Part 1 · Prelude
A ranking should not be confused with an investigation. The separate Etimad business-practice investigation examines the company’s archived kosher-eligibility claim, its combined EarthKosher program, its public process, sampled certificates, and the unanswered question of who performs the halal-specific work. This article has a narrower purpose: it applies the same fixed organizational assessment used for every certifier.
The assessment asks eleven numbered questions about legal identity, ownership, governance, personnel, Islamic authority, halal audit method, impartiality, standards, certificate traceability, complaints, and operating capacity. Each question separates three different forms of evidence: control assurance, operating proof, and publicly verifiable evidence. Government records and other authoritative public sources count even when Etimad does not reproduce them on its website. An independent accreditation can substantiate controls examined within its scope, while accreditation cannot replace evidence that the system operates in practice.
Etimad’s public activity is real. Unrelated client certificates identify Etimad and repeatedly name Jamal Saleem as Halal Administrator, while campus and product records show its mark in use [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]. A public federal bankruptcy service list also links “Jamal Saleem Etimad, LLC” at Etimad’s published Dover address, but it does not identify an owner, percentage, or governing authority [13]. The issue for this score is not whether Etimad exists. It is how much of the organization’s authority and certification system can be independently substantiated.
No current accreditor-issued record was verified for Etimad. Its current pages do not name an accreditor or accreditation number, the official GAC directory search did not identify Etimad, and the current CICOT-recognized U.S. list reproduced by USDA does not include it [1] [2] [3] [4]. Those bounded searches do not prove that no credential exists anywhere. They mean this assessment awards no accreditation-derived control credit unless Etimad supplies a verifiable issuer, status, standard, dates, locations, and scope. This public assessment does not replace the controlling HIPS standard, an accreditation decision, a certification decision, or a religious ruling.
Halal Industry Exposé · Accountability Assessment
Etimad Halal Organizational accountability: 22% · Grade F · Insufficiently substantiated
Moderate confidence. Etimad receives credit for documented certification activity, a repeatedly named administrator, sampled certificate scopes, a public ingredient-and-process verification claim, and an operating history visible across unrelated clients. The reviewed record does not independently substantiate ownership, qualified personnel, Islamic decision authority, a complete halal audit system, impartial decision separation, current accreditation, an open certificate directory, or formal complaints and appeals controls.
This is an organizational accountability score, not a ruling that every Etimad certificate is invalid, proof that an undisclosed control does not exist, or a declaration that Jamal Saleem is fictitious or unqualified. Accreditation credit is awarded only when the issuing body, current status, standard, dates, and scope can be verified.
Halal Certification Body Accountability Assessment version 2.1. Source cutoff September 11, 2026. Last reviewed September 11, 2026. Raw score 22.02 out of 100.
Accreditation examined
No current accreditor verified · Not verified. Not verified. Not verified. Accredited Not verified; expiry Not verified.
Scope: Etimad’s current public pages do not name an accreditor or accreditation number. A direct GAC directory search and the current CICOT-recognized U.S. list did not identify Etimad. These bounded searches do not prove that no credential exists anywhere; they support awarding no accreditation-derived control credit until an issuer, standing, standard, dates, locations, and scope are verified.
Third-party independence: No accreditation body was identified for Etimad, so accreditor independence cannot be assessed and no accreditation assurance is transferred into the metric scores.
Status factor 0 percent; scope factor 0 percent; independence factor 0 percent; accreditation assurance factor 0 percent.
How USDHS grades organizational accountability
Each metric is 60 percent control assurance, 25 percent operational evidence, and 15 percent public evidence. Government records and other authoritative public sources count even when the certifier does not reproduce them on its own website. Accreditation supports only the control layer within its verified scope. 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.
Part 2
Numbered assessment metrics
1. Legal identity and operating status
Legal entity, jurisdiction, operating identity, formation, status, address, and required registrations.
3.94 of 7 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No accreditation-derived credit was available; the score relies on domain, certificate, client, and address records.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 2.10 points. Etimad consistently operates under the same name and has issued certificates, but a complete current formation and standing record was not obtained.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 1.31 points. Unrelated client certificates and a state halal-establishment record corroborate current certification activity.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 0.53 points. The operating name and Dover address are public, while entity number, formation date, standing, and operating location are not clearly disclosed.
Metric conclusion: An operating certifier is documented, but complete current legal identity and operating-location evidence remain incomplete.
2. Ownership and control
Beneficial owners, percentages, controlling persons, governance rights, related parties, and conflicts.
0.00 of 10 points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current independent accreditation or official ownership record was verified.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No accredited review, official filing, governing document, or signed ownership declaration was available.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No reviewed record identified who exercises ownership or controlling authority.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. The reviewed Delaware, court, accreditation, trademark, licensing, certificate, and first-party sources did not identify Etimad’s owners, exact percentages, or controlling authority.
