Review the evidence signals before interviewing. Then use the anchored descriptions—not instinct alone—to choose the score that best matches each answer.
01
Evaluation factor
Subject and technical command
30% weight
Check command of the practical stack nomads live on: Schengen 90/180 rules, digital nomad visas (Portugal D8, Estonia, Bali E33G), tax residency tests, foreign earned income exclusion, geo-arbitrage budgeting.
Evidence to listen for
Knows the material or discipline well beyond the level they teach
Holds the qualifications, licences, or certifications required, and they are current
Can answer an unexpected question honestly rather than bluffing
Keeps learning in their own field
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Knowledge barely ahead of the learners; bluffs when asked something unexpected.
2
Needs Improvement
Adequate on the syllabus only; gaps show under questioning.
3
Satisfactory
Solid command of the material for the level taught.
4
Very Good
Depth well beyond the taught level; comfortable being asked anything.
5
Excellent
Names specific visa routes and residency thresholds, flags where a tax adviser is required, and cites their own border and banking experience.
02
Evaluation factor
How they actually teach
30% weight
Probe the coaching method itself: ICF or similar credential, discovery call structure, goal-setting frameworks, session cadence, use of Notion dashboards, worksheets, or 90-day relocation plans.
Evidence to listen for
Describes how they teach a specific thing, not their philosophy of teaching
Adapts when the first explanation does not land
Checks understanding rather than assuming it
Differentiates for varying ability within one group
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Only philosophy, no method; one explanation and no plan B.
2
Needs Improvement
Delivers content but cannot adapt when learners are lost.
3
Satisfactory
Sound instruction; differentiation is limited.
4
Very Good
Multiple routes to the same concept, with real checks for understanding.
5
Excellent
Describes a repeatable session structure with accountability artefacts, distinguishes coaching from consulting, and adapts pacing to a client's runway and risk tolerance.
03
Evaluation factor
Group management and safeguarding
25% weight
Assess handling of cohorts and community: managing Slack or Circle groups across time zones, escalating mental health or isolation disclosures, boundaries on financial and immigration advice, refund and no-show policy.
Evidence to listen for
Has a concrete approach to a disruptive individual and a whole group losing focus
Knows the safeguarding or duty-of-care obligations for this age group and setting
Escalates a concern through the right channel
Sets boundaries without becoming punitive
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No behaviour strategy; unaware of safeguarding obligations.
2
Needs Improvement
Struggles with disruption; vague on duty of care.
3
Satisfactory
Manages a normal group; less confident with serious disruption.
4
Very Good
Confident group management with clear safeguarding awareness.
5
Excellent
Sets explicit scope limits, refers out on medical, legal, or immigration matters, and moderates community groups with documented conduct rules.
04
Evaluation factor
Progress and communication
15% weight
Look for client outcomes they can quantify: number who actually relocated, income retained or replaced, retention across a six-month programme, testimonials, referral rate, churn reasons they can name.
Evidence to listen for
Measures whether learners actually improved, not just attended
Gives feedback that changes what someone does next
Communicates with parents, clients, or managers about difficult progress honestly
Records progress usefully
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
No sense of whether anyone improved.
2
Needs Improvement
Tracks attendance rather than progress; avoids hard conversations.
3
Satisfactory
Monitors progress; feedback is general.
4
Very Good
Measures progress concretely and handles difficult conversations well.
5
Excellent
Cites concrete client numbers and outcomes, tracks progress between sessions, and speaks candidly about clients who stayed home and why.
Put this rubric to work
Score every candidate against the same standard
Add these weighted factors to Hirevire and let AI evaluate recorded answers against your rubric.
