After checking an agent’s university relationship, the record should state exactly what was verified, where and when it was checked, and what remains unconfirmed. It should not turn a working relationship into a broader claim of formal authorisation.
What to record
- The agent and institution: Use the exact names shown in the institutional material being checked.
- The applicant’s country: The British Council advises finding out whether the chosen institution has agents in the applicant’s country that it regularly works with.
- The precise relationship: Record the wording used by the institution. If it says it “regularly works with” an agent, do not recast that as “exclusive partner” or “authorised representative” without separate, explicit evidence.
- The evidence checked: Keep the institutional page, document or written confirmation used to support the entry.
- The date of the check: This makes clear when the information was confirmed.
- Outstanding questions: Note any missing detail, such as whether the relationship covers the applicant’s country or whether the claimed status appears in direct institutional material.
Keep applicant notes separate from sponsor evidence
The UK Home Office states that all student sponsors using recruitment agents must retain evidence of how they manage those agents in line with the AQF. That statement is addressed to student sponsors, not individual students. An applicant’s notes about a university-agent relationship do not, by themselves, demonstrate how a sponsor manages agents.
What still needs confirmation
Neither cited source establishes the relationship of any particular agent and university. Before recording formal authorisation, exclusivity, current status or scope as fact, the reader should obtain direct confirmation from the relevant institutional material.
If that confirmation is unavailable, the claim should remain marked as unverified rather than being inferred from an agent’s own description or a university’s general reference to working with agents.