Fountain

AI-powered high-volume hiring platform that automates sourcing, applicant screening (including a voice-based AI Recruiter), interview scheduling, and onboarding for frontline workforces.
ScreeningATS-integratedSchedulingSourcing

HireAIScore rates Fountain 44 out of 100 (grade F, Substantial gaps) under rubric v1.0, last reviewed June 7, 2026. Fountain ranks 94 of 160 vendors rated in Screening AI, against a category average of 46. That score is drawn from 20 evidence items across 7 rubric criteria for Fountain — 14 with a cited source, 6 recording that nothing was located.

Score breakdown

Fountain, criterion by criterion

Each rubric criterion is scored out of 100 on the cited evidence, then weighted into the total.

Weighted contribution shown to the right of each bar.

  1. Article 11 Technical Documentation

    Weight 20% · avg 49

    50

    +10.0

  2. Bias Audit Transparency

    Weight 18% · avg 41

    30

    +5.4

  3. FRIA Support

    Weight 15% · avg 31

    30

    +4.5

  4. Data Governance Disclosure

    Weight 15% · avg 53

    55

    +8.3

  5. Human Oversight Design

    Weight 12% · avg 56

    58

    +7.0

  6. Post-Market Monitoring

    Weight 12% · avg 40

    40

    +4.8

  7. Customer Documentation

    Weight 8% · avg 58

    52

    +4.2

Total weighted score

44.1(rounded to 44 for display)

Category avg is the mean raw score on that criterion across the 160 Screening AI vendors in scope of this rubric, this one included.

Strongest criterion

Human Oversight Design

58raw / 100

Contributes 7.0 to the total. 58 against a 56 category average.

Weakest criterion

FRIA Support

30raw / 100

Contributes 4.5 to the total. 30 against a 31 category average.

Cited evidence

The evidence behind the score

Every score is backed by at least one cited piece of evidence. Open a criterion to see what was found, when, and where.

Download diligence record

Evidence ledger

Items
20
Documentation
11
Public statement
3
Absence
6
With a source URL
14 of 20
Source hostnames
4
Fewest items
2
FRIA Support

These figures measure how thoroughly Fountain was reviewed, not how Fountain performed — an absence row, recording that nothing was located, is counted like any other item.

Article 11 Technical Documentation

3 items50
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Ethical AI page commits to bias elimination, clear explanation of AI-powered decisions, and human-AI collaboration, with no model cards or technical pack.

    https://www.fountain.com/ethical-ai

  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Agentic AI page states the system is 'Designed in accordance with EEOC, GDPR, and ISO 42001 frameworks'- framework alignment, not certification.

    https://www.fountain.com/agentic-ai

  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-06-07.

    Where we looked: No model/system cards, instructions-for-use, explainability whitepaper, or ISO 42001 certificate located (including the gated trust.fountain.com center).

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Bias Audit Transparency

3 items30
  • Public statementCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Fountain's screening article frames adverse-impact testing and bias audits as employer obligations, stating 'compliance responsibility rests with the employer, not the vendor,' and provides no Fountain bias audit.

    https://www.fountain.com/posts/ai-powered-candidate-screening

  • Public statementCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    ADP Marketplace listing claims the AI Recruiter uses the same role-specific questions to 'improve fairness'- an unaudited fairness assertion.

    https://apps.adp.com/en-US/apps/759475/fountain-ai-recruiter

  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-06-07.

    Where we looked: No NYC LL 144 AEDT bias-audit summary or independent audit (Warden, Holistic, BABL, DCI, ORCAA, Credo) located.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

FRIA Support

2 items30
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Vanta-hosted trust center exists but covers information-security attestations (gated), not AI deployer fundamental-rights or FRIA support.

    https://trust.fountain.com/

  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-06-07.

    Where we looked: EU AI Act is never mentioned by Fountain; no FRIA (Art. 27) template or deployer-obligation material located.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Data Governance Disclosure

3 items55

Human Oversight Design

3 items58

Post-Market Monitoring

3 items40

Customer Documentation

3 items52
  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Detailed public product page for the AI Recruiter covering evaluation, scoring, human override, and audit logs.

    https://www.fountain.com/airecruiter

  • DocumentationCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    Privacy portal hosting the privacy policy, Terms of Service, and Master Subscription Agreement.

    https://privacy.fountain.com/policies/en/

  • AbsenceCaptured Jun 7, 2026

    No public material located as of 2026-06-07.

    Where we looked: No public DPA, NYC LL 144 candidate-notice template, or EU AI Act/AEDT deployer-compliance guidance located.

    Have a URL that disputes this?

Editorial notes

Company overview

Fountain, founded in 2014 and headquartered in San Francisco, builds a high-volume hiring and frontline-workforce platform whose customers collectively hire over a million workers a year. Its suite covers sourcing, an ATS, onboarding, and shift scheduling, but the regulated core is its AI Recruiter - an agentic system that reads a job description, holds a voice conversation with applicants, evaluates responses, and advances "top candidates" with a structured score and justification. In 2026 it launched "Cue," an agentic orchestration layer pushing screening, sourcing, and scheduling further toward autonomous execution with human-oversight controls.

Regulatory exposure

An AI tool that scores and ranks applicants is squarely an AEDT under NYC Local Law 144 and a likely "high-risk" system under the EU AI Act, with parallel exposure under Illinois and Colorado law. Fountain's marketing leans on fairness, explainability, and being "designed in accordance with EEOC, GDPR, and ISO 42001 frameworks"- but ISO 42001 is referenced as a design framework, not a held certification, and Fountain publishes no bias audit, no model card, and no FRIA material. Notably, its own screening blog states that "compliance responsibility rests with the employer, not the vendor," pushing the regulatory burden downstream without supporting artifacts.

Path to a higher score

The highest-leverage move is commissioning and publicly posting an independent NYC LL 144 bias audit with disparate-impact ratios and sample sizes, ideally for two consecutive years. Fountain should convert its "designed in accordance with ISO 42001" claim into a real certification or a published AI-management-system statement, release a system/model card and explainability statement for the AI Recruiter, and add deployer-facing compliance guidance (LL 144 notice templates, an EU AI Act deployer pack, a public DPA and subprocessor list).

Regulatory frame

What applies to screening AI.

Treated as high-risk under Annex III §4 when the screening output is decisive. EU AI Act Article 13 transparency obligations apply; deployers must give candidates a way to contest.

Keep reading

All screening vendorsHow this score is builtAnnex IV section-by-section: what AI hiring vendors must documentWhat makes a defensible NYC LL 144 bias audit

Compare

Fountain against its nearest-scoring peers.

The closest scores in Screening AI, side by side.

Build any comparison

Ranking

Others rated in Screening AI

Ranked 94 of 160 by weighted total under rubric v1.0. The ordering is arithmetic on the rubric and carries no view on which tool suits a given hiring process.

  1. #91Vincere44F
  2. #92Equalture44F
  3. #93Emmersion44F
  4. #94FountainThis profile44F
  5. #95UKG44F
  6. #96JazzHR44F
All screening vendors

Conflicts of interest

No vendor pays for placement, scoring, or removal. Casework - the consulting firm that operates this directory - provides paid services to some vendors. Any active or recent (within 24 months) commercial relationship is disclosed on the affected vendor profile and the review is reassigned to an independent reviewer. See the full policy on About.

Casework has no commercial relationship with this vendor.