§ The result
4 points separate Checkr and Test Partnership.
Checkr (Screening) edges Test Partnership (Assessment) by 4 points under rubric v1.0, 54 to 50. The 7 criteria split 5 to 2 in favour of Checkr: Checkr is ahead on Article 11 Technical Documentation and Test Partnership on Bias Audit Transparency. Post-Market Monitoring is the widest raw gap (Checkr 50, Test Partnership 33) but not the heaviest weighted swing, which is Article 11 Technical Documentation at 20% (Checkr 70, Test Partnership 57), 38% of the weighted advantage Checkr builds across the 5 criteria it leads.
Vendor profile
Checkr
Checkr is an FCRA-regulated background screening platform that uses machine learning to parse, classify and standardize criminal, employment, education and motor-vehicle records, and to route them through customer-configured adjudication rulesets that flag candidates as eligible, review or escalated for employment decisions.
Vendor profile
Test Partnership
Test Partnership publishes computer-adaptive aptitude tests, the TPAQ personality questionnaire and MindmetriQ game-based cognitive assessments. Employers review, rank and export the resulting norm-referenced percentile and sten scores in its dashboard, through its API or in integrated ATSs.
§ The record
Checkr is filed under Screening AI, Test Partnership under Assessment AI. They record no secondary category in common.
Both are in scope of EU AI Act, NYC LL 144, Colorado AI Act and Illinois HB 3773. Only Test Partnership is in scope of Mobley v. Workday.
| Record | Checkr | Test Partnership |
|---|---|---|
| Price tier | Mid | Mid |
| Headquarters | US | GB |
| Founded | 2014 | 2012 |
§ What decides it
The criteria that move the gap, heaviest swing first.
20% weight · 27% of the movement so far
Article 11 Technical Documentation
Checkr 70 · Test Partnership 57
2.6 weighted points to Checkr
18% weight · 51% of the movement so far
Bias Audit Transparency
Checkr 35 · Test Partnership 48
2.3 weighted points to Test Partnership
12% weight · 71% of the movement so far
Post-Market Monitoring
Checkr 50 · Test Partnership 33
2.0 weighted points to Checkr
12% weight · 81% of the movement so far
Human Oversight Design
Checkr 66 · Test Partnership 58
1.0 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 89% of the movement so far
Data Governance Disclosure
Checkr 62 · Test Partnership 57
0.8 weighted points to Checkr
15% weight · 95% of the movement so far
FRIA Support
Checkr 32 · Test Partnership 36
0.6 weighted points to Test Partnership
8% weight · 100% of the movement so far
Customer Documentation
Checkr 68 · Test Partnership 62
0.5 weighted points to Checkr
Weighted delta is the raw difference times the criterion weight, so the 7 figures above sum to +3.9 — the difference between the two totals before either is rounded. Shares are of 9.8 points of movement counted without direction. The table below rounds each side to a whole number first, so its Δ raw total reads +4 beside that +3.9.
§ Category-by-category
Raw score per criterion, with weighted delta.
Δ is Checkr minus Test Partnership.
| Category | Weight | Checkr | Test Partnership | Δ raw | Δ weighted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 70 | 57 | +13 | +2.6 |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 35 | 48 | -13 | -2.3 |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 32 | 36 | -4 | -0.6 |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 62 | 57 | +5 | +0.8 |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 66 | 58 | +8 | +1.0 |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 50 | 33 | +17 | +2.0 |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 68 | 62 | +6 | +0.5 |
| Total | 100% | 54 (F) | 50 (F) | +4 | +3.9 |
§ Evidence
Cited sources and documented absences, criterion by criterion.
An absence is a finding, not a blank: the reviewer looked for a named artefact and recorded that it is not located. Where a source sits is a fact about hosting only.
| Criterion | Weight | Checkr | Test Partnership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | Cited | Absences | Audit / hosting | ||
| Article 11 Technical Documentation | 20% | 3 | 1 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Bias Audit Transparency | 18% | 3 | 2 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| FRIA Support | 15% | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 2 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Data Governance Disclosure | 15% | 4 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Human Oversight Design | 12% | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 0 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| Post-Market Monitoring | 12% | 4 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain |
| Customer Documentation | 8% | 3 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domain | 5 | 1 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
| All criteria | 100% | 24 | 6 | Audit reportSources on the vendor's own domain | 26 | 6 | Sources on the vendor's own domainSources on a separate domain |
Checkr has 28 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 24 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; Test Partnership has 32 evidence rows across 7 of 7 criteria — 26 with a source URL, 6 documented absences; some documentation or audit rows for Test Partnership sit on a domain separate from the vendor's own site.
Provenance
The scores above are documented by 60 evidence rows on file for these two vendors: 28 for Checkr, across 2 distinct source domains, and 32 for Test Partnership, across 3 distinct source domains.
- Rubric
- v1.0
- Checkr last reviewed
- August 2, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
- Test Partnership last reviewed
- September 25, 2026 · HireAIScore editorial team
HireAIScore scores are editorial research, not legal advice, and no vendor pays for placement, scoring or removal — see the methodology, conflicts policy and terms.
§ Where next