A halal mark should explain the rules behind the approval
People seeking halal-certified products need clear, checkable standards so they can understand whether their religious dietary requirements are being met. When certification bodies do not fully disclose their governance, personnel qualifications, or a public way to trace certificates, consumers and industry stakeholders have less ability to check the integrity of the certification process.
Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) is an Illinois-based halal certification body that provides certification services for several industries. This assessment examines the organization's public accountability, transparency, and the verifiable evidence supporting its certification claims.
Who Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) is
Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) is an Illinois-based nonprofit organization established in 2022. It provides halal certification services for the food, cosmetics, and clothing industries in domestic and international markets [1] [2]. The organization publicly operates through its website and describes a certification process that includes application, audit, supervision, and certificate issuance [1].
The organization's nonprofit status and two directors are publicly identifiable, but the public record does not establish a complete current board, control rights, or related-party structure [1]. The organization describes a Majlis oversight concept, but the public record remains incomplete on member identities, appointments, and decision authority [1].
Halal Industry Exposé · Comprehensive Accountability Assessment
Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) Organizational accountability and public certification-criteria disclosure: 17% Credibility Score · Grade F · Insufficiently substantiated
Moderate confidence. Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) receives a 17% Credibility Score and Grade F. This review could not verify qualifying current independent accreditation for this organization. The result draws on the reviewed record of controls and operations, together with limited public evidence. The record does not yet provide enough verified information about personnel qualifications, operating controls, or public accountability to support reliance on the score alone. A finding that information was not verified reflects a limit in the reviewed record; it is not proof that an internal control does not exist or that wrongdoing occurred.
See the three numerical score components
- Competence assurance
- 15.5321 of 90
- Accreditation breadth
- 0.0000 of 4
- Public accountability
- 1.7764 of 6
How to read this result: The score measures what the reviewed evidence supports. Information that was missing or unclear was not treated as proof that a safeguard does not exist. This is not a ruling on every certificate, product, or facility.
USDHS Accreditation-Dominant Credibility Score version 4.1. Source cutoff September 15, 2026. Last reviewed September 15, 2026. Raw Credibility Score 17.3085 out of 100, ordinarily displayed as 17%.
Category breakdown
Where this score came from
Each bar shows how much of that category the reviewed evidence supported. A short bar means important information was missing, unclear, or not independently verified; it does not prove that an internal safeguard does not exist.
- 1. Legal identity and standing 81.44%
- 2. Ownership and control 48.00%
- 3. Accountable leadership and governance 46.50%
- 4. Qualified personnel 0.00%
- 5. Islamic authority and halal decision rights 0.00%
- 6. Halal-specific audit and certification controls 9.35%
- 7. Impartiality, conflicts, and independence 1.50%
- 8. Standards, scheme, and certification scope 6.79%
- 9. Public certification criteria and position disclosure 5.14%
- 10. Certificate traceability and mark control 0.00%
- 11. Complaints, appeals, and corrections 0.00%
- 12. Operating history and demonstrated capacity 43.59%
What stands out
What helps—and what gives us pause
These are the most important positive and cautionary findings in the reviewed record. They explain the score rather than creating extra bonus points or penalties.
What supports confidence
Public Disclosure of Criteria and Identity
The organization publicly discloses its legal identity, operating status, and specific material religious positions, including its stance on mechanical slaughter and stunning.
How this affected the detailed record
Categories: #1, #9
Scoring treatment: positive
Evidence boundary: Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc.
Sources:
What needs caution
Missing Certificate Traceability and Complaint Procedures
No public exact-entity certificate register, status-control example, or public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
How this affected the detailed record
Categories: #10, #11
Scoring treatment: negative
Evidence boundary: Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc.
Sources:
Unverified Personnel and Decision Authority
While role criteria and a religious framework are described, the specific named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and the final decision process are not publicly verified.
How this affected the detailed record
Categories: #4, #5
Scoring treatment: negative
Evidence boundary: Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc.
Sources:
How USDHS calculated the score and grade
Model B totals competence assurance from 0 to 90, proportional current exact-entity accreditation breadth from 0 to 4, and public accountability from 0 to 6. A current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation establishes competence within verified scope; affirmative contradictions reduce it requirement by requirement. Every qualifying authority contributes 0.8000 breadth points against the five-authority national benchmark, capped at four. Public accountability remains separate. The 137 requirement statuses remain visible as the evidence record. Classification bands: A, 90 to 100, strongly substantiated; B, 80 to 89, substantiated; C, 70 to 79, partially substantiated; D, 60 to 69, material gaps; F, 0 to 59, insufficiently substantiated.
