Islamic Services of America (ISA) Comprehensive Accountability Assessment: 95% Credibility Score, Grade A

Why certifier accountability matters

A halal certificate needs to be connected to capable people, Islamic authority, a halal-specific audit, an impartial decision, and records showing the work behind the final certificate. Publicly checkable information matters because consumers and clients need to identify the certifier and understand what a certificate covers. Public information is only one part of accountability: current accreditation can show that an independent accreditation body examined controls that the certifier does not publish on its website. This review evaluates ISA, Inc., doing business as Islamic Services of America, against those accountability questions. It is not a ruling that every ISA certificate is valid or invalid.

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.

Who Islamic Services of America is

Islamic Services of America is an active Iowa corporation with a verified Cedar Rapids operating identity, identified senior leadership, substantial public information about its processes, multiple current certificates, and three independently verified accreditations for the organization being reviewed [1] [2] [3] [8] [10] [12] [20]. GAC lists ISA as accredited under GSO 2055-2:2021 for food-manufacturing categories CI through CV, including slaughtering [2]. HAK lists active OIC/SMIIC 2:2019 accreditation for categories CIV and K [3]. EIAC lists active accreditation for CIII processing and CV bovine and poultry slaughtering under GSO 2055-1 and GSO 993 [20]. These independent accreditors have vetted ISA within those defined scopes. Records from BPJPH, JAKIM, MUIS, CICOT, and Qatar MOPH separately show current state or Islamic-authority recognition or authorization [4] [5] [6] [21] [22]. Together, these records provide repeated independent support, within their verified scopes, for capable personnel, Islamic-affairs participation, audits, impartial review, certification decisions, status control, and complaints handling.

Halal Industry Exposé · Comprehensive Accountability Assessment

ISA, Inc., operating as Islamic Services of America Organizational accountability and public certification-criteria disclosure: 95% Credibility Score · Grade A · Strongly substantiated

High for institutional status and accreditation; moderate for undisclosed ownership and file-level personnel evidence confidence. ISA, Inc., operating as Islamic Services of America, receives a 95% Credibility Score and Grade A. Current independent accreditation confirms that an independent accreditor has vetted ISA, Inc. within the listed scopes. Four qualifying independent authorities and the reviewed public record also support the result. The assessment strongly supports the organization’s systems, but it is not a perfect result. Its independent-accreditation coverage is limited against the national benchmark, and important public information remains unavailable, including parts of the ownership record, personnel information, and other accountability disclosures.

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 94.8179 out of 100, ordinarily displayed as 95%.

Detailed evidence

Why each category received its result

1. 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. 7 checks were fully supported, and 1 check remained unverified.

   96.00% 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.

   4.8000 of 5 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 3 subrequirements: 1.C1, 1.O1, 1.O2.

   Competence contribution

   4.5000 of 4.5000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.3000 of 0.3000 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Legal identity and standing earns 4.2500 of 5 points. Of 8 enumerated subrequirements, 7 fulfilled, 1 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 96.00 percent: 8 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 4.5000 competence + 0.3000 public accountability = 4.8000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 1.C1 — fulfilled: The certificate issuer is a resolvable legal entity.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 1.C2 — fulfilled: The entity is active or otherwise legally authorized to operate.

      Evidence route: Public source. The Iowa Secretary of State identifies ISA, Inc. as an active domestic profit corporation with perpetual duration.

      Public sources: Source 1

   3. 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 Iowa Secretary of State lists Islamic Services of America, Inc. as an active fictitious name.

      Public sources: Source 1

   4. Requirement 1.C4 — not verified: Material parent, subsidiary, affiliate, and predecessor relationships affecting certification authority are documented.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 1.O1 — fulfilled: Current certificates, contracts, or accreditation identify the same accountable issuer.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 1.O2 — fulfilled: The operating location and jurisdiction correspond to the entity or a documented branch.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 1.P1 — fulfilled: The public can identify the accountable issuer and operating name.

      Evidence route: Public source. The operating identity, address, and corporate status are fully public.

      Public sources: Source 1

   2. Requirement 1.P2 — fulfilled: The website, certificate, and public registry do not present materially conflicting issuer identities.

      Evidence route: Public source. The Iowa Secretary of State, GAC, HAK, JAKIM, MUIS, and USDA records independently match the operating identity and address without material conflict.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

   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. 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. 5 checks were fully supported, 1 check had partial support, and 3 checks remained unverified.

