Seattle, WA
AI Evaluation Engineer recruiting based on accountable delivery experience. Crosscheck recruits AI, ML & Software Engineering candidates for contract, contract-to-hire, and permanent roles tied to Seattle.
What We Place
Representative roles
Platforms and technologies
Our Approach
This editorial hiring guide starts with sourced Seattle business context. Seattle's Office of Economic Development separates technology, commerce, life sciences, green industry, and maritime logistics in its current sector map. That structure supports several technical search paths with different system and support requirements. an AI Evaluation Engineer search should define the operating boundary before comparing resumes. The brief must distinguish AI Evaluation Engineer, LLM Evaluation Engineer, AI Quality Engineer and connect role-specific scope to the work this person will personally own. Screening centers on evaluation design, test datasets, quality rubrics, failure analysis, regression controls, human review, and release decisions.
Define the systems, delivery stage, operating boundary, and ownership expected from the AI Evaluation Engineer
Screen candidates for evidence of evaluation design, test datasets, quality rubrics, failure analysis, regression controls, human review, and release decisions
Separate direct delivery experience from adjacent product, project, or consulting exposure
Support contract, contract-to-hire, and permanent searches across the US and Canada
Start the search
Include the business context, systems, delivery phase, work model, compensation, and interview timeline. A Crosscheck search lead will use that context to calibrate the role before sourcing begins.
Local Market Brief
Record the required decisions, systems, delivery stage, and support duties for AI Evaluation Engineer work. Treat Evaluation Harnesses, Benchmarking, Golden Datasets, Human Review as context for the assignment, not a keyword checklist. Separate that scope from adjacent Model Evaluation Scientist, AI Red Team Engineer, Evaluation Technical Lead responsibilities so each candidate is evaluated against the same completed brief. Build the calibration map from the actual assignment: AI Evaluation Engineer against Evaluation Harnesses and Benchmarking; LLM Evaluation Engineer against Golden Datasets and Human Review; AI Quality Engineer against Regression Testing and Safety Testing; Model Evaluation Scientist against Error Analysis and Quality Rubrics; AI Red Team Engineer against evaluation design and test datasets; Evaluation Technical Lead against quality rubrics and failure analysis. For the delivery handoff, trace the working sequence from Safety Testing to Regression Testing to Human Review to Golden Datasets to Benchmarking to Evaluation Harnesses and name who accepts each boundary. The three sourced Seattle contexts below turn that scope into intake and screening decisions. They do not measure current vacancies, candidate supply, or Crosscheck client activity.
Editorial market scenario
Tie each must-have requirement to a task, system, risk, or deadline. Remove industry preferences that do not change how the person will perform the job. This is planning guidance, not measured local demand.
Editorial industry scenario
A product-company brief should connect the role to users, release decisions, service measures, and ownership after launch. Confirm that this context applies to the employer before using it in the search.
Screening focus
We test for model or application ownership, evaluation discipline, data judgment, and evidence that the candidate has shipped reliable AI systems.
Published labor benchmark
BLS does not publish an occupation matching AI Evaluation Engineer. Crosscheck uses Data Scientists (15-2051) as the closest published broad benchmark; it is not a count or pay estimate for this exact specialty.
BLS OEWS May 2025, published May 15, 2026
Published metro employment
8,370
BLS publishes a sizable metro employment estimate for the proxy occupation. The intake still needs to isolate the platform, delivery stage, and ownership required here. The estimate equals 4.011 jobs per one thousand across the metro workforce.
Employment concentration
2.38 location quotient
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA reports more than twice the national employment concentration for this proxy occupation. Treat that as occupational context, not proof of available candidates.
Annual wage reference
$81,130 to $230,980
The metro median is 37% above the national Data Scientists median. Test whether the role's scope and location requirement support that difference. BLS reports a $164,740 median for the proxy occupation in Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA.
Hiring brief scenarios
These scenarios connect location context to role responsibilities. Use them as prompts to verify with the employer, not as measures of Seattle demand, clients, or candidate supply.
