If we can't verify it, we don't publish it.

Every state exam fact we publish, which NEC edition the exam references, who administers it, how many questions, how much time, what score passes, whether the code book is allowed in the room, is verified against a primary source: the state licensing board's own pages or the exam vendor's official candidate bulletin. Third-party trackers and other prep sites are never treated as sources, because that is how wrong facts spread. Each verified fact carries an internal verification date, and facts with known expiry (a state adopting a new NEC edition on a set date) sit in a re-verification queue.

When a primary source does not state a fact, we leave the gap visible rather than fill it. Two live examples: Wisconsin does not publish the question count for its master electrician exam, so we do not offer a Wisconsin master exam simulation even though we verified its time limit, pass mark, and open-book policy from the state's own documents. Utah's master exam is a law-and-rules exam, roughly half state statute and safety material, so we do not simulate it with NEC questions, which would misrepresent what you would face.

Every practice question carries its exact NEC reference, down to the table or subsection, and explanations for why each wrong answer is wrong. That is not just pedagogy, it is accountability: if you think an answer is wrong, you can open the code book and check us. When a user flags a question, it is reviewed against the cited article, and corrections ship with the question, not quietly.

We ask every user with an exam date how their real exam went and publish the counts, passes and fails alike, on our verified results page. We never invent testimonials, and we will not publish a pass rate until at least 30 outcomes come from users who answered 200 or more practice questions before their exam, so the number means what it appears to mean.