Metric conclusion: Ownership and control remain unverified after authoritative public-record searches; no sensitive attribute is inferred.
3. Governance and accountable leadership
Named leadership, governing bodies, organizational structure, management responsibility, and accountable contacts.
2.00 of 8 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No independent accreditation record was available to substantiate governance controls.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 1.20 points. Etimad states that a team of professionals and experts exists, but publishes no organization chart or governing structure.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.50 points. Jamal Saleem is repeatedly identified as Halal Administrator, establishing one operating role without establishing governance authority.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.30 points. Public records and first-party pages identify Jamal Saleem’s repeated administrator association but do not name owners, executives, board members, quality management, impartiality oversight, or certification decision bodies.
Metric conclusion: One consequential role is documented, while accountable governance remains largely undisclosed.
4. Personnel competence and authorization
Auditor, reviewer, technical-expert, and contractor qualifications, training, authorization, monitoring, and assignments.
3.50 of 14 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No current independent accreditation or competence evaluation was verified.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 2.10 points. Certificates document a Halal Administrator title, but no competence procedure, authorization scope, monitoring system, or personnel roster was reviewed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.88 points. The repeated signatory role shows ongoing participation but not education, training, sector competence, audit experience, or direct assignments.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.53 points. Etimad describes professionals and experts but names none of the auditors, technical experts, or reviewers and publishes no qualifications.
Metric conclusion: A repeated administrator is visible; competence and authorization for the required roles are not substantiated.
5. Islamic authority and halal decision
Qualified Islamic-affairs personnel, governing authority, jurisprudential basis, review roles, and final halal decisions.
0.81 of 13 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No accreditation-derived assurance of Islamic governance or decision authority was available.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No governing document, authority appointment, jurisprudential procedure, or independent evaluation was verified.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.81 points. Jamal Saleem signs certificates as Halal Administrator, but the title does not establish religious-review qualifications or final decision authority.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. Etimad does not identify Islamic-affairs experts, qualifications, review responsibility, or the final halal decision-maker.
Metric conclusion: Certificate sign-off is visible, but qualified Islamic authority and the accountable halal decision chain are not verified.
6. Halal audit method and facility verification
Application, scope review, documents, on-site work, ingredients, processes, findings, corrections, reports, surveillance, and recertification.
5.60 of 16 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No accreditor-issued standard or scope was verified, so public and client evidence carry the full burden.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 2.40 points. Etimad says ingredients and processing methods must be verified, but does not publish the accountable audit, reporting, review, surveillance, or combined-program procedure.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 2.00 points. Campus reports and client certificates show real certification activity and some halal-specific adjustments, but no audit reports or responsible-person assignments were reviewed.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 1.20 points. The public process lists application, agreement, and certification without identifying an audit stage, qualified auditor, report, religious review, or decision committee.
Metric conclusion: Etimad states the correct verification objective, while the method and responsible halal personnel remain insufficiently substantiated.
7. Impartiality and decision separation
Conflicts, consultancy separation, impartiality oversight, and separation among audit, review, and certification decisions.
0.00 of 10 points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No independent accreditation or impartiality assessment was verified.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No impartiality policy, conflict procedure, committee, or governing separation rule was reviewed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No file-level or organizational evidence separates consultation, audit, technical review, Islamic review, and decision functions.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. Etimad’s public pages do not describe conflict controls or decision separation.
Metric conclusion: Impartiality and independent certification decision controls remain unverified.
8. Standards, scheme, and certification scope
Governing standards, sectors, locations, exclusions, religious positions, certificate scope, and scheme boundaries.
2.19 of 7 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No accreditor-issued scope or governing certification-body standard was verified.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 1.05 points. Etimad makes general halal-compliance claims but does not identify a governing standard or complete scheme rules.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 0.88 points. Sampled certificates identify holders, products, facilities, numbers, and dates across multiple industries.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.26 points. Public pages do not publish the applicable standards, exclusions, religious positions, or a complete certified scope directory.
Metric conclusion: Certificate-level scope is visible in samples, while the governing scheme and accredited boundaries are not.
9. Certificate traceability and mark control
Current certificate verification, identifiers, holders, sites, products, dates, status changes, and mark misuse controls.
2.19 of 7 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No independently evaluated certificate-directory or mark-control system was verified.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 1.05 points. Client-hosted certificates show a repeatable document format, but no directory, suspension, withdrawal, or misuse procedure was reviewed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 0.88 points. Multiple unrelated clients publish certificates with numbers, scopes, and validity periods.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.26 points. Consumers cannot verify every current certificate, status change, product, site, or mark authorization through a complete public Etimad directory.
Metric conclusion: Individual certificates are traceable, while system-wide current status and mark control remain incomplete.
10. Complaints, appeals, and corrections
Complaint and appeal routes, timing, independent review, records, corrections, escalation, and non-retaliation.