Detailed evidence
Why each category received its result
1. Legal identity and standing
What this means in plain English: This category asks whether the public can identify the organization behind the certificate and confirm that it is legally connected to the work. 6 checks were fully supported, and 2 checks had partial support.
81.44% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
8 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
4.0721 of 5 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 3.7721 of 4.5000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.3000 of 0.3000 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Legal identity and standing earns 4.3125 of 5 points. Of 8 enumerated subrequirements, 6 fulfilled, 2 partial.
Why this metric earned 81.44 percent: 8 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 3.7721 competence + 0.3000 public accountability = 4.0721 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 1.C1 — fulfilled: The certificate issuer is a resolvable legal entity.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization is identified as Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc., an Illinois nonprofit organization.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 1.C2 — fulfilled: The entity is active or otherwise legally authorized to operate.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization is an Illinois-based nonprofit organization established in 2022 that publicly operates.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 1.C3 — fulfilled: Every public operating name, DBA, division, or brand used for certification is connected to the issuer.
Evidence route: Public source. The public operating name Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) is connected to the issuer.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 1.C4 — partial: Material parent, subsidiary, affiliate, and predecessor relationships affecting certification authority are documented.
Evidence route: Public source. IRS-derived nonprofit records and the public operating site identify the exact Illinois entity and location.
Public sources: Source 1
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 1.O1 — partial: Current certificates, contracts, or accreditation identify the same accountable issuer.
Evidence route: Public source. IRS-derived nonprofit records and the public operating site identify the exact Illinois entity and location.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 1.O2 — fulfilled: The operating location and jurisdiction correspond to the entity or a documented branch.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization operates as an Illinois-based nonprofit, establishing its jurisdiction.
Public sources: Source 1
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 1.P1 — fulfilled: The public can identify the accountable issuer and operating name.
Evidence route: Public source. The public website identifies the accountable issuer as Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S).
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 1.P2 — fulfilled: The website, certificate, and public registry do not present materially conflicting issuer identities.
Evidence route: Public source. The public website does not present materially conflicting issuer identities.
Public sources: Source 1
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
2. Ownership and control
What this means in plain English: This category asks who ultimately owns or controls the organization and whether related interests are clearly identified. 9 checks had partial support
48.00% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
9 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
3.8400 of 8 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 3.6000 of 7.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.2400 of 0.4800 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Ownership and control earns 4.0000 of 8 points. Of 9 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 9 partial.
Why this metric earned 48.00 percent: 9 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 3.6000 competence + 0.2400 public accountability = 3.8400 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 2.C1 — partial: Ultimate owners or members are identified.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 2.C2 — partial: Ownership percentages or interests are established.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 2.C3 — partial: Voting, management, or equivalent control rights are established.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 2.C4 — partial: Related entities that could affect control are identified.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 2.C5 — partial: Ownership continuity is established or preserved through istiṣḥāb absent contrary evidence.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 2.O1 — partial: Ownership and control records are current, maintained, and available to an authorized verifier.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 2.O2 — partial: No current record contradicts the established owner or control structure.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 2.P1 — partial: Consumers can identify the controlling person or organization when ownership identity is part of the public accountability standard.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 2.P2 — partial: Private percentages, taxpayer data, signatures, and personal addresses need not be published when authoritative evidence establishes them.
Evidence route: Public source. Nonprofit status and two directors are public, but a complete current board, control rights, and related-party structure are not.
Public sources: Source 1
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
3. Accountable leadership and governance
What this means in plain English: This category asks who is responsible for the certification program, how authority is assigned, and who is accountable for its decisions. 9 checks had partial support, and 1 check remained unverified.
46.50% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
6.5100 of 14 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 6.3000 of 12.6000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.2100 of 0.8400 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Accountable leadership and governance earns 6.4750 of 14 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 9 partial, 1 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 46.50 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 6.3000 competence + 0.2100 public accountability = 6.5100 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 3.C1 — partial: Senior leadership is identified.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.C2 — partial: Organizational structure and reporting lines are defined.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.C3 — partial: Certification decision authority is assigned.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.C4 — partial: Required governance, impartiality, and Islamic-affairs committees exist.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.C5 — partial: Senior management is accountable for the certification system.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 3.O1 — partial: Governance roles and committees are implemented and reviewed.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.O2 — partial: Certification decisions follow assigned authority.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.O3 — partial: Management review and internal oversight occur.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 3.P1 — partial: Responsible leadership and principal governance roles are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Public source. Directors and a Majlis oversight concept are public; member identities, appointments, and decision authority are incomplete.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.P2 — not verified: The public can understand who is accountable for halal decisions and certification decisions.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
4. Qualified personnel
What this means in plain English: This category asks whether the people doing audits, reviews, and decisions are identified, qualified, authorized, and kept competent. None of the 14 checks was independently verified in the reviewed record.
