Free document tools•POST /v1/adverse-media
Screen candidate documents before you hire
Supported Formats: Identity Documents (100-point), Payslips & Income Evidence, Bank Statements, Candidate Name & DOB
Core Verification Mechanisms: Sanctions Screening · Corroboration-Gated Media · 100-Point Identity Tally · Pack Checklist
Need copy-paste code with sandbox testing?Open Developer Playbook (cURL / Python / MCP) →
The problem
Hiring for a regulated or high-trust role means screening against sanctions lists and adverse news — then proving the person is who the paperwork says.
Manual background checks take days, and a naive name search buries a real hit under a hundred people who share the name.
How Stipple helps
Screen the candidate name with entity disambiguation: sanctions list matching (PEP is not screened, and the result says so), and same-name articles pushed into an excluded bucket rather than counted as hits.
Run their identity documents through the AFP 100-point scheme in the same workflow — a deterministic points tally showing which documents counted and how far short a pack falls.
The call
View Full Recipe →bash
curl -X POST https://www.stipple.sh/v1/adverse-media \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"name": "Jordan Sample", "country": "AU"}'
# → { "risk_flag": "clear", "sanctions": { "matches": 0 }, ... }Screen candidates with auditable evidence in seconds without manual database trawling.
Questions
- Can this tell me whether a candidate has the right to work?
- No. There is no right-to-work determination here, and no immigration or visa database behind it. What you get is an identity result — the AFP 100-point tally showing which documents were recognised and what they were worth — plus a name screen for sanctions and adverse media. Establishing work rights is a separate check against the relevant government service, and this does not replace it.
- Does it verify a degree or a professional certification?
- It does not contact an issuing institution, so it cannot confirm a qualification was awarded. A certificate is inspected as a document — was it tampered with, does it hold up structurally — and that is a different question from whether the university has a record of it. Treat a clean document result as one input, not as verification of the credential.
- How do you avoid flagging every candidate who shares a name with someone notorious?
- By refusing to count a name match as a hit. Sanctions candidates are corroboration-gated: a name-only match is reported as possible, never confirmed, because one common name belongs to several different people. Adverse-media results are entity-disambiguated, and same-name articles are surfaced separately under excluded rather than folded into the count. You can sharpen it further by passing date of birth, country, employer, or role.
- Is a clear result a clean background check?
- No, and treating it as one is the mistake this is designed to prevent. Clear means these sources found nothing, which is a statement about coverage. It is not a finding of good character, and it is not a substitute for a formal police check where the role requires one.
- What does corroboration-gated adverse media mean?
- A media hit is only surfaced when it corroborates against the submitted identity pack — name and date-of-birth alignment — which removes most of the same-name noise that makes raw media screening unusable. Excluded same-name hits are still shown, so you can see what was set aside and why.