AI screening in Greenhouse: a Screened workflow

The report has arrived in Greenhouse. The recruiter thinks the manager is reviewing it. The manager thinks the coordinator is booking an interview. The candidate is still waiting.

Decide who reviews the report, who approves the next step and who sends the invitation. A report arriving does not mean any of those tasks is done.

Here is how to connect those steps when using Screened with Greenhouse. Check where reports appear, what managers can see and who handles a result that is missing, wrong or attached to the wrong job.

How do you test AI screening in Greenhouse safely?

Use a test CV and contact details your team controls. Ask the administrator to help keep this first assessment separate from live hiring:

Please help me test one CV review in Greenhouse without automatically moving or contacting the candidate.

I need to see where the report appears, who can read it and how we approve an interview afterwards. Let's check any settings shared with live jobs before changing them.

Our ATS configuration guide separates importing candidates, returning assessments, changing stages and sending invitations (Screened sign-in required).

Use this short work-history passage in a sample support CV:

I investigated billing complaints by comparing the customer’s account with invoice and payment records. I sent the findings to my supervisor, who approved refunds. I explained the outcome to the customer. I did not approve refunds myself.

The assessment should credit the applicant with the investigation and customer update, not the supervisor’s approval. Keep that expected answer in your test log rather than adding it to the application the tool reads.

Choose the intake stage: the Greenhouse stage from which applications enter Screened. Inspect the applications already there before adding the job. A stage used for selected candidates and the main application stage may contain very different groups.

Screened's ATS settings can apply across connected jobs in the workspace. Ask the administrator which jobs a change will affect. The selected intake stage and any destination stage must exist on those Greenhouse jobs. Calling one vacancy “Test” does not make a shared setting affect only that vacancy.

For the first test, leave supported Move to fields blank and check interview automation separately. Returning a report does not require a stage move. The expected outcome is one assessment for the intended job, with no candidate message and no application moved.

Does a screening result mean the candidate is approved for interview?

No. The report supplies an assessment; your team's existing approval process determines the next action. Track the three events separately:

Keep the approval process you already use. If the recruiter can approve interviews, they do not need a new manager sign-off just because the assessment came from Screened.

Record any approval still needed and who will act once it arrives. “Writing exercise approved; Lee has agreed to send the invitation by Thursday” is clear. A request sent to Lee still needs confirmation that they will do it.

Use one system for that invitation and check its message history. Test sending separately from the report-only test, using your own inbox. A stage labelled “Interview” does not prove that the candidate was contacted.

Where do Screened's results appear in Greenhouse?

Screened can return tags, notes and fields. AI Screened CV Fit (%) contains the score; AI Screened CV Results contains the assessment and its explanation. When screening notes are enabled, the assessment also appears in the Activity feed. Our Greenhouse results guide shows where to find them (Screened sign-in required).

Check how the assessment note is labelled. An integration account's name should not make an automated report look like a colleague's completed review.

Ask what to do if the score appears but the written explanation is missing. Keep that application awaiting review until you can read the explanation or arrange another review. A number appearing in a field does not mean someone has checked the CV.

Check whether interviewers can see earlier ratings

Greenhouse's scorecard visibility controls govern access to scorecards. Do not assume they also hide an AI recommendation posted as a candidate note, tag or custom field.

Decide what the interviewer needs before changing access. For the support role, that might be the applicant's account of a billing complaint and the question still open, not the earlier reviewer's overall rating.

A useful brief could say:

The applicant describes investigating billing complaints and keeping customers informed. Their supervisor approved refunds. Ask about one complaint: what did they find, and what did they ask their supervisor to do?

That gives the interviewer a question to explore. “Excellent judgement; likely a hire” gives them your conclusion before they have assessed the answer.

Ask the interviewer to use their normal account. Check the brief, activity notes, profile fields and linked report. A rating left out of the brief may still be the first thing the report displays.

Use the permissions and sharing methods your organisation approves. An unrestricted copy of candidate information is not a safe workaround.