Sourced software and emerging technology context
Seattle's Office of Economic Development lists technology as a key industry and names software, gaming, retail technology, and emerging technologies within that category. The page supports a software-sector scenario without measuring demand for a specific role. Define how Regression Testing, Safety Testing, Error Analysis, Quality Rubrics fit the employer's current environment. Ask which constraints changed the design, what AI Evaluation Engineer owned directly, who approved the decision, and how the result was checked after delivery. Product teams may own high-volume services, internal platforms, experiments, and release processes shared across several engineering groups.
Evidence to request: Request a redacted design, configuration, test, runbook, review record, or operating measure that supports the candidate's account of AI Evaluation Engineer ownership. State whether the hire owns a customer product, developer platform, model service, or internal system and name the service level attached to it.
Sourced retail and ecommerce context
Seattle's key-industries page places retail and ecommerce within its technology profile. A technical role in that setting may support catalog, search, recommendations, customer identity, orders, payments, or fulfillment data. Set the boundary for ownership checkpoints before interviews. A useful account involving evaluation design, test datasets, quality rubrics, failure analysis names the starting condition, alternatives considered, implementation sequence, failure handling, and the operating team that received the work. Commerce services face peak traffic, data freshness requirements, partner dependencies, and direct links between technical failures and customer orders.
Evidence to request: Use a comparable scenario involving and release decisions, AI Evaluation Engineer, LLM Evaluation Engineer, AI Quality Engineer and score assumptions, technical judgment, communication, delivery steps, and the evidence proposed for acceptance. Record the scale, peak event, failure budget, and business metric the candidate was accountable for in prior commerce work.
Sourced maritime, manufacturing, and logistics context
Seattle lists maritime, manufacturing, and logistics as a key industry connected to global trade. The same city profile distinguishes this work from software and life sciences, which helps employers define asset, warehouse, route, or supplier-system experience. Connect adjacent role boundaries to an employer decision rather than a broad tool list. Require the candidate to explain work with regression controls, human review, and release decisions, AI Evaluation Engineer, including dependencies, controls, measurable evidence, and responsibility when the original plan changed. Trade and asset systems may run across ports, warehouses, carriers, and maintenance teams with limited tolerance for lost or delayed records.
Evidence to request: Ask for a problem involving LLM Evaluation Engineer responsibilities. Record the signal, diagnosis, decision, corrective action, handoff, and verification the candidate personally completed. Identify the physical operation, partner interfaces, operating schedule, and recovery process the role must support.
Interview scorecard
Ask each candidate the same core questions. Score the evidence, ownership, and judgment in the answer instead of relying on job-title or keyword matches.
1. AI Evaluation Engineer: Evaluation Harnesses
Choose an Evaluation Harnesses decision from your work as AI Evaluation Engineer. Which constraint changed the design, and what evidence supported the result?
Use the answer to assess evaluation tied to user tasks, latency, cost, monitoring, fallback behavior, and product ownership. The product and software delivery context is an editorial scenario, not a measured claim about Seattle.
2. LLM Evaluation Engineer: Benchmarking
Describe project work you completed as LLM Evaluation Engineer involving Benchmarking that did not follow the original plan. What did you own, and how did you correct it?
Use the answer to assess evaluation tied to user tasks, latency, cost, monitoring, fallback behavior, and product ownership. The product and software delivery context is an editorial scenario, not a measured claim about Seattle.
3. AI Quality Engineer: Golden Datasets
For a Golden Datasets system you supported, explain the handoff, operating limits, and measures used after launch. Where did your responsibility begin and end?
Use the answer to assess evaluation tied to user tasks, latency, cost, monitoring, fallback behavior, and product ownership. The product and software delivery context is an editorial scenario, not a measured claim about Seattle.
Need the full AI Evaluation Engineer evaluation guide?
The role guide covers technical scope, interview questions, and evidence checks once, without repeating the same material on every city page.
FAQ
For qualified exclusive searches in our core disciplines, Crosscheck targets a first candidate slate within 48 hours after a completed intake. Contract placements include a 40-billable-hour replacement guarantee, and permanent placements include a 90-day replacement guarantee, subject to the signed agreement.
Continue your research