Recruiter: resume screening criteria template

Great recruiters demonstrate three things on their resumes: measurable hiring velocity (time-to-fill, requisitions closed per month), quality of hire indicators (retention rates, hiring manager satisfaction scores), and evidence of full-cycle ownership from intake to offer acceptance. Look for specific numbers like "filled 15 technical roles in Q3 with average 28-day time-to-fill" or "maintained 92% 90-day retention rate across 40 hires." The best candidates show they've worked multiple channels (sourcing, screening, coordinating, closing) rather than just one piece of the process.

The biggest mistake is hiring someone who only worked in high-volume agency recruiting and expecting them to excel at consultative corporate recruiting, or vice versa. These require completely different skill sets: agency recruiters move fast on transactional roles while corporate recruiters build relationships and sell candidates on employer brand. The second mistake is overvaluing years of experience while ignoring whether they actually closed requisitions themselves. Many "recruiters" were really sourcers or coordinators who never owned the full cycle from job intake meeting to signed offer.

One click loads this rubric and an editable job-post draft into SiftFirst: adjust them to your reality, add the resumes, and every applicant is scored with quoted evidence.

The criteria (6)

Measurable Hiring Results

weight 10/10

Evidence they actually filled positions with specific velocity and quality metrics, not just participated in hiring

Strong evidence: "Filled 23 roles in 2024 with average 32-day time-to-fill" or "Closed 8-12 requisitions per quarter with 88% 90-day retention rate" or "Reduced time-to-fill from 45 to 28 days while maintaining quality"

Red flag: Resume lists recruiting responsibilities but no numbers on how many roles filled, how quickly, or with what outcomes. Vague phrases like "supported the hiring process" or "assisted with recruitment" suggest they weren't the closer.

Full-Cycle Ownership

weight 9/10

They managed the entire process from intake meeting to offer acceptance, not just one piece like sourcing or scheduling

Strong evidence: "Managed full-cycle recruiting for 15 sales roles including intake, sourcing, screening, interview coordination, and offer negotiation" or resume shows they worked directly with hiring managers and closed offers, not just handed off candidates

Red flag: Experience is only in one slice like "sourced candidates" or "coordinated interviews" or they worked at a large company where recruiting was divided into specialized roles. They may not know how to own the whole process.

Active Sourcing Skills

weight 8/10

Ability to find and engage passive candidates through outreach, not just screen inbound applicants from job posts

Strong evidence: "Sourced 60% of hires through LinkedIn outreach and referral campaigns" or "Built talent pipeline of 200+ qualified candidates for hard-to-fill technical roles" or mentions Boolean search, LinkedIn Recruiter, or specific sourcing strategies

Red flag: No mention of sourcing methods or candidate outreach. Resume only talks about "reviewing applications" or "screening candidates" which suggests they only worked with people who applied, not proactive hunting.

Relevant Role Experience

weight 7/10

They've recruited for similar roles or industries, understanding what good looks like in your type of positions

Strong evidence: If hiring for technical roles, they show "recruited software engineers and product managers." If hiring for trades, they show "filled 30 electrician and HVAC tech positions." Industry and role-type alignment matters for screening quality.

Red flag: All their experience is in completely different role types (like if they only recruited executives but you need hourly workers, or only healthcare but you're in tech). Screening skills don't always transfer across vastly different roles.

ATS and Process Management

weight 6/10

Experience using applicant tracking systems and maintaining organized pipelines with multiple open requisitions simultaneously

Strong evidence: Names specific ATS platforms like Greenhouse, Lever, Workable, BambooHR, or mentions "managed pipeline of 40+ active candidates across 8 open roles" or "maintained detailed candidate tracking and interview feedback"

Red flag: No mention of ATS experience or managing multiple requisitions. If they only ever worked on 1-2 roles at a time or used spreadsheets instead of proper systems, they may struggle with your volume.

Closing and Candidate Experience

weight 5/10

Ability to sell candidates on opportunities, negotiate offers, and maintain positive candidate experience throughout the process

Strong evidence: "Achieved 85% offer acceptance rate" or "Maintained 4.8/5 candidate experience rating" or describes building relationships with candidates and guiding them through process, not just transactional screening

Red flag: Resume is all about screening out candidates with no mention of selling the opportunity, candidate communication, or offer acceptance rates. Good recruiters are marketers and relationship builders, not just gatekeepers.

How to use this template

Adjust the weights to your reality: every business weighs these differently.
Score every applicant against the same criteria, and write down the evidence (a quoted line from the resume) behind each score, not a gut feeling.
Rank by the weighted total and review the top 10-15 in full. Consistent criteria plus recorded evidence is also what makes your process defensible.

Or skip the spreadsheet: the button above loads this rubric into SiftFirst, which scores the whole pile for you with a quote behind every score. Free, no signup.

FAQ

Should I require previous experience in my specific industry?

No, unless you're in a highly specialized field like biotech or defense where understanding technical requirements is critical. Recruiting skills transfer well across industries. A recruiter who filled 12 sales roles per quarter in SaaS can absolutely recruit for your retail management positions. Focus on whether they've recruited similar role types (professional vs. hourly, technical vs. non-technical) rather than industry match. Someone with strong sourcing skills and full-cycle experience will learn your business faster than someone from your industry who only knows how to post jobs and wait.

This candidate has agency recruiting experience but I need corporate recruiting. Will they work out?

Maybe, but dig deeper in the interview. Agency recruiters excel at speed and volume but often lack the consultative relationship-building that corporate recruiting requires. Ask specifically: How many requisitions did they manage simultaneously? Did they work with hiring managers on intake and strategy, or just fill orders? What was their typical time-to-fill? If they managed 30+ reqs at once with 15-day fills, they may struggle with your slower, more strategic 45-day corporate process. But if they managed 10-15 reqs with real client relationships, the transition can work. The reverse is also true: corporate recruiters often can't handle agency pace.

Should I hire someone with HR generalist experience who did some recruiting, or a dedicated recruiter?

Hire the dedicated recruiter unless you specifically need someone to split time between recruiting and other HR work. HR generalists who "also did recruiting" typically handled low-volume hiring (maybe 1-2 roles per month) and often lack strong sourcing skills because they relied on inbound applicants. A dedicated recruiter who filled 8-12 roles per quarter has developed the sourcing, screening, and closing skills you need. If your hiring volume is only 3-4 positions per year, the generalist might work. But if you're hiring monthly, you need someone whose primary expertise is finding and closing candidates, not someone who recruits as a side task.

New to screening this role? Read the full Recruiter resume screening guide.