Matching Score

Transparent match score

Show why a match makes sense, where it is thin, and what should happen next.

The score is a conversation starter, not a verdict. A volunteer should understand the fit, the gaps, and the extra context that would make a match safer or more useful.

1

Skills fit

Required skills, adjacent skills, certifications, languages, work samples, and normalized taxonomy tags.

2

Cause and impact fit

Cause areas, community focus, beneficiary group, and the impact goal behind the opportunity.

3

Availability fit

Weekly hours, deadline, recurring shift window, timezone, and synchronous meeting needs.

4

Location fit

Remote, local, hybrid, travel radius, group-friendly work, and event constraints.

5

Trust fit

Organization verification, role sensitivity, screening requirement, privacy mode, and moderation status.

6

Project readiness

Whether the opportunity includes enough context, files, decisions, docs, and next steps for real momentum.

What the score can do

Prioritize review, surface promising opportunities, and explain why a role may be worth a closer look.

What it should not do

Hide decisions behind automation, rank people without context, or replace consent, moderation, and human judgment.

Example deterministic match explanation

Transparent match signal

Rule-based fit estimate

79%

Skill fit 19 / 40

Matched required skills: Technical writing.

Availability fit 20 / 20

4 available hours compared with 3 requested hours.

Cause fit 15 / 15

Cause alignment: Civic technology.

Location fit 10 / 10

Volunteer prefers remote and opportunity is remote.

Trust/readiness 10 / 10

Organization verification is verified.

Project readiness 5 / 5

A project context brief is attached.

Missing required skills: Information architecture

  • Matched skills: Technical writing, WordPress.
  • Missing required skills: Information architecture.
  • Cause alignment includes Civic technology.
  • Availability meets the estimated commitment.
  • The organization is verified.