calhire
Hire talent
Every applicant arrives assessed and AI-interviewed.See how

Capability

For recruitment agencies

An agency sells judgement about people. Verified scores make that judgement checkable, which is uncomfortable for some agencies and a significant advantage for the good ones.

CalHire’s agency workspace lets a recruitment agency build a verified talent pool once and submit talent to multiple client companies under its own brand. Each client gets a separate workspace with its own data boundary, talent stays anonymous until a consented reveal, and placements are tracked in a commission ledger. The talent’s verified skills profile is portable across the agency’s clients without being re-tested for each.

Last reviewed

The short version

  • One verified pool, many clients. A talent assessed once can be submitted to several roles without retesting.
  • Client workspaces are isolated from each other, so one client cannot see another’s pipeline or your pool.
  • Submissions stay anonymous until reveal, which protects both the talent and your relationship with them.
  • Placement commissions are tracked in a ledger rather than reconciled from email.

What changes when the score is verifiable

An agency’s core product has always been a claim: this person is worth your time. Clients cannot check it cheaply, so they price in the risk, negotiate the fee, and quietly discount everything an agency tells them. That dynamic is bad for agencies who are actually good at this.

A verified skills profile changes the conversation. The claim comes with evidence attached that the client can read directly, on the same scale for all talent, from any source. What the agency contributes is what it should have been selling all along: knowing which talent suits which team, which role is actually open versus theoretically open, and which client will move fast enough to keep good talent engaged.

It is worth saying plainly that this is not comfortable for everyone. An agency whose margin depends on the client’s inability to evaluate submissions will find verified scoring unhelpful. An agency whose margin depends on judgement and speed gets a much better argument for its fee.

How the workspace is built

  • A pool you own

    Talent you have sourced and assessed, with their verified scores and expiry dates. Rediscovery surfaces people already in the pool who match a new role.

  • Separate client workspaces

    Each client is its own boundary. One client cannot see another’s roles, pipeline or feedback, and neither can see your pool except through what you submit.

  • Anonymous submissions

    Talent goes to a client anonymously and is revealed only on consent, to that client. This is also the cleanest available answer to talent poaching.

  • Your brand

    White-label surfaces on your domain. Talent experiences your agency rather than a platform you happen to use.

  • A commission ledger

    Placements and the fees attached to them, recorded as they happen. What you invoice reconciles against a record rather than against memory.

  • Scores that expire

    The validity window applies here too. A pool with dated scores is a pool a client can trust; a pool of two-year-old results is a spreadsheet.

A placement, end to end

  1. 1

    You source and assess once

    The talent takes the vetted assessment and joins your pool with a verified profile. This is the only test they sit, however many of your clients they are eventually submitted to.

  2. 2

    A client opens a role

    In their own workspace, with their own weights and requirements. You see the role; other clients do not.

  3. 3

    You submit anonymously

    The client evaluates a verified, anonymous talent against their own criteria. Your judgement about fit travels with the submission; the talent’s identity does not.

  4. 4

    Reveal, then placement

    The client requests identity at an allowed stage and the talent consents. The placement and its commission are recorded in the ledger.

What this does not do

It does not stop a client hiring talent outside the platform after a reveal. No software prevents that. What the ledger provides is a dated, mutual record of who was submitted, when, and by whom, which is the evidence a fee dispute actually turns on.

It does not replace your relationships. Sourcing, knowing which client is serious, and managing a talent through a slow process are the work. This makes the evidence portable and the admin lighter.

A shared pool is not shared talent. Each submission requires the talent’s participation, and each reveal requires their consent for that specific client. An agency wanting to circulate CVs to twenty companies without asking should not use this.

Very small or highly specialised pools weaken anonymity. In a market with a handful of qualified people, a client may recognise a talent from their skill profile alone. Anonymity is a probabilistic protection and it thins as the pool does.

Questions people actually ask

Can one client see talent we submitted to another?
No. Client workspaces are isolated, and your pool is not visible to any client. A client sees only what you submit to their roles.
Does a talent retake the vetted assessment for each client?
No. The verified profile is the talent’s and travels with them while the result is valid. A client-specific test can be added on top where a role calls for one.
How are commissions calculated?
Placements are recorded against the client and role, with the fee terms you have agreed, in a ledger you can export. It is a record of what happened rather than a billing system that decides what should have.
Can we use our own branding with talent?
Yes. White-label surfaces and custom domains mean the talent’s experience is your agency’s throughout.
What stops a client from poaching talent before a fee is due?
The talent is anonymous until a reveal that the client requested and the talent consented to, and every step of that is logged with timestamps. Contracts still do the enforcing; the platform makes the facts hard to dispute.
Can we bring an existing talent database?
You can invite talent in, but they need a vetted assessment before their profile carries a verified score. An imported record without one is a contact, not a submission.

Related

Where this connects to the rest of the platform.

  • Vetted assessment

    One vetted assessment produces a skills profile a company can check, instead of a resume they have to take on trust.

  • Identity broker and staged reveal

    CalHire holds the talent’s identity. A company requests it, the talent consents or declines, and consent releases it to that one company with an immutable record.

  • ATS integration, with API access coming soon

    Two-way connectors for Greenhouse, Lever, SAP SuccessFactors, Zoho Recruit and Workable; Workday receives hires. API access is coming soon. Identity syncs only after a reveal.

Read the reasoning

The evidence and the argument behind what is on this page.

Hiring Playbook8 min read

What skills-based hiring actually is (and what it is not)

Skills-based hiring decides on demonstrated ability, not proxies like degrees or job titles. What it means in practice and where it fails.

Read
Candidate Guide8 min read

Does an ATS really reject your résumé? What actually happens

The "75% of résumés are rejected by robots" claim has no verifiable source. What an ATS actually does, where filtering happens, and what to do.

Read
Hiring Playbook8 min read

Time-to-hire is a throughput metric. Quality-of-hire is the one that matters

Speed metrics are easy to collect and easy to game. How to measure whether your hiring decisions were any good, and which metrics to pair with which.

Read

Browse all topics on the blog

See a verified pipeline for one of your roles

Post a role free and review anonymous, skill-ranked talent. No card, no sales call to get started.

Start hiring freeTalk to the team