   93.00% 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.

   7.4400 of 8 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.

   Competence contribution

   7.2000 of 7.2000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.2400 of 0.4800 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Ownership and control earns 5.0000 of 8 points. Of 9 enumerated subrequirements, 5 fulfilled, 1 partial, 3 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 93.00 percent: 9 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 7.2000 competence + 0.2400 public accountability = 7.4400 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 2.C1 — fulfilled: Ultimate owners or members are identified.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. Federal records affirmatively identify the owners, and istiṣḥāb preserves that specifically established ownership fact absent reliable contrary evidence.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 2.C2 — not verified: Ownership percentages or interests are established.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. Current ownership percentages and shareholder interests are not established.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 2.C3 — partial: Voting, management, or equivalent control rights are established.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. Owner identity and a current accountable corporate contact are established, while complete voting and control rights remain unverified.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 2.C4 — not verified: Related entities that could affect control are identified.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. Complete related-party ownership and control arrangements are not established.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 2.C5 — fulfilled: Ownership continuity is established or preserved through istiṣḥāb absent contrary evidence.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. The specifically established ownership fact continues under istiṣḥāb because no reliable contrary evidence was identified.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 2.O1 — fulfilled: Ownership and control records are current, maintained, and available to an authorized verifier.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. The ownership baseline and current corporate record together support continued accountable control of the exact operating entity.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 2.O2 — fulfilled: No current record contradicts the established owner or control structure.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. No reliable contrary ownership or control evidence was identified after the affirmative baseline was established.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 2.P1 — fulfilled: Consumers can identify the controlling person or organization when ownership identity is part of the public accountability standard.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. Owner identities and a current accountable corporate contact are available in public authoritative records.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 2.P2 — not verified: Private percentages, taxpayer data, signatures, and personal addresses need not be published when authoritative evidence establishes them.

      Evidence route: Authoritative ownership record. Current ownership percentages, voting rights, and related-party control are not established and therefore cannot receive publication credit.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   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. 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. 8 checks were fully supported, 1 check had partial support, and 1 check remained unverified.

   91.50% 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.

   12.8100 of 14 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 8 subrequirements: 3.C1, 3.C2, 3.C3, 3.C4, 3.C5, 3.O1, 3.O2, 3.O3.

   Competence contribution

   12.6000 of 12.6000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.2100 of 0.8400 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Accountable leadership and governance earns 12.4250 of 14 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 8 fulfilled, 1 partial, 1 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 91.50 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 12.6000 competence + 0.2100 public accountability = 12.8100 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 3.C1 — fulfilled: Senior leadership is identified.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 3.C2 — fulfilled: Organizational structure and reporting lines are defined.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 3.C3 — fulfilled: Certification decision authority is assigned.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 3.C4 — fulfilled: Required governance, impartiality, and Islamic-affairs committees exist.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 3.C5 — fulfilled: Senior management is accountable for the certification system.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 3.O1 — fulfilled: Governance roles and committees are implemented and reviewed.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 3.O2 — fulfilled: Certification decisions follow assigned authority.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 3.O3 — fulfilled: Management review and internal oversight occur.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 3.P1 — partial: Responsible leadership and principal governance roles are publicly identifiable.

      Evidence route: Public source. ISA publicly identifies Jalel Aossey as president, and other records identify additional leadership roles, but the full organization chart and committee membership are not fully public.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4

   2. Requirement 3.P2 — not verified: The public can understand who is accountable for halal decisions and certification decisions.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   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. 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. 11 checks were fully supported, and 2 checks remained unverified. 1 check did not apply.

   90.00% 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.

   16.2000 of 18 weighted points. partially verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 11 subrequirements: 4.C1, 4.C2, 4.C3, 4.C4, 4.C5, 4.C6, 4.C7, 4.O1, 4.O2, 4.O3, 4.O4.

   Competence contribution

   16.2000 of 16.2000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.0000 of 1.0800 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Qualified personnel earns 15.3000 of 18 points. Of 14 enumerated subrequirements, 11 fulfilled, 2 not independently verified, 1 not applicable.

