Screening. Done differently. On purpose.

notanATS is an applicant screening system, not an applicant tracking system. You describe what the role actually requires once; notanATS then runs the whole screening process against those exact requirements: every applicant assessed, scored on the same criteria, and ranked. Nobody reads a résumé to build the shortlist, and every applicant gets feedback on where they stood.

Recruiters and hiring teams who see AI screening as a boon, not a threat. You want the screening handled properly so you can get to interviews faster, and you want an AI that knows its place: it screens, a person decides. Works for technical roles, operational roles, and leadership roles. The structure does not care about the domain. It cares about specificity. If you want an AI that makes the hiring decision for you, this is not your tool, and it is not going to become one.

No, and it is not trying to. An ATS manages your pipeline: job postings, applicant tracking, offer letters, compliance paperwork. We handle one thing: screening. We sit between "applied" and "interview," and we do that part properly. The screened applicants you advance go into your existing system as your shortlist.

Ironic, given the name. We are aware.

The hiring team defines what matters for the role. Applicants describe their experience against those same things. You see the evidence behind every result: the applicant's own words that supported it. It isn't a score handed down from nowhere; it's a record you can read and judge for yourself.

We would rather you see exactly how it fails than believe vaguely that it works.

About 20 minutes. You have a calibration conversation where the system asks what the role needs, what experience matters, and how you want the work done. It challenges vague answers until the criteria are specific enough to measure. If your answers are vague and generic, it will take longer. You are not filling out a form. You are describing the role the way you would explain it to a smart colleague.

Every role is calibrated on its own. You define the problem the role actually needs solved and the experience that matters, and the assessment then holds every applicant to that role-specific definition. Nothing is scored against a template for the job title. The criteria are yours; how answers are measured against them is not published.

Yes. The full conversation, every message from both sides, is available on the applicant detail page. Alongside it you get the evidence behind each result: which criteria were met and the applicant's own words that supported them.

Your first two postings are at no cost, with unlimited screenings and no card required. Post a real role or a test role; we do not police the difference. If you want to see how the calibration and scoring work, just create a posting and run yourself through the applicant side.

The best demo is the product. We do not trust slide decks.

Your criteria lock before the first applicant sees the link, and everyone already screened keeps the score they earned against the bar they were told about. What you learn from the interviews sharpens the bar you set next time. Re-scoring old answers against new questions is not fairness; it is retrofitting.

The locked bar is the point. Applicant number 12 is not judged by a rule written after applicant number 40.

The conversation is grounded in work the applicant says they have actually done, and the hiring team sees the full transcript alongside the evidence behind every result, so nothing rests on a score by itself. We do not publish how answers are assessed.

We cannot catch every lie. We can make lying harder than telling the truth.

Copy and paste is disabled in the conversation, and detection runs underneath it: pasted or machine-generated input leaves signals, and when we see anomalies we flag them to the hiring team alongside the transcript instead of silently rejecting anyone. How the detection works is not published. Then ask what gaming the screen would actually buy an applicant: an interview, in person, holding claims they cannot back. The screening only decides who gets talked to.

It is a strange thing to cheat your way into.

After submitting their application, applicants choose: start the screening immediately, or schedule a 30-minute slot for a later time. No account creation, no password, no app download required either way. If they schedule, an access link is emailed to them at the start of their booked slot. The link is valid for that 30-minute window only. If they start now, they go straight into the conversation from the application page.

Yes. The screening conversation is AI-guided, but it is not a chatbot quiz and it is not a black box. It is a structured discussion about work the applicant has actually done. The hiring manager reads every word of the conversation. The full transcript is available to them alongside the scores. No trick questions, no keyword matching, no rubric to memorize. The AI extracts evidence against the dimensions the hiring manager defined. A person makes the call.

The AI does not decide who gets screened in. It measures alignment. The manager decides.

We are not pretending a person is evaluating you. It is an AI comparing your responses against what the hiring manager defined. Speaking introduces errors the AI might misinterpret. Typing lets you review your answers before submitting. No ambiguity. No mistakes. Just your words.

