Useful first. Honest about freshness.
The tracker keeps all 329 research leads, including closed cycles, because a closed cycle is how you find out that a fellowship opens every February. Keeping them is only defensible if every record says plainly what has and has not been checked. This page explains the labels, the schedule behind them, and what they do not mean.
Two badges, two different questions
Every record on the tracker can carry two badges, and they answer different questions. Reading them as one thing is the most common way to misuse this site.
The status badge answers: what does this record claim about its own timing? It is derived from the record, not from a fresh check.
- Historical record — a past deadline or closed cycle, kept for planning. It is not open.
- Needs primary-source review — a useful lead whose present status has not been reconfirmed under the current standard.
- Rolling language · unverified — the record says the opportunity is rolling or continuous. That wording has not been reconfirmed.
- Future date in record · unverified — the record carries a date still ahead of us. The date has not been reconfirmed with the sponsor.
The source-check badge answers: has a person opened the sponsor's own page, and how far did they get?
- Current terms source-checked — the recorded terms were read against the sponsor's own page and matched, for a cycle that was open at the time of checking.
- Historical terms source-checked / Closed cycle source-checked — the same check, for a past cycle. The details are right; the cycle is over.
- Official destination checked — the link still reaches the official destination, and nothing more than that was confirmed. The eligibility, deadline, and stipend recorded here were not read against the page.
The apply link changes wording to match. A record whose terms have been checked offers “Open checked primary source”; one that has only had its destination confirmed says “Check official source”, because that is the work still left for you.
Where the corpus actually stands
Counted from the tracker's own records on 30 August 2026, across ten categories — co-op opportunities (46), remote and part-time supervised clerkships (55), writing competitions (58), fellowships (42), clerkships (26), bar prep (24), journals and publication (19), pro bono and volunteer (17), NUSL funding (17), and external scholarships (25):
- 144 of 329 records have had their recorded terms read against the sponsor's own page — 44 for a current cycle, 74 historical, 26 closed.
- 185 of 329 have had only the official destination confirmed. Treat every detail on those as unconfirmed.
- By status: 175 need primary-source review, 106 are historical records, 34 carry rolling language, 14 carry a future date.
The summary line at the top of the tracker and the counter beside the search box are both computed from the records themselves rather than typed in, so they cannot drift apart from the data or from each other. The figures in this section are transcribed by hand from the same records, so they can: on 30 August 2026 a record was added and they had to be recounted. If the numbers above differ from the tracker, trust the tracker — and please send a correction, because it means this paragraph has aged.
What counts as a source
Published factual claims have to trace to a primary source, in this order: an official Northeastern University or NUSL page, catalog, policy, office, or written communication for school information; the official employer, court, agency, nonprofit, fellowship, competition, or programme page for an opportunity; or the official application portal or current programme document.
Secondary reporting, aggregators, reposted listings, screenshots, newsletters, social posts, search snippets, and AI-generated summaries may identify a lead. None of them can substantiate it. A record is verified only when a reviewer has opened the authoritative source and confirmed the published statement against it — and never merely because it appeared in an earlier spreadsheet.
When sources conflict, the controlling official source is preferred, the conflict is preserved in the review notes, no definitive statement is published, and the reader is sent to the responsible office. There is a live example of this on the status and reliance notice, where two official Northeastern pages state the FlexJD relevant-work-experience requirement differently.
How often things are re-checked
| Record type | Review at least |
|---|---|
| Fixed-deadline opportunities, while open | Every 14 days |
| Rolling opportunities | Every 60 days |
| Institutional requirements and policies | Each academic term, and after any announced policy change |
| Contact information | Each academic term |
| Campaign resources and external links | Annually, and before republication |
Expired items are never left silently represented as open. They are marked historical and kept as searchable planning records with the original cycle and source boundary stated. Records are removed only when they are true duplicates, malformed imports, unauthorised personal information, or content with no legitimate editorial purpose.
What the automated checks do and do not establish
Three scheduled jobs run against this repository: a link check every Tuesday, an opportunity-freshness check every Monday, and a secrets scan over the commit history every Monday. When the weekly link check finds a dead external destination it opens a labelled issue, so a failure lands somewhere a person looks rather than turning a scheduled run quietly red.
What they establish is narrow: that a URL still resolves, and that a recorded date has not silently passed. A green run is not verification. It says nothing about whether the opportunity is still open, whether eligibility changed, whether this site has permission to republish the description, or whether the sponsor rewrote the page behind the same URL. Only a person opening the source can establish those, and that is the only thing this site calls verified.
Dates of record
Core Northeastern programme sources were reviewed 20 August 2026. The restored opportunity corpus had an earlier editorial pass on 22 July 2026 and is being re-checked record by record under the stricter primary-source standard described here. Historical changelog wording never overrides a record's current status label. Relative phrases such as “tomorrow” are replaced with dates, and sponsor pages are stored separately from application links so that one moving does not silently break the other.
The full governing rules, including the prohibited practices, are published in the repository as the source verification and freshness policy, and the controlling source map for institutional copy is the primary-source register.
Sending a correction
A correction is most useful when it names the record, quotes what is wrong, and links the source that shows what is right. Corrections that cite an authoritative source are applied and logged; corrections without one are treated as a lead to be checked, which is still worth sending.
Submit a correction Open the tracker
Record counts on this page read from the tracker's own data on 29 August 2026.