0.00% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
14 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.0000 of 18 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 16.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 1.0800 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Qualified personnel earns 0.0000 of 18 points. Of 14 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 14 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 14 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 4.C1 — not verified: Competence criteria exist for technical auditors.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.C2 — not verified: Competence criteria exist for Islamic-affairs experts.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.C3 — not verified: Competence criteria exist for reviewers and decision makers.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 4.C4 — not verified: Muslim-status requirements are applied where the governing standard requires them.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.C5 — not verified: Training, education, experience, and sector competence are defined.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.C6 — not verified: Authorization, assignment, monitoring, and performance review are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.C7 — not verified: External personnel and contractors satisfy the same applicable requirements.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 4.O1 — not verified: Current personnel records demonstrate qualification and authorization.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 4.O2 — not verified: Audit teams contain the required technical and Islamic expertise.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.O3 — not verified: Assignments match sector and scope competence.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.O4 — not verified: Personnel performance and continuing competence are monitored.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 4.P1 — not verified: Responsible personnel roles are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.P2 — not verified: A reasonable public qualification basis is available for principal technical and Islamic authorities.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Requirement 4.P3 — not verified: Private personnel files, degree numbers, and every assignment record need not be published when accreditation verifies competence.
Evidence route: Public source. Role criteria and training claims are public, but named personnel qualifications, authorizations, and assignments are not verified.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
5. Islamic authority and halal decision rights
What this means in plain English: This category asks who provides the Islamic review, what authority that person or body has, and who makes the final halal decision. None of the 11 checks was independently verified in the reviewed record.
0.00% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
11 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.0000 of 18 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 16.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 1.0800 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Islamic authority and halal decision rights earns 0.0000 of 18 points. Of 11 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 11 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 11 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 5.C1 — not verified: Qualified Muslim Islamic-affairs experts are appointed.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.C2 — not verified: Muslim decision makers are used where required.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.C3 — not verified: The Islamic-affairs committee has defined composition and authority.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.C4 — not verified: Halal interpretations, disputed questions, and escalations have a controlled decision path.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.C5 — not verified: Islamic authority is independent of sales and client pressure.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.C6 — not verified: Final halal and certification decision rights are unambiguous.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 5.O1 — not verified: Islamic experts participate in audit, review, and decision functions as required.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.O2 — not verified: Committee or expert decisions are documented and implemented.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.O3 — not verified: Certification cannot be issued contrary to the authorized halal decision.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 5.P1 — not verified: The principal Islamic authority or committee is publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Requirement 5.P2 — not verified: The public can understand who has final halal-decision authority.
Evidence route: Public source. A Majlis and religious framework are described, but the responsible members, qualifications, appointment, and final decision process are not public.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
6. Halal-specific audit and certification controls
What this means in plain English: This category asks what the certifier actually checks, what halal-specific evidence it records, and how findings lead to approval, follow-up, or withdrawal. 1 check was fully supported, 2 checks had partial support, and 12 checks remained unverified.
9.35% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
15 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
1.3094 of 14 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.8894 of 12.6000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.4200 of 0.8400 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Halal-specific audit and certification controls earns 1.8900 of 14 points. Of 15 enumerated subrequirements, 1 fulfilled, 2 partial, 12 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 9.35 percent: 15 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.8894 competence + 0.4200 public accountability = 1.3094 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 6.C1 — partial: Application and application review are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. The accepted article notes the certification process includes an application stage, providing partial evidence of application control.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 6.C2 — not verified: The audit program and audit time are determined by scope, risk, complexity, sites, and prior results.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.C3 — not verified: Stage-one and stage-two audits are used where applicable.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.C4 — not verified: Audit teams perform halal-specific document and facility review.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 6.C5 — not verified: Sampling, inspection, and accredited laboratory testing are controlled where applicable.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.C6 — not verified: Audit reports and nonconformities are documented.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.C7 — not verified: Independent review and certification decisions are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.C8 — partial: Surveillance and recertification are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. The accepted article notes the certification process includes supervision and the public pages describe unannounced visits.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 6.C9 — not verified: Suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.C10 — not verified: Outsourced work remains under HCB responsibility.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 6.O1 — not verified: The current certification system implements each applicable control.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
Requirement 6.O2 — not verified: Surveillance or accreditation assessment verifies continued implementation.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 6.O3 — not verified: No affirmative evidence shows reliance on an unauthorized third party for the halal decision.