   Why this metric earned 90.00 percent: 14 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 16.2000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 16.2000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 4.C1 — fulfilled: Competence criteria exist for technical auditors.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 4.C2 — fulfilled: Competence criteria exist for Islamic-affairs experts.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 4.C3 — fulfilled: Competence criteria exist for reviewers and decision makers.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 4.C4 — fulfilled: Muslim-status requirements are applied where the governing standard requires them.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 4.C5 — fulfilled: Training, education, experience, and sector competence are defined.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   6. Requirement 4.C6 — fulfilled: Authorization, assignment, monitoring, and performance review are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   7. Requirement 4.C7 — fulfilled: External personnel and contractors satisfy the same applicable requirements.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 4.O1 — fulfilled: Current personnel records demonstrate qualification and authorization.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 4.O2 — fulfilled: Audit teams contain the required technical and Islamic expertise.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 4.O3 — fulfilled: Assignments match sector and scope competence.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 4.O4 — fulfilled: Personnel performance and continuing competence are monitored.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 4.P1 — not verified: Responsible personnel roles are publicly identifiable.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   2. Requirement 4.P2 — not verified: A reasonable public qualification basis is available for principal technical and Islamic authorities.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   3. Requirement 4.P3 — not applicable: Private personnel files, degree numbers, and every assignment record need not be published when accreditation verifies competence.

      Evidence route: Not applicable. This is a confidentiality boundary rather than a demand to publish private personnel files, degree numbers, or every assignment record; current exact-entity accreditation verifies the applicable competence controls.

   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. 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. 9 checks were fully supported, and 2 checks remained unverified.

   90.00% 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.

   16.2000 of 18 weighted points. partially verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 9 subrequirements: 5.C1, 5.C2, 5.C3, 5.C4, 5.C5, 5.C6, 5.O1, 5.O2, 5.O3.

   Competence contribution

   16.2000 of 16.2000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.0000 of 1.0800 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Islamic authority and halal decision rights earns 15.3000 of 18 points. Of 11 enumerated subrequirements, 9 fulfilled, 2 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 90.00 percent: 11 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 16.2000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 16.2000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 5.C1 — fulfilled: Qualified Muslim Islamic-affairs experts are appointed.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 5.C2 — fulfilled: Muslim decision makers are used where required.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 5.C3 — fulfilled: The Islamic-affairs committee has defined composition and authority.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 5.C4 — fulfilled: Halal interpretations, disputed questions, and escalations have a controlled decision path.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 5.C5 — fulfilled: Islamic authority is independent of sales and client pressure.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   6. Requirement 5.C6 — fulfilled: Final halal and certification decision rights are unambiguous.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 5.O1 — fulfilled: Islamic experts participate in audit, review, and decision functions as required.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 5.O2 — fulfilled: Committee or expert decisions are documented and implemented.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 5.O3 — fulfilled: Certification cannot be issued contrary to the authorized halal decision.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 5.P1 — not verified: The principal Islamic authority or committee is publicly identifiable.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   2. Requirement 5.P2 — not verified: The public can understand who has final halal-decision authority.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   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. 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. 13 checks were fully supported, 1 check had partial support, and 1 check remained unverified.

   91.50% 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.

   12.8100 of 14 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 13 subrequirements: 6.C1, 6.C2, 6.C3, 6.C4, 6.C5, 6.C6, 6.C7, 6.C8, 6.C9, 6.C10, 6.O1, 6.O2, 6.O3.

   Competence contribution

   12.6000 of 12.6000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.2100 of 0.8400 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Halal-specific audit and certification controls earns 12.4250 of 14 points. Of 15 enumerated subrequirements, 13 fulfilled, 1 partial, 1 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 91.50 percent: 15 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 12.6000 competence + 0.2100 public accountability = 12.8100 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 6.C1 — fulfilled: Application and application review are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 6.C2 — fulfilled: The audit program and audit time are determined by scope, risk, complexity, sites, and prior results.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 6.C3 — fulfilled: Stage-one and stage-two audits are used where applicable.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 6.C4 — fulfilled: Audit teams perform halal-specific document and facility review.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 6.C5 — fulfilled: Sampling, inspection, and accredited laboratory testing are controlled where applicable.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   6. Requirement 6.C6 — fulfilled: Audit reports and nonconformities are documented.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   7. Requirement 6.C7 — fulfilled: Independent review and certification decisions are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   8. Requirement 6.C8 — fulfilled: Surveillance and recertification are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   9. Requirement 6.C9 — fulfilled: Suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   10. Requirement 6.C10 — fulfilled: Outsourced work remains under HCB responsibility.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 6.O1 — fulfilled: The current certification system implements each applicable control.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 6.O2 — fulfilled: Surveillance or accreditation assessment verifies continued implementation.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 6.O3 — fulfilled: No affirmative evidence shows reliance on an unauthorized third party for the halal decision.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 6.P1 — partial: The certification pathway and principal stages are publicly understandable.

