A single platform for resume analysis, ATS scoring, job matching, cover letters, interview prep, a networking CRM, and job tracking. We built it to replace the patchwork of disconnected tools that students were stuck using.
The career services team had a growing problem: students preparing for the job market were bouncing between five or more websites and apps just to get their materials in order. One tool for resume scanning, another for job boards, a spreadsheet to track applications, a separate site for interview prep, and yet another for cover letters. Nothing talked to each other, and students were burning hours on context-switching instead of actually improving their candidacy.
For career advisors, it was just as frustrating. They had no centralized way to see which students were actively preparing, where they were struggling, or how their resumes scored against real applicant tracking systems. Coaching sessions relied on gut instinct rather than data. Advisors would repeat the same generic lines ("use more action verbs," "quantify your achievements") without being able to pinpoint which bullet points fell flat or which keywords were missing for a student's target industry.
The institution needed one platform that could replace all of this: every career preparation tool under a single login, with analytics that let advisors give specific, data-backed guidance. It had to be simple enough that students would actually use it on their own, but capable enough to show them exactly what to fix to get past automated screening and into a hiring manager's hands.
Students juggled 5+ disconnected websites and spreadsheets for resume review, job tracking, interview prep, and cover letters, wasting hours on logistics instead of preparation.
Career advisors had no way to track student progress, identify at-risk job seekers, or measure the effectiveness of their guidance at scale.
Resume feedback was one-size-fits-all. Advisors couldn't tailor guidance to specific industries, roles, or the exact keywords an ATS would flag.
Without a unified workflow, students frequently lost track of applications, missed follow-ups, and couldn't measure their own improvement over time.
I interviewed career advisors and surveyed students to catalog every tool in use and every pain point in the job-search process. The research pointed to twelve distinct capabilities that needed to live under one roof, spanning the full workflow from resume creation through offer acceptance.
Built a resume analysis pipeline: TF-IDF algorithms for job-description matching, keyword extraction for ATS compatibility scoring, bullet-point quality heuristics, and AI-phrase detection to flag language that reads as machine-generated. Each analysis produces a section-by-section breakdown with specific things to fix.
Integrated cover letter generation, a Kanban-style job tracker, a networking CRM for managing contacts and follow-ups, an interview prep module with practice questions matched to target roles, and a career goals tracker. All connected so data flows between tools without re-entering anything.
Built an admin dashboard with real-time charts showing aggregate ATS scores, student engagement trends, common skill gaps, and cohort-level outcomes. Advisors can drill into individual student profiles or pull program-wide reports for budget meetings and coaching conversations.
If your team is juggling disconnected tools for resume reviews, job tracking, and student coaching, I can help you build something that puts it all in one place.
Start the ConversationUpload a resume in PDF or DOCX and get an instant ATS compatibility score with section-by-section feedback, keyword density analysis, formatting checks, and an employer-perspective readability assessment. Everything is benchmarked against real applicant tracking system criteria.
Paste a job description and the engine uses term frequency–inverse document frequency to find exactly which keywords are missing from the resume, which are overused, and which sections need work to match the target role.
Generates tailored cover letters by cross-referencing the student's resume data with a target job description. The AI drafts role-specific language that pulls in relevant experience while keeping a natural tone that passes AI-detection checks.
A drag-and-drop board where students manage every application from "Saved" through "Applied," "Interviewing," and "Offer." Each card stores the job link, notes, contacts, deadlines, and follow-up reminders. No more losing track of things in a spreadsheet.
Students log contacts (recruiters, alumni, hiring managers) with interaction history, follow-up dates, and notes. The CRM reminds them to re-engage dormant contacts and tracks which connections led to interviews or referrals.
Career services staff see real-time Chart.js visualizations: aggregate ATS scores, engagement funnels, skill-gap heat maps, and cohort comparisons. They can drill into individual profiles or export program-wide reports to show placement outcomes to leadership.
The analysis view shows an overall ATS score, section-by-section grades, keyword match percentages against a target job description, bullet-point quality ratings, and AI-phrase detection flags. Everything lives in a single scrollable report.
The Kanban board organizes applications into stages with color-coded priority, deadline badges, and one-click status changes. Students can filter by company, role type, or date applied, and advisors can view boards across their entire cohort.
Career advisors can check aggregate ATS score distributions, active-user trends, skill gaps across the student body, and placement-rate forecasts. Everything updates in real time with interactive Chart.js charts.
Students who used the platform consistently saw real gains: resumes that once scored in the 30–40% ATS range climbed to 80%+ after working through the platform's feedback. Career advisors said coaching sessions got noticeably more productive because they could point to specific problems, like a missing keyword cluster, a weak bullet point, or a formatting issue an ATS would reject, instead of guessing. Time from program completion to first job offer shortened, and career services finally had the data they needed to report outcomes to leadership.
The biggest design decision was putting everything behind one login. Students didn't need a better resume scanner, they needed to stop switching between five tabs. Once the platform was the only place they had to go, daily engagement tripled compared to the individual tools it replaced. Cutting friction matters more than adding features.
Early iterations gave broad feedback like "add more keywords." Students ignored it. When I changed the engine to show exactly which keywords were missing, point out the bullet points that lacked numbers, and compare the resume side-by-side with the job description, edit completion rates jumped from 15% to over 70%. Turns out people act on specific, concrete guidance, not vague suggestions.
Giving career services staff a dashboard changed how the institution thought about career outcomes. For the first time, advisors could walk into budget meetings with numbers: "Here's the average ATS score improvement, here's the interview-rate increase, here's how our students compare across cohorts." Career services went from being seen as a cost center to a program that could prove its results.
If you want to consolidate your career tools into one platform or give your advising team real data to work with, We'd like to hear what you're working on.