Evidence route: Public source. Public pages describe virtual or on-site audits, halal-assurance controls, unannounced visits, segregation, and change notice, but no certificate sample verifies implementation.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 6.P1 — fulfilled: The certification pathway and principal stages are publicly understandable.
Evidence route: Public source. The accepted article confirms the organization publicly presents a certification process that includes application, audit, supervision, and certificate issuance.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 6.P2 — not verified: The public can identify the governing scheme and certificate status consequences.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
7. Impartiality, conflicts, and independence
What this means in plain English: This category asks how the organization prevents commercial interests, consulting work, or personal conflicts from controlling certification decisions. 1 check had partial support, and 10 checks remained unverified.
1.50% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
11 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.0900 of 6 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 5.4000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0900 of 0.3600 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Impartiality, conflicts, and independence earns 0.2250 of 6 points. Of 11 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 1 partial, 10 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 1.50 percent: 11 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0900 public accountability = 0.0900 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 7.C1 — not verified: An impartiality policy and risk process exist.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.C2 — not verified: An impartiality committee or equivalent mechanism operates.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.C3 — not verified: Consulting and certification conflicts are prohibited or controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.C4 — not verified: Financial, commercial, and relationship threats are identified and mitigated.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.C5 — not verified: Recusal and independent decision rules exist.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.C6 — not verified: Outsourced and external personnel are subject to impartiality and confidentiality controls.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 7.O1 — not verified: Impartiality risks are reviewed periodically.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.O2 — not verified: Conflicts and recusals are documented.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Requirement 7.O3 — not verified: Certification decisions remain independent of audit, sales, and consulting pressure.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 7.P1 — partial: The impartiality commitment and complaint route are publicly accessible.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 7.P2 — not verified: The public can identify the separation between certification and prohibited consulting.
Evidence route: Public source. An auditor-independence statement is public, while impartial oversight and audit-to-decision separation remain unverified.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
8. Standards, scheme, and certification scope
What this means in plain English: This category asks which current rules govern the certification, what products and facilities they cover, and where the limits or exclusions are. 2 checks had partial support, and 8 checks remained unverified.
6.79% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.2038 of 3 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.1588 of 2.7000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0450 of 0.1800 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Standards, scheme, and certification scope earns 0.2625 of 3 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 2 partial, 8 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 6.79 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.1588 competence + 0.0450 public accountability = 0.2038 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 8.C1 — not verified: Governing standard names and versions are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
Requirement 8.C2 — partial: Accredited or claimed categories, activities, products, sites, and locations are defined.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization's certified scope includes food, cosmetics, clothing, meat, poultry, dairy, bakery, and health/beauty products.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 8.C3 — not verified: Exclusions and limitations are defined.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
Requirement 8.C4 — not verified: Supplementary destination-market schemes are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
Requirement 8.C5 — not verified: A precedence rule resolves conflicts between base and supplementary requirements.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
Requirement 8.C6 — not verified: Clients receive the applicable version and scope.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 8.O1 — not verified: Certificates and audits use the correct current standard and scope.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 8.O2 — not verified: Scope changes and version changes are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 8.P1 — partial: The principal standard, version, category, and certification scope are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization's certified scope includes food, cosmetics, clothing, meat, poultry, dairy, bakery, and health/beauty products, but exact version controls and effective dates are not publicly disclosed.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 8.P2 — not verified: The public can determine whether supplementary schemes apply and how conflicts are resolved.
Evidence route: Public source. Public criteria and sector scope are available but are not presented as a complete version-controlled scheme.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
9. Public certification criteria and position disclosure
What this means in plain English: This category asks whether an ordinary reader can find the certifier’s practical halal rules and understand the positions behind its approvals. 12 checks were fully supported, and 8 checks remained unverified.
