How we research, review, update, and correct what we publish.
If a page appears on CollegeHelpGuide, we want a reader to understand where the information came from, how it was checked, what AI did and did not do, and what happens if something needs to be fixed later.
Publishing Workflow
A page should only go live after it clears both a content bar and a trust bar.
That means the page has to be useful and specific, but it also has to be transparent, source-aware, and updateable when the world changes.
Define the real decision behind the topic
We begin with the question a student or parent is actually trying to answer, not just the keyword they typed. That keeps pages anchored to a real job-to-be-done.
Gather the strongest available sources
We prefer official data, authoritative institutional guidance, university research, and well-established reporting over recycled summaries.
Draft for clarity, specificity, and stakes
The draft should explain the tradeoffs clearly, use concrete numbers when they matter, and help the reader understand what changes if they choose one path over another.
Review claims, dates, and source fit
Before publication, we review whether the claims are supported, whether the date-sensitive parts still hold, and whether the cited sources are strong enough for the stakes of the page.
Publish with visible trust signals
Readers should be able to see update dates, standards links, and a direct path to report a problem or ask a question.
Source Standards
Not all sources deserve the same trust.
The higher the stakes of the claim, the more we want to lean on primary or clearly authoritative sources. A polished article is not a substitute for strong sourcing.
Tier 1: Government and official public data
Examples include the Department of Education, FAFSA or studentaid.gov, NCES, BLS, and other official data or policy sources.
Tier 2: University and institutional research
Peer-reviewed studies, university reports, and official institutional resources can add depth, context, and findings that explain what the raw data means.
Tier 3: Established sector authorities
Sources like College Board and NACAC can be valuable when they are being used for clearly attributable admissions or testing data and guidance.
Tier 4: Established journalism
Reputable reporting can help with context, recent developments, and explanation, but we still prefer a corroborating source when the claim has direct decision-making consequences.
Sources we do not treat as primary evidence
- Wikipedia
- Reddit threads or forum posts
- Commercial content farms
- Unsourced blog summaries repeating another article
Claims we are especially careful with
- Deadlines and policy changes
- Cost and debt figures
- Admissions statistics
- Career and salary expectations
Review Standards
Before a page goes live, it should be clear, evidence-backed, and honest about uncertainty.
Good editorial review is not only about grammar or style. It is about whether a page deserves to influence a real decision.
What we want to be true before publication
- The page answers a real decision question, not just a keyword.
- The most important claims are traceable to reliable sources.
- The writing is specific enough to be useful, not just pleasant to read.
- Tradeoffs and consequences are explained honestly.
- Readers can see how current the page is and how to report issues.
Reasons a page should be reworked or held
- Important claims sound plausible but are not well-supported.
- The page stays too vague to guide a real decision.
- Date-sensitive guidance may already be stale.
- The source mix is too weak for the stakes of the topic.
- The page hides uncertainty instead of naming it clearly.
Tools & Data Pages
Trust should apply to calculators, checklists, and school pages too.
Interactive pages can look authoritative very quickly, so it is important to be explicit about what they are and what they are not.
How we think about tools
Tools like calculators and quizzes are meant to help a reader think more clearly about a decision. They should explain inputs, label estimates honestly, and point readers back to fuller guidance when context matters.
Where a tool relies on averages, assumptions, or generalized salary data, the page should say that plainly.
How we think about school data
School profiles rely primarily on U.S. Department of Education College Scorecard data, with supplementary public-context fields where appropriate. Those pages should make the data origin clear and avoid pretending that a single page can replace direct school confirmation.
AI Policy
AI can speed up parts of the workflow, but it does not replace source judgment.
We would rather be direct about this than pretend otherwise. The standard is not 'was AI involved?' The standard is 'was the final page reviewed carefully enough to deserve trust?'
What AI may assist with
- Helping organize a draft more quickly
- Summarizing source material for internal review
- Surfacing missing questions or gaps to investigate
- Supporting workflow checks before publication
What AI cannot be trusted to do by itself
- Act as a primary source
- Make final editorial calls on high-stakes advice
- Guarantee a fact is current or correctly framed
- Own corrections or accountability after publication
Updates & Corrections
College planning information changes. A trustworthy site needs a correction habit, not just a publication habit.
Admissions policies, costs, deadlines, and aid rules can move quickly. That is why update visibility and correction paths matter so much on this type of site.
Our update approach
- Pages should show published and/or updated dates where relevant.
- Date-sensitive topics need more frequent review than evergreen advice.
- When a meaningful fact changes, the page should be updated rather than quietly ignored.
Our correction approach
- Readers can contact us directly to report a factual issue.
- Important factual fixes should update the page and its visible recency signals.
- For significant errors, we prefer to be clear that a correction was made.
Need to report something?
The fastest route is to send the page URL, what looks wrong, and what source you think should be checked to hello@collegehelpguide.com.
You can also use our full contact page if you want to route a correction, editorial question, or partnership inquiry more specifically.
Ready to start planning?