Evaluate Solar Energy Technician candidates across 4 weighted areas: hands-on competence, safety discipline, fault finding, and reliability and conduct. Hands-on competence leads at 35%, so check hands-on PV work: module racking on comp shingle and standing seam, conduit runs, string sizing, torquing MC4 connectors, commissioning SolarEdge or Enphase inverters to spec. Use the rubric to compare role-specific evidence consistently.
skilled trades technical operationsinverter commissioningnabcepphotovoltaicracking and mounting
TL;DR
For hands-on competence, look for evidence the candidate names array sizes built, mounting systems used, inverter and optimizer brands commissioned, and cites NEC 690 clearances from memory. For safety discipline, look for evidence the candidate describes personal pre-job hazard checks, refuses live DC work without gloves and meter verification, holds current OSHA and fall protection training.
Apply the written 1–5 anchors to every answer, record the evidence behind each rating, and use the factor weights to reach a consistent overall assessment.
Complete evaluation framework
What to assess and how to score it
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
Hands-on competence
35% weight
Check hands-on PV work: module racking on comp shingle and standing seam, conduit runs, string sizing, torquing MC4 connectors, commissioning SolarEdge or Enphase inverters to spec.
Evidence to listen for
Names the equipment, materials, and tolerances they work to
Can describe a job start to finish without hand-waving the hard parts
Holds the tickets, licences, or certifications the work requires, and they are current
Knows what they are not qualified to touch
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Cannot describe the work concretely; lacks required tickets or licences.
2
Needs Improvement
Basic familiarity; needs supervision on routine tasks.
3
Satisfactory
Competent on standard work; slower or unsure on unfamiliar jobs.
4
Very Good
Skilled and independent across the normal range of the role.
5
Excellent
Names array sizes built, mounting systems used, inverter and optimizer brands commissioned, and cites NEC 690 clearances from memory.
02
Evaluation factor
Safety discipline
30% weight
Probe rooftop fall protection habits: anchor points, harness inspection, DC arc-flash PPE, lockout/tagout at the AC disconnect, OSHA 10/30 cards, ladder setup on steep pitches.
Evidence to listen for
Treats procedure as protection rather than paperwork
Can describe a time they stopped work and why
Knows the specific hazards of this trade and the controls for each
Reports near misses instead of hiding them
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Casual about safety; describes shortcuts with pride.
2
Needs Improvement
Follows procedure when watched; cannot name the hazards that matter.
3
Satisfactory
Sound safety habits; less certain on unfamiliar hazards.
4
Very Good
Safety is instinctive; can describe stopping work over a real concern.
5
Excellent
Describes personal pre-job hazard checks, refuses live DC work without gloves and meter verification, holds current OSHA and fall protection training.
03
Evaluation factor
Fault finding
20% weight
Test troubleshooting of underperforming arrays: reading monitoring portal alerts, IV curve tracing, clamp meter and irradiance checks, isolating ground faults, shading versus failed optimizer diagnosis.
Evidence to listen for
Has a method for narrowing a fault rather than swapping parts
Reads schematics, manuals, or error codes and acts on them
Knows when to escalate rather than guess
Can describe a fault that took real work to find
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Parts-swapper; no diagnostic method.
2
Needs Improvement
Fixes symptoms; cannot explain how they found the cause.
3
Satisfactory
Solid on familiar faults; less structured on new ones.
4
Very Good
Clear systematic method with a real hard-fault story.
5
Excellent
Walks a real underproduction call from portal alert to root cause, naming instruments used and how the fix was verified.
04
Evaluation factor
Reliability and conduct
15% weight
Assess crew dependability: callback rates, permit and interconnection paperwork submitted correctly, as-built photos for inspectors, punctuality on dawn starts, customer conduct on occupied homes.
Evidence to listen for
Turns up, on time, prepared
Handles shift work, callouts, or travel as the role requires
Documents work so the next person can pick it up
Deals with customers or site staff professionally
Five-point scoring guide
1
Poor
Unreliable attendance; unprofessional on site.
2
Needs Improvement
Inconsistent; documentation is an afterthought.
3
Satisfactory
Dependable; paperwork is adequate.
4
Very Good
Consistently reliable, documents well, professional with customers.
5
Excellent
Cites low reinspection or callback numbers, documents work with labeled photos, and handles homeowners and AHJ inspectors calmly.
Evidence-led prompts
Interview questions for a Solar Energy Technician
Use these prompts to surface evidence for the weighted factors above and compare candidates against the same role-specific criteria.
01
Can you describe your experience with solar panel installation?
02
What types of solar energy systems have you worked with?
03
Have you worked on both residential and commercial solar projects?
04
Do you have experience with grid-tied and off-grid solar systems?
05
What safety protocols do you follow when working on solar installations?