5.14% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
20 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.4114 of 8 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 7.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.4114 of 0.4800 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Public certification criteria and position disclosure earns 1.0286 of 8 points. Of 20 enumerated subrequirements, 12 fulfilled, 8 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 5.14 percent: 20 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.4114 public accountability = 0.4114 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 9.C1 — not verified: The public disclosure is authorized, versioned, dated, and controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
Requirement 9.C2 — not verified: It identifies the governing Islamic and technical authority.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
Requirement 9.C3 — not verified: It addresses every applicable Form 1002-D field or marks it not applicable.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 9.O1 — not verified: Public criteria match the operative certification scheme.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 9.O2 — not verified: Changes to criteria are reflected in the controlled public version.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
Requirement 9.O3 — not verified: Supplementary-scheme positions and precedence are kept current.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 9.P1 — fulfilled: Religious or jurisprudential basis.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization certifies according to its own Operating Principles and Halal Criteria, which are based on the Quran and Sunnah.
Requirement 9.P2 — not verified: Supplementary destination-market schemes and precedence.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
Requirement 9.P3 — fulfilled: Mechanical poultry slaughter.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization prohibits mechanical slaughter for poultry.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P4 — fulfilled: Mechanical-line tasmiyah.
Evidence route: Public source. Blessing (Tasmiyyah) must be pronounced verbally by the slaughterer on each individual bird.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P5 — fulfilled: Slaughter-person requirements and supervision.
Evidence route: Public source. Requires that slaughter be performed manually by a sane adult Muslim.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P6 — fulfilled: Stunning and reversibility.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization does not accept any form of stunning.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P7 — fulfilled: Alive-at-cut control.
Evidence route: Public source. Requires that the animal be alive and healthy at the time of slaughter.
Requirement 9.P8 — fulfilled: Minimum vessel requirement.
Evidence route: Public source. Requires that the slaughter act sever the trachea, esophagus, and both jugular veins.
Requirement 9.P9 — fulfilled: Pork and animal derivatives.
Evidence route: Public source. Pork and its by-products are prohibited in certified facilities.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P10 — fulfilled: Alcohol and ethanol.
Evidence route: Public source. While alcohol use is prohibited, the organization allows residues of ethanol up to 5000 parts per million (0.5%).
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P11 — fulfilled: Processing aids and ingredient sources.
Evidence route: Public source. All ingredients and processing aids, such as rennet and gelatin, must be verified as halal or derived from plant or microbial sources.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P12 — fulfilled: Shared lines and cross-contact.
Evidence route: Public source. In processing plants where both halal and non-halal production occur, halal production must be performed in a separate unit or an approved segregated area, or it must precede non-halal production with thorough prior cleansing.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P13 — fulfilled: Sanitation or ritual cleansing.
Evidence route: Public source. The organization also expects that all machines and equipment are thoroughly cleaned or sanitized before halal processing.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 9.P14 — not verified: Certificate-level position communication.
Evidence route: Public source. Several material positions are public, including hand slaughter without stunning, but version control, full scope, authority, and certificate-level use are incomplete.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
10. Certificate traceability and mark control
What this means in plain English: This category asks whether a certificate can be checked for its holder, site, scope, dates, and current status, and whether misuse of the mark is controlled. None of the 10 checks was independently verified in the reviewed record.
0.00% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.0000 of 3 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 2.7000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.1800 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Certificate traceability and mark control earns 0.0000 of 3 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 10 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 10.C1 — not verified: Certificate templates contain required issuer, holder, site, product or activity scope, identifier, issue date, expiry date, and authorization.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.C2 — not verified: A certified-client and product directory is controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.C3 — not verified: Certificate status, renewal, suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.C4 — not verified: Halal-mark licensing, display, reproduction, translation, and misuse are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.C5 — not verified: Verification records are traceable to the exact certificate and issuer.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 10.O1 — not verified: Certificates and marks are monitored in use.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.O2 — not verified: Misuse and expired status are acted upon.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.O3 — not verified: Directory and status records are maintained.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 10.P1 — not verified: Consumers can verify current certificate status through a working HTTPS route, searchable directory, QR destination, or equivalent accessible mechanism.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Requirement 10.P2 — not verified: Public verification shows enough information to distinguish holder, scope, site or product, identifier, and validity.
Evidence route: Public source. No public exact-entity certificate register or status-control example was located.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
11. Complaints, appeals, and corrections
What this means in plain English: This category asks whether people can challenge a decision, report a problem, receive an independent review, and see appropriate corrective action. None of the 10 checks was independently verified in the reviewed record.