0.15 of 4 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No accreditation-derived assurance of complaint and appeal controls was available.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No formal complaint, appeal, independent disposition, correction-log, or response-time procedure was reviewed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 0 percent evidence factor; 0.00 points. No complaint, appeal, correction, or outcome record was available.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.15 points. A general contact route exists, but it is not a complete complaints and appeals procedure.
Metric conclusion: A contact channel exists; the accountability procedure and operating record do not.
11. Operating history and demonstrated capacity
Corroborated timeline, current activity, clients, sectors, personnel resources, and workload matched to competent capacity.
1.65 of 4 points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: No accredited scope or resource evaluation was verified.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.60 points. Etimad claims a professional team and more than 160 clients but does not publish personnel resources, assignments, or capacity controls.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.75 points. The domain dates to 2018 and unrelated certificates corroborate activity from 2020 through 2026.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 0.30 points. Etimad publishes a client-volume claim but not the staffing, sector authorization, workload, or historical detail needed to test it.
Metric conclusion: Operating activity is well corroborated; qualified capacity for the claimed scale is not.
Part 3
Conclusion
Strongest findings
- Independently hosted certificates document Etimad certification activity from at least 2020 through 2026.
- Jamal Saleem or M. Jamal Saleem appears repeatedly as Halal Administrator on unrelated client certificates.
- Sampled certificates identify holders, products or facilities, certificate numbers, and validity periods.
- Etimad’s current Services page states that ingredients and processing methods must be verified for halal compliance.
Material gaps
- Delaware, court, accreditation, trademark, licensing, and certificate-source searches did not verify beneficial ownership, exact percentages, controlling persons, or accountable governance.
- Personnel qualifications, Islamic-affairs authority, audit assignments, and certification-decision responsibilities were not verified.
- No current accreditor-issued record, governing halal standard, impartiality system, complete certificate directory, or formal complaint-and-appeal procedure was verified.
- The combined EarthKosher program does not publicly identify the separate halal personnel, observations, report, religious review, and decision that preserve a complete halal audit.
Unresolved questions
- Who owns and controls Etimad, and in what percentages?
- What qualifications and written authority support Jamal Saleem’s Halal Administrator role?
- Which personnel perform the halal audit, technical review, Islamic review, and final certification decision?
- Which halal standard and certification scheme govern Etimad’s work?
- Has any independent accreditor issued a current credential directly to Etimad, and for what scope?
- Where can consumers verify current certificate status, suspensions, withdrawals, and scope changes?
Critical-control caps
- Ownership and controlling authority were not verified through accreditation, official filings, governing documents, or a signed organizational declaration; a higher result would be capped at D.
- Personnel competence, Islamic authority, halal audit method, and decision separation earned 9.9125 of 53 points, or 18.70%; the core-control cap fixes the maximum grade at F.
Material records are rescored under the same rules, whether they raise or lower the result. Documentary evidence may be sent to director@halalstandards.org.
Frequently asked questions
Why does Etimad receive 22%, Grade F?
The reviewed record documents real certification activity, a repeated administrator name, sampled certificate scopes, and a public verification claim. Delaware, court, accreditation, trademark, licensing, certificate, and first-party searches still do not independently substantiate ownership, qualified personnel, Islamic authority, halal audit controls, impartial decision separation, accreditation, certificate-status verification, or formal complaints and appeals controls.
Is Etimad currently accredited?
No current accreditor-issued directory entry, certificate, standard, scope, or status record was verified in this review. Etimad may change that finding by identifying the issuing accreditation body and providing a current credential with its scope, dates, locations, and restrictions.
Does the score prove Etimad has no halal controls?
No. The score distinguishes evidence from absence. Undisclosed or unverified controls receive no or limited credit, but the assessment does not claim that every undisclosed control is nonexistent or that every Etimad certificate is invalid.
Why is this separate from the Etimad investigation?
The investigation examines documented business practices and public claims. This ranking article applies a standardized organizational methodology. Keeping them separate prevents an investigative narrative from being mistaken for the scoring formula.
Can Etimad’s score change?
Yes. USDHS will rescore material authoritative evidence under the same control, operational, and transparency layers. New evidence may raise or lower the result, and substantive corrections will be dated.
References
- Etimad Halal, Who We Are
- Etimad Halal, Services
- GCC Accreditation Center, Accredited Bodies
- USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, CICOT U.S. Foreign Halal Certification Bodies for 2025–2028
- New York Department of Agriculture and Markets, Halal Establishment Registrations
- LFA Machines DFW, Etimad certificate dated April 30, 2020
- C.A.L. Italia, Etimad certificate dated October 12, 2022
- Special DM, Etimad facility certificate dated June 27, 2025
- West Penetone, Etimad certificate dated May 8, 2026
- EarthKosher, Combined Kosher and Halal Certification
- Verisign RDAP, etimadhalal.com
- Delaware Division of Corporations, Registered Agents
- Public federal bankruptcy service list linking Jamal Saleem and Etimad, LLC