JAIP studies what actually happens between job discovery and employer receipt. Our research is designed to document application paths, preserve evidence, distinguish facts from assumptions, and make the source behind important public claims easy to inspect.
Our research standard
We do not begin with the conclusion that third-party distribution is good or bad. We document who is behind the job, whether the opportunity appears authentic and current, whether a publisher is authorized, where Apply goes, who receives applicant information, and what can actually be verified.
The JAIP research foundation
Government sources
FTC, FBI/IC3 and other government sources are prioritized for fraud patterns, reported losses, identity theft, consumer protection and enforcement guidance.
Platform policies
Google, LinkedIn, Indeed and other platform policies are used to document the rules those platforms themselves publish regarding authorization, authenticity, job status, application routing and fraudulent content.
Attributed research
Industry studies may help explain candidate experience, application volume and trust. JAIP identifies the source, population and year rather than presenting vendor research as government fact.
Application Path Audits
JAIP's own work focuses on reproducible observations: authoritative job source, copies, authorization, redirects, final destination, apparent data recipient, job currency and source attribution.
Authorization Matters. Enforcement Matters Too.
Major employment and search platforms recognize that an employer's authorization matters when jobs are distributed by third parties.
LinkedIn's published Jobs Terms restrict certain copying, duplication, scraping or reproduction of employer job postings without the hiring company's prior knowledge and authorization. Indeed's published partner requirements likewise address employer authorization and application handling. Google's JobPosting policies prohibit postings made on behalf of an organization or company without authorization and prohibit impersonation, misleading affiliation, fake jobs and expired job postings.
Platform policy is not the same as applicant verification.
A platform may require authorization and may investigate violations. That is important. But the existence of a rule does not necessarily tell a job seeker whether the specific employer, job, publisher and application destination in front of them have actually been verified.
Authorization Requirement
A contractual, policy or legal requirement that a publisher obtain the employer's permission.
Authorization Enforcement
The process through which a platform investigates and addresses violations of that requirement.
Authorization Verification
Evidence connecting a specific employer, job and authorized participant before an applicant submits personal information.
Founder Paul Cornell has worked directly with LinkedIn and Indeed regarding unauthorized or improper job representation and reports that both organizations were responsive and helpful in resolving employer concerns. JAIP treats this as firsthand operational experience, not as an independent research finding.
JAIP supports platforms that enforce employer authorization, provide meaningful employer reporting and escalation processes, and take action when jobs or employer brands are misused.
The objective is not to restrict legitimate job distribution. The objective is to make legitimate distribution visible and trustworthy.
JAIP Facts
These are reusable, source-attributed facts JAIP may use in educational materials, interviews and research. Statistics are tied to the time period and population reported by the source.
Reported job-scam volume increased sharply
The FTC said reports of job and employment agency scams tripled from 2020 to 2024.
Reported job-scam losses in 2024
The FTC said reported losses to job and employment agency scams rose from $90 million in 2020 to $501 million in 2024.
Imposter scams remain a major consumer threat
The FTC reported $3.5 billion in losses to imposter scams in 2025, including nearly $1 billion reported lost to business impersonators.
Fake jobs can target both identity and finances
The FBI has warned that criminals use fake jobs and spoofed employer websites to obtain personally identifiable information or money from applicants.
Employer impersonation can harm companies too
The FBI has warned that fraudulent job postings can impersonate legitimate businesses, threaten company reputation and defraud job seekers.
Google bars unauthorized employer representation
Google's job-posting policy says it does not allow job postings made on behalf of an organization or company without authorization.
Google prohibits fake jobs used primarily to collect applicant information
Google's policy identifies fake or non-existent jobs whose primary purpose is collecting applicant information as prohibited misrepresentation.
Expired postings should be removed
Google requires jobs that are no longer open for applications to be expired or removed from the job-search experience.
Application paths should avoid unnecessary intermediate steps
Google defines a direct-apply experience as a short, straightforward application process without unnecessary intermediate steps, including direct contact with the actual hiring company or its representative.
Indeed treats deceptive job postings as a trust-and-safety issue
Indeed says fraudulent job postings include scams and activity intended to steal personal, financial or sensitive information, and says it removes postings determined to be fraudulent.
LinkedIn provides a specific job-scam reporting path
LinkedIn lets users report jobs as spam or scams and identifies requests for SSNs, bank details, passwords or payment as examples of suspicious conduct.
Application volume has increased dramatically in one major ATS dataset
Greenhouse reported that average applications per job increased 102% from Q3 2022 to Q4 2024. This is Greenhouse platform data, not a government statistic.
The Online Job Application Path Study
JAIP's first major research model is designed to follow real jobs from the employer's authoritative source through the online employment marketplace.
Establish the authoritative job
Record employer, title, location, job ID, authoritative URL, date and intended application destination.
Map where the job appears
Identify relevant search engines, job boards, aggregators, recruiters and other publishers displaying the opportunity.
Document identity and authorization
Record how the employer and publisher are represented and whether authorization can be established or remains unknown.
Trace every Apply path
Record public redirects, domains, registration steps and the final application destination before personal information is submitted.
Identify applicant-data custody
Document which party appears to collect or retain applicant information and what is disclosed to the applicant.
Check job status and attribution
Determine whether the opportunity remains open and whether source attribution survives without interfering with applicant delivery.
Separate evidence from uncertainty
JAIP distinguishes documented facts, attributed claims, reasonable inferences and unresolved questions. Lack of verification is not automatically proof of misconduct.
Research & Source Library
These are core sources supporting JAIP's current public education and research framework. Links go to the originating organization.
Federal Trade Commission
FBI / Internet Crime Complaint Center
Platform Policies & Guidance
Attributed Industry Research
Corrections and reproducibility
Material factual claims in JAIP research should be supported by preserved evidence. Research reports should identify the audit period and methodology version used. Where an identifiable organization provides information that materially changes a finding, the published record should reflect the correction or response.
Governance & Independence Verified Application Path Standard