0.00% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.0000 of 1 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.9000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.0600 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Complaints, appeals, and corrections earns 0.0000 of 1 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 10 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 11.C1 — not verified: Complaints and appeals have documented procedures.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.C2 — not verified: Independent committee or reviewer requirements are defined.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.C3 — not verified: Islamic-affairs expertise participates where required.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.C4 — not verified: Investigation, decision, communication, corrective action, and records are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.C5 — not verified: Conflicts and recusals are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 11.O1 — not verified: The mechanism is implemented and reviewed.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.O2 — not verified: Complainants and appellants are informed of outcomes.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.O3 — not verified: Valid complaints can trigger investigation and certificate action.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 11.P1 — not verified: A working public route or contact method exists for complaints and appeals.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Requirement 11.P2 — not verified: The submission pathway and responsible organization are clear.
Evidence route: Public source. No public complaint, appeal, or correction procedure was located.
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
12. Operating history and demonstrated capacity
What this means in plain English: This category asks whether the organization has a verifiable operating record and enough qualified people and resources for the certification work it claims to perform. 8 checks had partial support, and 1 check remained unverified.
43.59% of this category was supported by the reviewed evidence.
View the detailed evidence and calculation
9 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.8718 of 2 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.
- Competence contribution
- 0.8118 of 1.8000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0600 of 0.1200 points.
Recorded category conclusion: Operating history and demonstrated capacity earns 0.9167 of 2 points. Of 9 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 8 partial, 1 not independently verified.
Why this metric earned 43.59 percent: 9 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings
Arithmetic: 0.8118 competence + 0.0600 public accountability = 0.8718 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 12.C1 — partial: The HCB defines competence and resource needs for each scope.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 12.C2 — partial: Audit time, staffing, sites, shifts, categories, and workload are considered.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 12.C3 — partial: External resources and outsourcing are controlled.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 12.C4 — partial: Records, internal audits, management review, and corrective action support continued delivery.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 12.O1 — partial: Current accreditation or direct evidence verifies active delivery capacity within scope.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 12.O2 — not verified: Current certificates or clients demonstrate active operations.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. No accepted requirement-specific evidence establishes this item. The result is an evidence limitation, not a finding of absence or misconduct.
Requirement 12.O3 — partial: Surveillance, recertification, and management review maintain capacity.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 12.P1 — partial: Operating history, current service scope, and accountable contact are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 12.P2 — partial: Confidential client volumes, payroll, and workload files need not be published when current accreditation verifies capacity.
Evidence route: Public source. The nonprofit has operated since 2022 and offers multiple service categories, but recent certificates and workload-to-personnel capacity are not public.
Public sources: Source 1
Authorized representative? Claim verification unlocks the private requirement-by-requirement improvement checklist at no charge. The annual review fee begins only when formal evidence is submitted. Open the review portal.
Bottom line
What you should know
What the evidence supports
- Legal identity and standing were the strongest-supported area: the reviewed record identifies an Illinois nonprofit organization, its public operating name, and its jurisdiction, while some relationship and issuer-link details remain only partly established.
- Ownership and control are partly documented because nonprofit status and two directors are public, but the public record does not establish a complete current board, control rights, or related-party structure.
- Leadership and governance are partly described through public directors and a Majlis oversight concept, but the public record is incomplete on member identities, appointments, decision authority, and who is accountable for halal and certification decisions.
What should make you cautious
- The reviewed record did not independently verify the personnel qualifications, authorizations, assignments, and ongoing competence needed to support the personnel findings; the requirement table identifies the affected items and evidence routes.
- The reviewed record did not independently verify the people or body responsible for Islamic authority and halal decision rights, including qualifications, appointments, authority, and final decision process; the requirement table identifies the affected items and evidence routes.
- The reviewed record did not substantiate enough evidence of halal-specific audit and certification controls, including how they are implemented in practice; the requirement table identifies the affected items and evidence routes. Missing information is not proof that any control does not exist.
What evidence could change this view
- What current, verifiable records would clarify qualified personnel?
- What current, verifiable records would clarify islamic authority and halal decision rights?
- What current, verifiable records would clarify certificate traceability and mark control?
View the original requirement-level questions
- What independently verifiable evidence, if any, could materially change the current finding for requirement 1.C4 under the published methodology?
- What independently verifiable evidence, if any, could materially change the current finding for requirement 1.O1 under the published methodology?
- What independently verifiable evidence, if any, could materially change the current finding for requirement 2.C1 under the published methodology?
- What independently verifiable evidence, if any, could materially change the current finding for requirement 2.C2 under the published methodology?
