Our Methodology

1. How We Source Promises

Every promise tracked on ManifestoWatch is drawn directly from official election manifesto documents published by political parties. We do not rely on press conferences, campaign speeches, social media posts, or third-party summaries. Our sole primary sources are:

Manifesto PDFs — the official document released by the party before an election, usually available on the party’s website or submitted to the Election Commission of India.
Official party policy documents — supplementary policy booklets released alongside the manifesto that elaborate on specific commitments.

Each promise entry on our platform links back to the exact page number in the source manifesto so that anyone can independently verify the original commitment. Where a manifesto is available in multiple languages, we use the official English-language version as the canonical reference and note any discrepancies.

2. How We Verify Promise Status

Each promise is assigned one of five statuses based on verifiable evidence from government records, credible news sources, court documents, and independent research. We update statuses as new evidence emerges.

Fulfilled

The promise has been substantively delivered. There is clear evidence of government action: a policy has been implemented, a scheme has been launched and is operational, legislation has been enacted, or measurable targets have been met.

Example: “Launch Ayushman Bharat for 50 crore citizens” — scheme launched, enrolment figures confirmed by the National Health Authority.

Partially Done

Meaningful work has started but the promise is not fully delivered. Legislation may have been passed but not implemented, a scheme may be operational but reaching far fewer beneficiaries than promised, or progress has stalled short of the stated target.

Example: “Build 2 crore houses under PMAY” — 1.2 crore houses completed, falling short of the 2 crore target.

Broken

The promise has been explicitly reversed, the relevant scheme or policy has been cancelled, or the government’s term has ended with no meaningful action taken towards fulfilment. A promise is also marked broken if the government has taken action that directly contradicts the commitment.

Example: “Repeal farm laws within 10 days” — government defends and retains the laws through the full term.

Pending

The government’s term is still active and there is no evidence of action — positive or negative — on this promise. It has neither been started nor contradicted. We do not mark a promise as broken while the term is ongoing unless there is explicit reversal.

Example: “Enact Uniform Civil Code” — no bill introduced as of the current date, term still in progress.

Disputed

Independent, credible sources disagree on the degree of fulfilment. This may occur when government data conflicts with independent assessments, when the definition of “delivered” is contested, or when multiple fact-checking organisations reach different conclusions.

Example: “Double farmer income by 2022” — government claims based on gross income, independent economists dispute the methodology and argue real income has not doubled.

3. Confidence Levels

Every status assessment carries a confidence level that reflects the strength and consistency of the underlying evidence.

High

Multiple independent, authoritative sources corroborate the assessment. Government data, CAG reports, court records, or widely-reported news converge on the same conclusion. Our analysts have high certainty in the status assigned.

Medium

Evidence supports the assessment but is limited in scope or comes from fewer sources. There may be partial data, or implementation is too recent for comprehensive independent verification. The status is our best current judgement and may be revised as more evidence surfaces.

Low

Limited or conflicting evidence makes a definitive assessment difficult. The status reflects the best available information but carries significant uncertainty. We actively seek additional sources and encourage readers to submit evidence.

4. Editorial Independence

ManifestoWatch is editorially independent. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or funded by any political party, candidate, government body, or politically-aligned organisation. Our work is guided by the following principles:

No party affiliation — our analysts and editors do not hold membership in any political party, nor do they engage in campaign activities.
No political funding — we do not accept donations, sponsorships, or grants from political parties, their affiliates, or elected representatives.
Equal treatment — every party’s promises are assessed using the same criteria and evidence standards. No party receives preferential or harsher treatment.
Transparent sourcing — every status assessment links to the evidence on which it is based, so readers can independently evaluate our conclusions.

5. Submitting Evidence

We actively encourage citizens, journalists, researchers, and civil society organisations to submit evidence on any tracked promise. Crowd-sourced evidence strengthens our assessments and helps us catch updates we may have missed.

What we accept: news articles from credible publications, government gazettes and orders, RTI responses, court judgements, CAG and parliamentary committee reports, and data from recognised statistical agencies.

What we do not accept: social media posts, anonymous claims, opinion pieces without factual backing, or party press releases as sole evidence.

Review process: every submission is reviewed by at least one analyst. We verify the source, cross-reference it with existing evidence, and update the promise status and confidence level if warranted. Submitters are not identified publicly unless they request attribution.

6. Corrections & Contact

We take accuracy seriously. If you believe a promise status is incorrect, a source has been mischaracterised, or any information on this platform contains an error, please write to us with the specific promise, the correction you propose, and the supporting evidence.