Most shortlists are built on institutional reputation and a rough sense of cost. Both matter. Neither is sufficient, and a decision made on those two alone is how capable students end up in mismatched programmes in cities they cannot afford.
These are the criteria we actually score a shortlist against.
One to four: the academic fit
First, curriculum content, module by module, against what you actually want to learn. Second, the department rather than the university, because a mid-ranked institution's strong department frequently outperforms a famous institution's neglected one. Third, entry requirements against your real record, so every option is one you can secure. Fourth, whether the qualification is recognised where you intend to work afterwards.
That fourth question is the one most often skipped and the most expensive to get wrong.
Five to seven: the money
Fifth, total cost of the first year including tuition, living, proof-of-funds requirement, insurance, and travel, in one number. Sixth, funding available at that specific institution, because scholarships are attached to institutions and therefore belong in the shortlist decision. Seventh, cost of living in that specific city rather than that country.
A cheaper university in an expensive city is frequently the more expensive option.
Eight to ten: the life and what follows
Eighth, post-study work rights attached to that qualification level in that country, since these differ by level and location and have changed repeatedly. Ninth, housing availability, because a guaranteed room in the first year is worth real money and real peace of mind. Tenth, the practical questions: climate, community, dietary and prayer facilities, distance, and whether you can realistically visit home.
The tenth set is the one families dismiss as soft and students feel most acutely in the first winter.
How to use them
Score each option against all ten rather than ranking on one. The exercise usually reorders a shortlist substantially, and it produces something more useful than a preference: a written reason for every institution on the list and every one you eliminated.
If a consultancy cannot give you that written reasoning for each entry, the list was not built for you.