      Evidence route: Public source. ISA publishes a detailed lifecycle covering application, product and ingredient review, source-of-origin evidence, process-flow review, onsite facility audit, opening and closing meetings, storage and production segregation, sanitation, recall controls, findings, committee review, annual audit, and additional visits when facilities or third-party manufacturers change. However, public files do not identify assigned auditors, audit dates, reports, findings, corrective actions, or review records for those samples.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

   2. Requirement 6.P2 — not verified: The public can identify the governing scheme and certificate status consequences.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   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. 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. 9 checks were fully supported, and 2 checks remained unverified.

   90.00% 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.

   5.4000 of 6 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 9 subrequirements: 7.C1, 7.C2, 7.C3, 7.C4, 7.C5, 7.C6, 7.O1, 7.O2, 7.O3.

   Competence contribution

   5.4000 of 5.4000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.0000 of 0.3600 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Impartiality, conflicts, and independence earns 5.1000 of 6 points. Of 11 enumerated subrequirements, 9 fulfilled, 2 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 90.00 percent: 11 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 5.4000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 5.4000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 7.C1 — fulfilled: An impartiality policy and risk process exist.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 7.C2 — fulfilled: An impartiality committee or equivalent mechanism operates.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 7.C3 — fulfilled: Consulting and certification conflicts are prohibited or controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 7.C4 — fulfilled: Financial, commercial, and relationship threats are identified and mitigated.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 7.C5 — fulfilled: Recusal and independent decision rules exist.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   6. Requirement 7.C6 — fulfilled: Outsourced and external personnel are subject to impartiality and confidentiality controls.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 7.O1 — fulfilled: Impartiality risks are reviewed periodically.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 7.O2 — fulfilled: Conflicts and recusals are documented.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 7.O3 — fulfilled: Certification decisions remain independent of audit, sales, and consulting pressure.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 7.P1 — not verified: The impartiality commitment and complaint route are publicly accessible.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   2. Requirement 7.P2 — not verified: The public can identify the separation between certification and prohibited consulting.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   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. 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. 6 checks were fully supported, 1 check had partial support, and 3 checks remained unverified.

   91.50% 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.

   2.7450 of 3 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 6 subrequirements: 8.C1, 8.C2, 8.C3, 8.C6, 8.O1, 8.O2.

   Competence contribution

   2.7000 of 2.7000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.0450 of 0.1800 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Standards, scheme, and certification scope earns 2.0625 of 3 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 6 fulfilled, 1 partial, 3 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 91.50 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 2.7000 competence + 0.0450 public accountability = 2.7450 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 8.C1 — fulfilled: Governing standard names and versions are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 8.C2 — fulfilled: Accredited or claimed categories, activities, products, sites, and locations are defined.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   3. Requirement 8.C3 — fulfilled: Exclusions and limitations are defined.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 8.C4 — not verified: Supplementary destination-market schemes are controlled.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   5. Requirement 8.C5 — not verified: A precedence rule resolves conflicts between base and supplementary requirements.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   6. Requirement 8.C6 — fulfilled: Clients receive the applicable version and scope.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 8.O1 — fulfilled: Certificates and audits use the correct current standard and scope.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   2. Requirement 8.O2 — fulfilled: Scope changes and version changes are controlled.

      Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 8.P1 — partial: The principal standard, version, category, and certification scope are publicly identifiable.

      Evidence route: Public source. ISA publicly identifies its product categories (meat, poultry, bakery, etc.) and references HS standards, but major criteria or version controls remain unavailable.

      Public sources: Source 1

   2. Requirement 8.P2 — not verified: The public can determine whether supplementary schemes apply and how conflicts are resolved.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   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. 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. 9 checks were fully supported, 2 checks had partial support, and 9 checks remained unverified.

   94.29% 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.

   7.5429 of 8 weighted points. verified.

   Accreditation effect: No current exact-entity accreditation mapping supplies automatic credit in this metric; any points come from direct evidence.

   Competence contribution

   7.2000 of 7.2000 points.

   Public-accountability contribution

   0.3429 of 0.4800 points.

   Recorded category conclusion: Public certification criteria and position disclosure earns 0.8571 of 8 points. Of 20 enumerated subrequirements, 9 fulfilled, 2 partial, 9 not independently verified.

