Fact-Checking Policy

This policy explains how a factual claim is checked before it appears on Grant Assist SA, what we accept as evidence, and what happens when we cannot confirm something.

It sits underneath the editorial policy, which covers how articles are chosen, researched and reviewed in general. The corrections policy covers what happens after a mistake reaches the page.

What counts as a factual claim

Anything a reader could check, act on, or be harmed by getting wrong. On this site that means:

• amounts, thresholds and percentages
• dates, deadlines and payment schedules
• eligibility requirements, and who they apply to
• what a process involves and the order of its steps
• the name, address and function of an official service
• quotations, and anything attributed to a person or an organisation
• legal and regulatory statements

Opinions, general description and clearly labelled examples are not factual claims. The distinction matters because everything on that list has to be sourced before it runs.

How a claim is checked

Each claim is traced back to a source that would actually know. For a rule, that is the body that made the rule. For a figure, the body that published the figure. For something an organisation said, the organisation’s own statement rather than somebody’s report of it.

Where a claim cannot be traced to a source like that, one of three things happens. We find a better source, we rewrite the claim so it says only what we can support, or we take it out.

What we accept as evidence

Strongest first:

1. South African legislation, regulations and published government notices
2. Publications by SASSA and the Department of Social Development
3. Court judgments and official records
4. Statistics published by Statistics South Africa
5. A statement an organisation has made on the record about itself
6. Reporting by an established publication that names its own source

Reporting by another publication is useful mainly as a route to the primary source. Where it does not say where its information came from, we treat the claim as unconfirmed and go looking ourselves.

Claims we treat with extra care

On this subject the numbers move. Grant amounts, qualifying thresholds, payment dates and application deadlines all change, sometimes at short notice, and they are exactly the things a reader is most likely to act on.

So we avoid printing a figure as though it were settled. Where a specific number matters, we say what it is for, note when it was accurate, and send the reader to SASSA to confirm the current one. An article that sends you to the right place is worth more than one that confidently prints last year’s amount.

When a claim cannot be verified

We say so in the article, in plain words. That reads as something like “SASSA has not published a date for this” or “we could not confirm this figure”.

What we do not do is fill the gap. A plausible number with nothing behind it is worse than an admission that the number is not public, because a reader cannot tell the two apart.

Screenshots, forwarded messages and social media

These are not evidence. A screenshot of a headline is not the article. A forwarded voice note is not an announcement. A post from an account with an official-sounding name is not an official statement.

They are sometimes a reason to go looking. When something is circulating widely we check whether the body it is attributed to has actually said it, and we will publish that a claim is unconfirmed when that is what we find.

Quotations and attribution

A quotation is checked against the recording, transcript or written statement it came from. If the original cannot be found, the quote does not run.

We name who said a thing and where they said it, so you can go and read the whole thing instead of trusting our extract of it.

Dates and re-checking

Every article shows when it was last updated. When a rule we have described changes, we go back to the articles describing it rather than waiting for a reader to notice.

A checked fact is checked as at a date, not forever. The date on the page is part of the claim.

AI tools and verification

We use AI writing tools to help draft and edit. They are not a source, and they are not a fact-checker.

Nothing an AI tool asserts goes into an article on its own authority. Each claim is confirmed against a real source by a person, the same as any other claim. Our editorial policy sets out who is accountable.

What this policy does not promise

We do not guarantee that every statement on this website is correct at every moment. Nobody can honestly promise that about a subject where the rules change and official information is sometimes published late, or not at all.

What we do commit to is a method. Claims are sourced before they run, uncertainty is written down rather than hidden, and mistakes are corrected in the open once we know about them.

Reporting a factual error

If something here is wrong, tell us. Send the article, the specific claim you are disputing, and where the correct information can be checked. Use the contact page.

A reader report is assessed against the same standards we apply to our own work. Corrections are handled under the corrections policy.

Changes to this policy

We review this policy from time to time and update it when our practice changes. The date at the top of this page is when it last changed.