Data methodology: how jurisdiction data is sourced, verified, and refreshed

Readers who build decisions on this site deserve to know how its data is made. This briefing describes the method behind the jurisdiction dataset: where the facts come from, how they are verified, how often they are refreshed, and — just as important — what the method deliberately refuses to invent. It is written for cooperation-programme offices and education-group BD and compliance leads. This site reads published rules; it does not represent any regulator’s position and gives no legal advice.

Source: official sources only

The dataset draws on one class of source: official material published by the authorities themselves.

1. Regulator websites — the bodies that administer each regime (for example the education authority and the supervision platform in Mainland China, the Non-local Courses Registry in Hong Kong, SkillsFuture Singapore, the Malaysian Qualifications Agency and Department of Higher Education, and the CAA with KHDA and ADEK in the UAE).
2. Instruments — the laws, ordinances, and standards that create the regime (for example the Chinese-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools Regulations, Cap. 493, the Private Education Act 2009, Act 555, and the CAA Standards 2019).
3. Official registers — the public ledgers where approvals, registrations, and recognitions are listed.

The dataset does not use secondary aggregators, commentary sites, or marketing material as a source of fact.

Verification: a checked date, not a claim of real time

Each entry carries a checked_on date — 2026-07-28 for the current dataset. On that date, every regulator name, instrument title, and URL was verified against the official source. The date states when the check happened; it does not claim the data is live at the moment of reading. A cooperation office should treat the dataset as a verified snapshot, and re-confirm with the regulator or a licensed adviser when a live decision depends on it.

Reading the checked_on date correctly changes behaviour. A field verified on that date is reliable as of that date; it is not a guarantee that the same field reads identically today. For a low-stakes orientation, the snapshot suffices. For a commitment that binds the institution, the live record on the official register is the source of truth, and the dataset is the map that shows where to look. This separation — snapshot for orientation, live source for commitment — is the safe way to use the data.

Null handling: not published, not guessed

The single most important methodological rule is how missing data is treated. If a field could not be confirmed from an official source, it is recorded as null and displayed as not published. It is never filled with an estimate, an assumption, or a recalled figure.

1. Branch-campus regimes that could not be confirmed are recorded as unconfirmed, not as “no.”
2. Fee and tuition amounts are recorded as not published, not as a placeholder number.
3. Processing timelines and outcome proportions are recorded as not published, because no regulator in this dataset publishes them.
4. Sending-jurisdiction arrangements that were not confirmed (for example the UK devolved administrations beyond England) are recorded as not stated, not assumed.

Refresh: periodic, not promised as a schedule

The dataset is re-verified periodically against the official sources. This briefing does not state a fixed refresh frequency, because the site will not publish a commitment it cannot tie to a verified source. When a re-check occurs, the checked_on date is updated. A cooperation office should not assume the figures are current to the day; for a live transaction, confirm with the regulator or a licensed adviser.

Limits the method accepts

The method is deliberately narrow, and that narrowness is a feature.

1. It reports what the authority published, not what the authority intended or is rumoured to plan.
2. It reports status on a date, not the trajectory of an application.
3. It reports the legal anchor of a regime, not a ranking of providers.
4. It reports recognition where a separate track exists (UAE federal, Malaysia register), not a single merged score.

A reader can replicate the method. Open the official source named for a jurisdiction, confirm the regulator name and instrument title, and read the relevant register. If the official source states the fact, the dataset may state it; if the official source is silent, the dataset says not published. This reproducibility is the point: the dataset is a verified index to primary sources, not a substitute for them. Where a live decision turns on a field, the primary source remains the place to confirm it.

Why no timelines, fees, or outcome proportions

The dataset note states plainly that no processing timelines for approvals, fee schedules, or approval-and-refusal proportions are stated anywhere in it, because no regulator publishes them. The method honours that: a figure with no primary source is omitted, not estimated. This is why a reader will never find a processing duration, a fee amount, or an outcome ratio on these pages. Confirm those with the regulator or a licensed adviser.

How to use the dataset responsibly

1. Read the checked_on date before relying on any field.
2. Treat not published as an explicit unknown.
3. Use the dataset to locate the right official register, then verify the live record there.
4. Do not extrapolate a cross-jurisdiction conclusion from one market’s entry.
5. For case-specific verification, the compliance coordination team can be engaged and will respond within one business day.

What this briefing does and does not say

This briefing describes the site’s method; it is not legal advice and does not represent any regulator. The method’s strength is its discipline: official sources, a verified date, and silence where the source is silent. For case-specific positions, confirm with the regulator or a licensed adviser.

Key takeaways

1. The dataset uses official sources only — regulator websites, instruments, and public registers.
2. Every field was verified on the checked_on date (2026-07-28); the date is a snapshot, not a live claim.
3. Unconfirmed fields are recorded as not published, never estimated or guessed.
4. The dataset is refreshed periodically; it does not promise a fixed schedule.
5. No timelines, fees, or outcome proportions appear, because no regulator publishes them.

Sources

1. Jurisdiction dataset (site-builds/tnestudy-com/src/data/jurisdictions.json), checked_on 2026-07-28 — note records that no regulator publishes processing timelines for approvals, fee schedules, or outcome proportions.
2. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China — Information Platform for Supervision of Chinese-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (https://www.crs.jsj.edu.cn/)
3. Hong Kong Education Bureau, Non-local Courses Registry — Non-local Higher and Professional Education (Regulation) Ordinance (Cap. 493) (https://www.elegislation.gov.hk/hk/cap493)
4. SkillsFuture Singapore — Private Education Act 2009 and register of private education institutions (https://www.ssg.gov.sg/resources/pei/)
5. Malaysian Qualifications Agency and Department of Higher Education — Private Higher Educational Institutions Act 1996 (Act 555) (https://mohe.gov.my/en/institutions/phei)
6. UAE Commission for Academic Accreditation — Standards for Institutional Licensure and Program Accreditation 2019 (https://www.moe.gov.ae/En/MediaCenter/News/Pages/accreditation2.aspx)