdicts: eligible, not eligible, or check yourself — never a false "yes".
• Every verdict shows its reasons, rule by rule.
• Preferences affect ranking only; they never hide an opportunity you qualify for.

What the check actually compares

When a listing is added to the catalogue, its published requirements are captured as rules: nationality, age, education level, field of study, work experience, language, residency, and sometimes gender — a number of awards exist specifically for women, and a few for men. Your profile holds your side of each: the nationalities you hold, your current level, your field, your graduation year.

The check walks the rules one by one and shows you the result per rule, not just a total. If you are eligible on nationality and level but short on work experience, you see exactly that — which matters, because "not yet" is different from "no". An award you miss on experience this year may be yours in two.

Why "check yourself" exists

Some rules cannot be decided automatically without pretending to knowledge we do not have. A programme that requires "demonstrated leadership" or "exceptional academic merit" is making a judgement, not stating a fact. And if you left gender blank in your profile — which you are always free to do — awards restricted by gender are marked "check yourself" rather than guessed at.

When you see "check yourself", read the rule on the official page and decide honestly. The check is a filter for your time, not a promise about outcomes.

What the check will never do

It never says yes when the rules say no. The point of the catalogue is a shorter list you can act on, and a flattering false positive would cost you the exact evenings it exists to save.

It never hides what you qualify for. Your preferences — where you would like to study, what kinds of opportunity interest you — change the order of results. They do not remove results. A funded place you qualify for in a country you did not list still appears; it just is not first.

It never shares your answers. Your profile is used to run these checks, rank your results, and send the alerts you opted into. Mentors, institutions and other students cannot see it. Nationality and gender are asked only because published rules use them. Delete your profile and the facts go with it.

Getting a better verdict

The check is only as good as the facts you give it. Three inputs do most of the work:

1. Add every nationality you hold. Dual nationals routinely qualify through their second nationality for awards their first excludes.

2. Keep your education level current. The single most common rule in the catalogue keys off level — an out-of-date level miscolours everything.

3. Set your graduation year. Several fellowships require a recent degree; the check cannot apply that rule without the year.

When the verdict is "not eligible"

Believe it, and let it save your evening — then look at *why*. A miss on level means "come back after graduation". A miss on nationality is permanent for that award, but the catalogue's related pathways and similar listings often surface a neighbouring award with different rules. And if you believe a listing's rules are captured wrongly, use "Report a problem" on the listing — the rules are re-checked against the official page.