If the interviewer can still see the earlier rating, make that clear to the hiring team. Do not describe their later assessment as independent of an opinion they already read.

What happens when a candidate applies for two jobs?

One candidate can have several applications in Greenhouse. Their profile is shared across those applications.

Screened keeps an assessment for each job. But the Greenhouse fields and tags belong to the shared candidate profile. A result for another job can replace the value you see there.

Give the same test candidate a second application, for a team-lead role requiring management experience the CV does not describe. Screen the support application first and save its result. Then screen the team-lead application.

Return to the support job and check both the application and the saved review list. Does the report still describe support? Does the application still appear in the list?

The second score can cause two different problems: a reviewer reads the wrong assessment, or the application disappears from a filtered list before anyone gets that far.

Open the assessment under the support job in Screened to read the right result. Then check the Greenhouse review list separately. Until you have tested its score filter, use the job's applications and your review notes to find people still waiting. Otherwise, a candidate could disappear from the list before anyone opens their report.

Save your decision against the right application and name the job it concerns. This manual approach does not give every application its own new score field. Count any extra steps before deciding whether the setup works for your team.

Test rules that reject applications before screening

A report cannot help someone rejected before it runs. Review Job Setup → Job Post → Manage Rules with your administrator.

For a developer vacancy accepting either Python or Ruby, an applicant who knows only Python should meet that condition. But an old rule rejecting “no Ruby” can conflict with a rule advancing “yes Python.” Greenhouse's rule guide says Auto-Reject takes precedence, so the intended alternative can be lost.

Test Python only, Ruby only, both and neither. Under this requirement, the first three satisfy the language question; an explicit answer of neither does not. Test an unanswered question separately where the form allows it.

Correct the rule, repeat all four cases and review earlier applications it affected. Passing this test means the rule accepts the permitted language answers; it does not verify coding ability or the other job requirements.

Two more rule details worth testing

Accepted answers within one multi-select question use OR. Separate questions can use AND. Deleting one question from a two-question AND rule leaves the other condition active.

Answers collected through a job post request email do not trigger Auto-Advance or Auto-Reject, although Auto-Tag applies. Test the normal application route; the email route alone won't exercise those rejection rules.

Correct the report and the places that copied it

Use the same support CV for a correction test. Ask the supplier how to handle a report that says the applicant approved refunds, although the CV gives that authority to the supervisor. Follow the supported correction or support process and update the interview brief.

Ask the manager to open the application after the correction and show which sentence describes refund approval. If they find an old report or copied note, correct that too. The next interview shouldn't begin with the same misunderstanding.

Then inspect filters and automatic actions using the old score. Updating a note does not necessarily update the values those rules read.

Work out why the result is wrong before running it again. A misread passage needs a correction to the assessment, not to the candidate’s CV. An unclear requirement needs the manager’s decision; missing experience details may need a question to the candidate. Fix the cause before repeating the assessment.

Record the cause and identify other affected applications. Then check what the old result triggered: a stage move, a queued message or an email already delivered.

The candidate may need an explanation even after the report is fixed. Assign that follow-up alongside the technical repair; correcting the text cannot recall a rejection email.

Check whether the integration reduces work after the demo

Ask a colleague who did not install the connection to find the right report, explain the hiring decision and identify any message still to send. Then try an incomplete report and a corrected one. Note where they need help.

Check every test application before adding more jobs. Has its report arrived, is it still processing, or does a problem need fixing? Confirm that no application moved unexpectedly and no unwanted message is waiting to be sent.

In the approved live trial, follow the work into the manager's interview. Did the report remove repeated background questions, reveal a useful follow-up or add reading without changing the conversation? Count preparation, corrections and candidate support as well as review time.

Start with the vacancy you tested. Before adding another, check who will review it, which list they will use and what access the manager needs. Your colleagues should be able to complete those tasks without the person who installed the connection guiding every click.

The useful result is a correct assessment that leads to a clear decision and candidate update. A report successfully posted to Greenhouse is one step towards that result, not the whole process.