Compare up to eight candidates against target-role skills, competency weights, reference checks, custom confirmed skills, salary, video, and qualification gaps.
Experience benchmark: 1 year(s) · confirm all required skills below
Meeting the configured requirements needs at least 70/100, all required skills, the experience benchmark, verified references, and each minimum competency threshold.
Explainable results
Salary and video are displayed for context only and never affect the score.
Required-skill coverage 0%
Required-skill coverage 0%
The report evaluates only the configured job-related requirements; it does not establish legal qualification or make the final hiring decision. Verify documents, references, experience, consent, contract terms, and official Musaned information.
The scorecard organizes candidate evidence against the household’s chosen job-related criteria. It is helpful when several interviews produce notes that are difficult to compare from memory. A total score depends on the criteria and weights selected, so it is not an independent statement of a person’s suitability. Start with the actual duties and record what each candidate demonstrated or explained for those duties.
Begin by deciding which question you want the tool to answer before changing the fields. Gather information from the source relevant to your situation and distinguish a confirmed value from an initial estimate. Read each field label, unit and option, then enter the information in the order shown by the form. If a missing-value or invalid-format message appears, correct that input rather than interpreting an unfinished result. Do not copy the numbers in a general example as if they were your actual records. This short preparation makes the process repeatable and helps explain why two results differ when a date, amount or option changes. Before entering a value, identify the person, record or time period it belongs to so information from different cases is not combined accidentally. When working with several records, finish checking one before moving to the next. Leave an optional field empty when its value is unknown instead of supplying a plausible number. If your source is a message or image, check its original wording, decimal separators, dates and units, particularly when switching languages. Keep a separate note of the source and the date you gathered the information when useful. Review every result label before sharing the output, and confirm that changing the page language has not caused you to misunderstand an entered value. Recheck names, amounts and units against the original record before keeping a final copy.
Add candidates, select criteria and set weights before entering interview scores. Apply the same core framework to everyone being compared. Use evidence notes for unclear or missing information and review the total weight. A blank score may mean an item was not discussed, not that the candidate cannot perform it. Keep the evaluation focused on relevant experience, communication and duties rather than unsupported personal assumptions.
If meal preparation is an important duty, give that criterion an appropriate weight and ask each candidate comparable questions about it. Record the examples given, then score the evidence using the same scale. If one interview did not cover the topic, arrange a follow-up before interpreting the comparison. Changing weights after seeing a preferred result can make the shortlist less consistent.
Review evidence, missing entries and weights alongside the score. Confirm relevant information with the candidate and recruitment coordinator before making a decision. Use the scorecard to explain a shortlist and identify further questions, not as an automatic selection rule. The interview builder can provide a consistent starting set of questions for the next comparison.
When comparing scenarios, change one input at a time and keep a note of the reason. Use the same units and time period so the difference is meaningful. Record the original inputs with the result, not only the final number, because another reader may not know which options were selected. If a source changes or a newer document becomes available, repeat the calculation or review the plan instead of relying on an old screenshot. Use the output to organize your next question or action, then confirm the relevant source when dealing with an invoice, official appointment or agreement that needs approval from the people involved.
Agree the job-related criteria before comparing scores. If cooking is central to the role, give each candidate the same opportunity to explain a relevant task and record the evidence. An unanswered question should be marked for follow-up rather than interpreted automatically as inability. Keep observations separate from assumptions. A total can help organize the discussion, but the underlying examples explain whether the criteria were assessed consistently. Avoid changing weights only after seeing one candidate’s score, because that makes the comparison difficult to interpret.
Use a simple sensitivity check when two totals are close. Review which criterion creates the difference and whether its weight reflects the household’s actual need. If the evidence for that criterion is incomplete, prepare the same follow-up question for the relevant candidates rather than inventing a score. Record the reason for any correction and keep the criteria consistent. The scorecard supports a documented comparison; it does not verify a reference or decide suitability automatically. Final discussion should return to the agreed duties, demonstrated skills and clarified information.
The score weights required-skill coverage, role skills, interview, safety, reliability, communication, working language, and experience. Salary and video are displayed separately and never affect the score.
No. It provides a consistent comparison aid. The family should verify documents, references, consent, contract terms, and official Musaned information before deciding.