- What independently verifiable evidence, if any, could materially change the current finding for requirement 2.C3 under the published methodology?
- What independently verifiable evidence, if any, could materially change the current finding for requirement 2.C4 under the published methodology?
Credibility Score interpretation
- Model B assigns 15.5321 of 90 competence-assurance points, 0.0000 of 4 proportional accreditation-breadth points, and 1.7764 of 6 public-accountability points.
- No qualifying current comprehensive exact-entity accreditation was applied; competence is normalized from the same control and operational requirement evidence used across the national set, and accreditation breadth is zero.
- Recognition, commercial approval, membership, affiliate credentials, expired credentials, and scope that does not cover the assessed work do not qualify as current exact-entity accreditation breadth.
- Missing public information means the reviewed public record did not establish the disclosure; it is not proof that an undisclosed internal control does not exist.
Material records are rescored under the same rules, whether they raise or lower the result. Privately share information or evidence. Evidence-source names and contact details are not exposed publicly. An authorized representative may separately claim this certification body with qualifying documents. A verified claim does not confer editorial control or automatically change an article, Credibility Score, Grade, ranking, or certification status.
Read the full legal and evidence boundary
This organizational accountability assessment measures evidence supporting identity, control, responsible people, Islamic authority, halal-specific work, standards, public certification criteria, certificate controls, correction access, and demonstrated operations. Each of 137 enumerated subrequirements is shown below. A not-verified finding means the reviewed record did not establish the item; it is not proof that the control does not exist, that wrongdoing occurred, or that every certificate is invalid. Private evidence is described only at a non-identifying level. The existing series label is editorial branding and is not itself an allegation. Flags explain evidence already scored inside the twelve fixed metrics and create no separate bonus or penalty. The assessment is not a religious ruling, legal judgment, fraud finding, guarantee, or declaration that every certificate is valid or invalid. An undisclosed item is not treated as proof that no internal control exists.
Which organization and services this review covers
This review covers Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc., an Illinois nonprofit organization [1], and its halal certification services for the food, cosmetics, and clothing industries [2].
This review could not verify qualifying current independent accreditation for this organization [1]. Although the organization offers several service categories, the public record does not establish recent certificates or whether its workload is matched by personnel capacity [1].
This accountability assessment uses the published USDHS methodology as a framework for reviewing evidence. It does not replace the controlling HIPS standard or make a religious ruling about every certificate or product.
The published halal rules and positions
Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) says it certifies under its own Operating Principles and Halal Criteria, based on the Quran and Sunnah [2] [3]. It prohibits mechanical poultry slaughter and requires slaughter to be performed manually by a sane adult Muslim [4]. It also requires the animal to be alive and healthy at slaughter and requires the slaughter act to sever the trachea, esophagus, and both jugular veins [3] [4].
The organization does not accept any form of stunning [3]. It requires the blessing, or Tasmiyyah, to be spoken aloud by the slaughterer for each individual bird [4]. Pork and its by-products are prohibited in certified facilities [2]. Although alcohol use is prohibited, the organization allows ethanol residues of up to 5000 parts per million (0.5%) [5].
All ingredients and processing aids, including rennet and gelatin, must be verified as halal or come from plant or microbial sources [5]. At processing plants that make both halal and non-halal products, halal production must occur in a separate unit or approved segregated area, or come before non-halal production after thorough prior cleaning [3]. The organization also expects all machines and equipment to be thoroughly cleaned or sanitized before halal processing [2].
The organization's certified scope includes food, cosmetics, clothing, meat, poultry, dairy, bakery, and health/beauty products [2]. ANT8S refers to QR traceability for its vegan-certification program [6], but the reviewed source did not establish that this feature applies to halal certification. Its public materials also do not disclose exact version controls and effective dates for published standards, or whether material religious positions are printed on certificates [1].
What the available evidence shows
Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) publicly describes a certification process and specific religious criteria. However, the public record is limited by unverified personnel qualifications, the lack of qualifying current independent accreditation that this review could verify for the organization, and no public certificate register [1].
The organization clearly states positions on issues such as mechanical slaughter and stunning. But without verifiable evidence of implementation, including current client certificates or independent accreditation, an outside reviewer cannot independently confirm its operating capacity or the consistent application of its standards [1] [2].
What information could change this assessment
This section describes the evidence that could support a higher score for Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S). It does not mean a control is absent simply because the reviewed public record did not establish it. Any submission must match the exact assessed entity, state its dates and scope, and show who was responsible for implementation and decision-making.
