NameScan, a member of the Neurocom group, is based in Australia and provides a publicly accessible online service which enables users to check the names of individual persons or companies instantly, against the Dow Jones Watchlists, which the vendor presents as the most detailed and accurate global watchlists available today of Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs), officially sanctioned individuals and persons of Special Interest.
$12
per month
Sterling Check
Score6.5 out of 10
N/A
Sterling background and identity solutions help you build a foundation of trust and safety for your employees, customers, and partners around the world. Sterling's CourtDirect technology provides direct online digital access to ~90% of US criminal search records, and SmartData technology enables Sterling to further automate across the end-to-end employment criminal background check process – from matching candidate data to determining reportability and applying any order rules.
In our specific case, NameScan is an interesting piece of software for administratively verifying the identity of those who have to enroll in courses or discuss a Thesis. The fact that NameScan can be integrated with other software (anti-plagiarism, for example, Turnitin) guarantees greater use efficiency. In this case, the integrated verification of identity and possible plagiarism helps us significantly limit fraud.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
SterlingOne has had my background check in progress for nearly a month. I spoke with them 5 days ago about the issue and discovered there was a criminal record flag in Connecticut. I have never been to Connecticut. They said this can often happen if an individual has the same name, birthday, or last four digits of SSN. This is clearly a flaw in their system if someone with the same name or birthday can appear on the same background check. I feel bad for any John Smith who applies for a job with a company that uses SterlingOne, they'll never get past the screening. Not only is this a flawed system, but when I spoke with customer service about this, they guaranteed they would expedite this within 24-48 hours. It has now been 5 days and when I called back, they said they would expedite this as if I had never called in the first place. I have been through numerous background checks for work in my life, I have done live scans and had my fingerprints taken, and have been approved to work with children with special needs (which requires a very rigorous screening) and I have never experienced such a disjointed and unprofessional process.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The initiation of a background check is very simple by only needing the name and email of the new candidate and submitting that as the new ticket.
Sterling communicates with the new candidate to keep the background check moving which saves us time by not needing to keep a close eye on the process of the background check.
Sterling communicates with the employer to let them know if additional charges are needed to run the background check and we can either approve or deny the charge.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The software still generates confusion, especially in the case of Asian names, often repetitive or similar to each other. In this case, the information it returns is not very accurate.
The numerous integrative databases that can be purchased are really very expensive.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Sterling Talent is an excellent company for performing the background checks for our new hires. However, the delay in processing times can be improved.
Also, there should be automation from legacy systems to pick up the candidate details as much as possible instead of asking for more details from the candidate via email.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
NameScan well integrated with our existing system, with less false positives results, where as with AuditGenius we get search results are not that great & sanctions list such as WorldCompliane, Dow Jones not up to mark, we have also issues with integration with our system . NameScan also offer us best competitive price .
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
We had no issues with HireRight. The system worked well and we had excellent service. The only reason we selected Sterling is we changed our ATS to Compas and wanted to be integrated with a background check company. Sterling was only one of two options and offered onboarding capabilities. The other did not
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info