Pathway Navigator

• Answers a different question from Merito Score: not "how ready is my evidence for one category," but "which of EB-1A, O-1A, and EB-2 NIW actually fits my situation, and why."
• Walks you through a short set of questions (no category picked upfront) and returns a fit level for all three paths side by side — each with its own stated reasons and a typical timeline.
• Where your answers support it, adds staged-strategy suggestions — for example, pursuing one path first while building toward another.

This is a rule-based comparative read against each category's real requirements, run against your own answers — never a probability, never an approval prediction. The tool's own copy is explicit about that, and every result carries the standard compliance disclaimer.

Run Pathway Navigator before you commit to a category — most petitioners use it before Merito Score, since it helps decide which category's detailed questions are even worth answering. It sits outside the tracked, in-app Case Journey (like Merito Score, it's a free standalone check, not a journey stage) — so there's no "before" step inside a case; it's the entry point for someone who hasn't opened a case yet.

After you get a result, the tool's own results page points you to Citation Quick-Check next (/tools/citations) to check your academic citation profile. Once you've settled on a category, the natural next step for a deeper read within it is Merito Score.

• No account, no upload, no case required. Have a rough sense of your field, achievements, and evidence gathered so far — that's all the questions ask about.
• Takes about 3–5 minutes to answer all 9 questions.
• Cost: free. No tool_costs row exists for this tool — running the comparison costs nothing, ever, on any plan.

• Fit level — Strong fit, Possible fit, or Unlikely fit, shown separately for EB-1A, O-1A, and EB-2 NIW, each with its own color indicator. These are independent reads, not a forced ranking — more than one category can genuinely show "Strong fit" at once.
• Why — the specific reasons behind that category's fit level, drawn from your own answers, not a generic description of the category.
• Typical timeline — a general timeline note for that specific category.
• Worth considering — staged-strategy suggestions, shown only when your specific answer pattern actually triggers one (for example, a near-term category as a bridge while building toward a longer-term one).

Warning: None of these fields are a probability or an approval prediction. The disclaimer band on the results page says so directly — treat the fit level as "how your record compares against real requirements," not "your odds."

• Pathway Navigator itself has no paid tier — the full three-way comparison, reasons, timelines, and staged strategies are free forever behind a 10-second free account, on any plan.
• What a free account does not include is turning the comparison into a tracked case: the results page's own upsell is "turn this into a real case with a full evidence file" and "your Merito Score tracked over time" — both live inside a Merito case, which is where the product's paid plan applies.
• If you go on to start the 7-day Pro trial for the rest of the product, note that Stripe's checkout collects a card upfront for that trial (it is not a no-card trial); cancelling anytime afterward is self-serve through the billing portal. None of this is required just to run Pathway Navigator.
• Start your free trial from /dashboard/billing only once you're ready to build an actual case — Pathway Navigator itself never asks for it.

• Expecting a category-selection step first. There isn't one — comparing all three at once is the entire point, and picking a category upfront isn't part of the flow.
• Treating the three fit levels as mutually exclusive. A petitioner can show "Strong fit" on more than one path — that's exactly when the staged-strategy suggestions matter most.
• Skipping the timeline note. It's easy to overlook next to the more prominent fit-level label, but timeline is often the deciding practical factor once evidentiary fit looks comparable across paths.
• Answering the most flattering version of an ambiguous situation instead of the most likely real one — the same honesty principle Merito Score runs on.