The Strictness Index of Citizenship Programme Checks

Here is how the checks work in the active programmes: who does the checking, what exactly they look at, where refusals are more frequent and what an applicant can close in advance.

What the comparison shows

• The check is carried out by a different body from the one that decides — in every programme they are separate.
• The cost of the check varies more than twofold: from USD 5,000 to USD 10,000 for the principal applicant.
• An interview is mandatory in a minority of programmes; in the rest it is held selectively.
• The main reason for rejection is the same everywhere: an unevidenced origin of funds.
• A refusal is recorded and asked about on the next programme's application form.

What the check costs in each programme

The due diligence fee is a mandatory state payment. It is non-refundable: it is paid on filing and not returned whatever the decision. It is the first thing an applicant loses if rejected.

The amounts are from the relevant bodies' published tariffs as at 29 August 2026. Note the difference in approach: São Tomé charges per application regardless of the number of people, while the others charge for each person checked. For a family of four that creates a gap of tens of thousands of dollars.

Who exactly checks the applicant

The structure is the same in every programme and is more sensible than people assume. The check is run by a separate body — a financial intelligence unit or an authorised service — while the decision is taken by the citizenship commission. The separation is deliberate: whoever grants the status should not check the applicant themselves.

The practical consequence: a weak case stalls at the second and third stages, before the commission decides. Such cases often do not appear in the official refusal statistics, so real strictness is higher than the published figures show. What that looks like over time is analysed in refusals of Vanuatu citizenship.

What is examined in the source of funds

The requirement is the same in every programme, but the emphasis shifts for different categories of applicant.

The general rule: what is checked is not the existence of the sum but the path by which it appeared. A break in the chain at any point produces a request, and an unanswered request produces a rejection.

What an additional request looks like

Between "approved" and "refused" there is an intermediate state that is almost never written about: the additional request. Formally it is not a refusal, but most rejections and almost all delays grow out of it.

The request goes to the agent, the applicant has limited time to reply, and while the reply is being prepared the case stands still. Typical wording looks like this.

None of the typical requests concerns the applicant as a person — they are all about documents. Hence the practical conclusion: a fully assembled case goes through without requests, while a partly assembled one receives them in batches.

The rule for replying is simple: reply with a document, not an explanatory note; close the whole episode, not only the literal question; and keep within the time allowed.

How long the check itself takes

The check is the least predictable part of the process. The regulations set the upper limit, and the actual time depends on how completely the case has been assembled.

The durations are based on actual Bridges Global cases and are our estimate, not the official regulations. The overall comparison by programme is in the speed index.

Where refusals are more frequent

Fact: according to the official statistics of the Vanuatu Citizenship Commission, the refusal rate rose from 0.37 per cent in 2021 to almost two per cent in 2023. There are no comparable public statistics for the Caribbean programmes.

Bridges Global estimate: the check is strictest where its fee is higher and the interview is mandatory. In our practice that means Saint Kitts and Nevis, Dominica and Saint Lucia. Softer are the programmes with a single fee per application and no mandatory interview.

An important caveat: strictness does not mean inaccessibility. It means the case must be assembled completely before filing, not completed in response to requests.

What an applicant can close in advance

• The money chain. Contracts, statements and tax confirmations for the whole path of the funds, not a final certificate.
• Gaps in employment. Any break is explained with a document, not orally.
• The spelling of the name. Different transliterations in the passport, the certificate and bank documents are reconciled in advance.
• Previous refusals. If there was a refusal, it is disclosed at once: concealment turns a solvable situation into an unsolvable one.
• Family composition. Everyone you plan to include goes into the first application.

In our practice a correctly assembled case goes through without a single additional request. Each request adds two weeks to a month and a half to the timeline.

Check the calculation for your own family. For the active programmes we have open full-cost calculators: the main investment, state fees, due diligence and mandatory costs are calculated for your composition. Free and without registration.

Vanuatu →São Tomé and Príncipe →Nauru →Dominica →Grenada →Antigua and Barbuda →Saint Lucia →Saint Kitts and Nevis →

What to do if you are refused

A refusal does not always close the road, but what to do next depends on the ground.

• Incomplete documents. The most common and most solvable case: the case is rebuilt and filed again.
• Questions about the source of funds. Solvable if the origin of the money can in principle be evidenced with documents. The full chain is needed, not another certificate.
• A criminal record. Depends on the offence, how long ago it was and whether it is spent. Such situations are analysed in the article on citizenship with a criminal record.
• Sanctions restrictions. There are no prospects, and it is better to hear that before paying than after.

What not to do: apply straight away to another programme without mentioning the previous refusal. The application form will ask about it, and concealment once discovered closes the road everywhere.

What to do with this

Choosing a programme for the softness of its checks is a poor strategy. First, the difference is smaller than it seems: the requirement to evidence the origin of funds is the same everywhere. Second, a document's reputation is directly linked to the strictness of the programme, and a passport with a weak check raises questions wherever it is used.

The sensible order is the reverse: first assemble the case so that it would pass in the strictest programme of the segment, then choose by timeline and budget. That way the choice stays with you, not with the reviewer.