Qualifying records can be public or submitted privately through the secure evidence pathway. Authenticated private records can support evidence about controls or operations, but they do not count as public transparency unless the organization makes the relevant information public.
- Legal identity and operating status: A current, authoritative registry or regulator record for Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) that shows the exact legal name, entity number, jurisdiction, formation date, active status, operating name, and any required certification-business registration not already established.
- Ownership and control: A current authoritative ownership filing or authenticated controlled record for Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) that identifies beneficial owners, ownership percentages, voting or governance rights, controlling persons, related entities, and conflict controls for the exact assessed entity.
- Governance and accountable leadership: A current Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) governing-body roster and organizational chart that identifies accountable leaders, their roles, the basis for their appointment or authority, management responsibilities, and responsibility for certification decisions at the organization level.
- Personnel competence and authorization: A current Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) personnel roster or independently assessed controlled record that identifies auditors, technical experts, reviewers, contractors, qualifications, sector experience, halal and audit training, authorization scope, assignments, monitoring, and competence review.
- Islamic authority and halal decision: Current Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) records identifying the Islamic-affairs experts or decision body, their qualifications and appointments, jurisprudential basis, review responsibility, authority at the organization level, and traceable participation in final halal decisions.
- Halal audit method and facility verification: A current controlled Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) audit procedure and corroborating recent files showing application and scope review, ingredient and process evaluation, on-site work, halal-specific observations, findings, corrective actions, reports, surveillance, and recertification.
- Impartiality and decision separation: A current Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) impartiality and decision-separation policy, with implementation records that identify conflict review, separation from consultancy, oversight membership, and separation among audit, technical review, Islamic review, and certification decision functions.
- Standards, scheme, and certification scope: A current Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) standard or scheme record that identifies the version, effective date, covered sectors and locations, exclusions, supplementary schemes, precedence rules, certificate scope, and responsible issuing entity.
- Public certification criteria and position disclosure: A current public Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) declaration or comparable methodology covering the governing standard and version, religious basis, scope and exclusions, practical halal positions, supplementary-scheme precedence, certificate communication, and a public verification route.
- Certificate traceability and mark control: A current public Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) certificate directory or verification method showing the certificate identifier, holder, site, products or scope, effective and expiry dates, live status, suspension or withdrawal, and enforceable controls for mark use and misuse.
- Complaints, appeals, and corrections: A current public Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) complaints, appeals, and corrections procedure that identifies ways to submit matters, acknowledgement and response timing, independent review, records, re-examination, corrective action, and non-retaliation or similar fairness protections.
- Operating history and demonstrated capacity: Current independently verifiable Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) operating records that show its timeline, active clients or certificates, sectors and locations served, workload, surveillance activity, and competent personnel capacity matched to that workload.
Corrections, appeals, and confirming authority to represent this certifier
Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S), or another affected party, may submit responsive records through the secure documentary-evidence form. Material evidence is evaluated under the same methodology whether it raises or lowers the Credibility Score.
An authorized representative may also use Claim this certification body. The claimant must document their identity, role, and authority to act for the exact assessed entity. That authority must be verified through qualifying documentation and an independently confirmable official contact channel. A claim stays private and pending until review; it does not give editorial control, reveal other submissions, or automatically change an article, Credibility Score, Grade, or ranking.
A correction request should identify the exact entity, statement, metric, source, effective dates, scope, responsible people, and requested correction. Publication does not depend on a response, and no organization has a private veto over a documented finding.
Frequently asked questions
What score and grade does this assessment give ANT8S?
The assessment record gives Al Nur Truly Halal Services Inc. (ANT8S) a 17% Credibility Score and Grade F. The original FAQ answer states 19% and Grade F, which conflicts with the assessment score; both figures appear in the supplied source. The source describes some public certification criteria, while identifying substantial gaps in verifiable accreditation, personnel qualifications, and public certificate traceability.
Does ANT8S permit mechanical poultry slaughter?
No. The organization prohibits mechanical poultry slaughter, requires slaughter to be performed manually by a sane adult Muslim, and requires Tasmiyyah to be pronounced verbally for each individual bird.
Does ANT8S permit stunning?
No. The organization does not accept any form of stunning.
Could this review verify current independent accreditation for ANT8S?
This review could not verify qualifying current independent accreditation for this organization in the public record.
How does ANT8S address alcohol?
The organization prohibits alcohol use but allows ethanol residues of up to 5000 parts per million (0.5%).
References
View the controlling HIPS publication