Every applicant who completed their conversation but was not hired receives per-dimension feedback when the position closes. For each dimension, they see what percentage of the pool scored higher. That is a sentence worth receiving. It is not a generic rejection email. It is a comparison against the actual pool, delivered once the full picture is available.

If you ask someone for 30 minutes of their time, you owe them more than a form letter.

The conversation has a time budget, and the AI manages it: when time is nearly up, it closes the conversation naturally instead of cutting anyone off mid-sentence. Everything said up to that point is saved and scored. Partial conversations count. If an applicant booked a slot and did not join before the window closed, the slot expires and they are offered one opportunity to reschedule.

Yes, it works on mobile. That said, you may find a keyboard more comfortable for thirty minutes of detailed answers. You can schedule the conversation for a time and device that suit you.

No hiring process can promise the absence of bias, and we won't claim otherwise. What we can tell you is where bias usually gets in and what happens to it here. Bias travels through proxies: names, schools, accents, gaps, résumé polish. The two-sided calibration takes them out of the comparison: the hiring manager sets what the role's outcome requires before seeing a single applicant, and every applicant is scored on work they have actually done against that same bar. Selection rates are tracked per pool and built to surface bias if it appears, the hiring team, not the AI, makes every decision, and organizations can enable voluntary, anonymous self-identification that is kept separate from scoring, never shown to the hiring manager, and has no effect on any result.

We would rather show you the numbers than ask you to trust us.

The system scores for evidence of capability, not writing quality. Spelling, grammar and phrasing are not evaluated unless the hiring manager explicitly defined written communication as a dimension of the role. What matters is the work an applicant has actually done, not how neatly they describe it. The conversation is designed to surface work evidence, not to grade English.

Applicant name, email, résumé, and the full conversation transcript, plus the dimensions and evidence captured during the conversation. We do not sell applicant data or use it to train models. We use service providers to operate the platform and limit what they receive to what is needed. Applicant data is retained for 12 months after a position closes, then automatically deleted, and managers can delete individual applicant records at any time.

We handle applicant data in line with GDPR and CCPA principles, and the organization running the screening is the data controller. In practice: applicants can request deletion through the organization that screened them, and notanATS provides a fallback contact if they can't reach that organization; applicant data is isolated per organization; applicant data is retained for 12 months after a position closes and then deleted; and we do not sell applicant data or use it to train models. For jurisdiction-specific obligations, we recommend confirming with your own counsel.

Yes. Each organization's data is isolated from every other organization's through row-level access controls, and access is limited to the people in your own organization. Applicant data is never sold or used to train models, and it is automatically deleted 12 months after a position closes. You can also delete an individual applicant's data at any time.

notanATS is built around the safeguards that matter most in hiring: the hiring manager defines the criteria before any applicant is assessed, every applicant is told an AI is being used before they take part, no advancement or rejection happens without a person deciding it, and selection-rate data is available for review. These are practical protections, not a legal guarantee. Regulation varies by country, state, and city and is changing quickly, so we recommend reviewing your specific obligations with your own counsel.

We would rather be honest about what requires legal counsel than give you a blanket guarantee.

Yes. Applicant conversation data is exportable at any time. The calibration model is not exportable.

No. Google Analytics and Microsoft Clarity, described in our privacy policy, run only on this public website. They are never active inside the hiring platform and never see candidate names, résumés, interview responses, or any other candidate data.

A conversation the applicant actually completes. If they click the link but never take part, it doesn't count. Your first two postings include unlimited completed screenings, and each paid posting includes 10 more before any charge applies. Getting applicants to show up is your job. We screen the ones who do.

Nothing to upgrade. The product is the same for everyone. To cancel, stop posting and contact us. For accounts on the free plan, all data is deleted when the 30-day window expires. For paid accounts, applicant data is retained for 12 months after each position closes, then deleted automatically. No contracts. No calls from us.