Our methodology

The historical base matrix

Our base dataset comes from the open-source passport-index project, published under the MIT licence. Its last upstream update was January 2025, so the base matrix is historical rather than a live statement of current policy. It provides broad passport-by-destination coverage, but visa rules can change after the snapshot date.

We retain that matrix as a useful starting point and apply a limited set of documented corrections when a specific change is supported by governing evidence. A correction to one route or group of routes does not make every other row current.

Destination sources and pair proof are different

We map a government, immigration, embassy, consulate, or supranational source to a destination where an eligible source is available. That mapping helps readers find destination-level context and gives editors a place to begin a review. Destination-level source mapping is not pair verification, and it does not show that every passport row was checked.

As of July 2026, source metadata has been mapped or reviewed for 60 of 60 tracked destinations. This is a destination-source coverage statistic, not a count of independently verified passport-by-destination results.

When we use the word “verified”

We reserve verified for a specific claim checked against its governing source with the date of that check recorded. The label applies only to the claim and scope actually reviewed. A destination link, a matrix row, or a nearby verified field cannot transfer that status to a different passport route.

Pair pages remain outside the search index until the passport-destination result has pair-level governing evidence, a recorded review date, and copy that clearly matches the reviewed claim. Until then, the page can still help a reader understand the historical matrix result, but it says that the route has not been independently verified.

Corrections are targeted

Our log contains 252 limited corrections across 36 destinations. These are targeted changes, not evidence that the full matrix was rechecked. Examples recorded in the project include:

• UK ETA. Selected rows affected by the staged expansion of Electronic Travel Authorisation were updated from the older base value.
• Turkey and Chinese ordinary passports. The relevant route was updated after a documented policy change replaced the earlier eVisa value.
• South Korea tourist eVisa coding. A limited group of rows was corrected where an online application portal had been mistaken for a standalone tourist eVisa category.

Each correction still needs to be read at its own scope and effective date. It should not be extrapolated to an unreviewed nationality, travel purpose, passport type, or later policy period.

Source hierarchy

For a claim we intend to verify, we prefer evidence in this order:

1. The destination government's immigration ministry, border agency, or equivalent official portal
2. An official embassy or consulate page that addresses the relevant passport or traveler group
3. A governing supranational regulation, such as a consolidated EU regulation
4. An official travel advisory from the passport country's foreign ministry, used as supporting context
5. A primary announcement that links to or reproduces the governing instrument, used cautiously for very recent changes

Wikipedia, travel aggregators, blogs, and visa agencies are not governing evidence. They may help discover a topic or an official link, but they cannot make a destination or passport route verified.

Review cycle

We aim to revisit mapped destination sources at least every 90 days and sooner when a material policy change is announced. This is an editorial aim for the source map, not proof that every passport pair is current. A date shown beside a destination source describes that source review only unless a page explicitly identifies a narrower claim and its own review date.

How the playbook uses sources

The Border Readiness Playbook combines several separately scoped facts, such as visa status, passport validity, transit risk, and document preparation. This report workflow assembles those scoped findings without turning one source into proof for the others. Its source appendix should be read claim by claim; one cited destination source does not prove every item in the report.

Independence and corrections

Commercial relationships do not determine matrix values, source eligibility, or evidence labels. See how we make money and our editorial standards for the full policy.

To report a possible error, email info@visaglance.com. We review the specific claim, governing source, traveler scope, and effective date before changing a value or label.