The official programme page and its FAQ, read directly and dated. Second-hand summaries age quickly and cannot be relied on for a decision involving money.
Treat only the official material as authority
This framework is recent, which has two consequences. Accurate information is available at source, and inaccurate information circulates faster than corrections. The disciplined approach is to read the official page and FAQ in full rather than skimming for a figure, to note the date of reading, and to treat anything the official material does not address as genuinely unresolved. That applies to eligibility conditions, to the treatment of family members, and to what any payment secures or does not secure. Where a decision turns on a point the official material leaves open, obtain advice and re-check the source before acting, because a commitment made on an assumption borrowed from another category is difficult to unwind afterwards.
Begin with the official description and identify what, if anything, it presently authorizes. A credible review produces a source list, a payment-path checklist, and a separate analysis of any underlying immigration classification. The record that settles a claimed government program is the official government publication, not an intermediary’s slide deck. Hypothetical example: a forensic-animator receives a “priority placement” offer; checking the named official payee and official terms determines whether the proposal has any stated governmental basis.
Treat any claim of eligibility as unproven until the official source identifies both the governing process and the applicant-specific conditions that must be satisfied.