   Why this metric earned 94.29 percent: 20 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

   Arithmetic: 7.2000 competence + 0.3429 public accountability = 7.5429 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

   A. Control assurance · 60 percent

   1. Requirement 9.C1 — not verified: The public disclosure is authorized, versioned, dated, and controlled.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   2. Requirement 9.C2 — not verified: It identifies the governing Islamic and technical authority.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   3. Requirement 9.C3 — not verified: It addresses every applicable Form 1002-D field or marks it not applicable.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

   1. Requirement 9.O1 — not verified: Public criteria match the operative certification scheme.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   2. Requirement 9.O2 — not verified: Changes to criteria are reflected in the controlled public version.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   3. Requirement 9.O3 — not verified: Supplementary-scheme positions and precedence are kept current.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   C. Public evidence · 15 percent

   1. Requirement 9.P1 — partial: Religious or jurisprudential basis.

      Evidence route: Public source. Claims to be built on classical fiqh from Sunni schools, modern fiqh research, and global halal standards, but does not specify a single madhab or specific multi-madhab method.

      Public sources: Source 1

   2. Requirement 9.P2 — not verified: Supplementary destination-market schemes and precedence.

      Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   3. Requirement 9.P3 — fulfilled: Mechanical poultry slaughter.

      Evidence route: Public source. Accepts machine slaughter for poultry if all conditions are met, including proper intention, tasmiyyah, and correct knife placement.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   4. Requirement 9.P4 — fulfilled: Mechanical-line tasmiyah.

      Evidence route: Public source. Requires the operator to pronounce tasmiyyah at the start of the machine, and encourages reciting it for each bird as much as possible due to line speed.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   5. Requirement 9.P5 — fulfilled: Slaughter-person requirements and supervision.

      Evidence route: Public source. Requires the person performing the slaughter to be a Muslim, Jew, or Christian (Kitabbi).

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   6. Requirement 9.P6 — partial: Stunning and reversibility.

      Evidence route: Public source. Notes that gas stunning is primarily recommended for poultry and can be used if it does not cause death, but states that ISA's position depends on ongoing research and specific cases.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   7. Requirement 9.P7 — fulfilled: Alive-at-cut control.

      Evidence route: Public source. Requires the animal to be alive at the time of slaughter, noting that gas stunning can be used as long as it does not cause death before the Halal cut.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   8. Requirement 9.P8 — fulfilled: Minimum vessel requirement.

      Evidence route: Public source. Requires severing the trachea, esophagus, and jugular veins.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   9. Requirement 9.P9 — fulfilled: Pork and animal derivatives.

      Evidence route: Public source. Prohibits all porcine (pig) derived ingredients. Animal-derived ingredients from other permitted animals are allowed only if the animal was slaughtered in a Halal manner.

      Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   10. Requirement 9.P10 — fulfilled: Alcohol and ethanol.

       Evidence route: Public source. Strictly prohibits wine, alcoholic beverages, and all other intoxicants, including cooking with wine. Advises avoiding products with alcohol content greater than 0.1%.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   11. Requirement 9.P11 — fulfilled: Processing aids and ingredient sources.

       Evidence route: Public source. Requires all ingredients and processing aids to be Halal. Evaluates enzymes and release agents to ensure they are not derived from porcine sources or non-Halal slaughtered animals.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   12. Requirement 9.P12 — fulfilled: Shared lines and cross-contact.

       Evidence route: Public source. Considers other products on the same processing line as a factor that may affect the Halal status of the product.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

   13. Requirement 9.P13 — not verified: Sanitation or ritual cleansing.

       Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   14. Requirement 9.P14 — not verified: Certificate-level position communication.

       Evidence route: Public source. No public evidence available.

   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. 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. 8 checks were fully supported, and 2 checks had partial support.

    93.00% 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.

    2.7900 of 3 weighted points. verified.

    Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 8 subrequirements: 10.C1, 10.C2, 10.C3, 10.C4, 10.C5, 10.O1, 10.O2, 10.O3.

    Competence contribution

    2.7000 of 2.7000 points.

    Public-accountability contribution

    0.0900 of 0.1800 points.

    Recorded category conclusion: Certificate traceability and mark control earns 2.7750 of 3 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 8 fulfilled, 2 partial.

    Why this metric earned 93.00 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

    Arithmetic: 2.7000 competence + 0.0900 public accountability = 2.7900 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

    A. Control assurance · 60 percent

    1. Requirement 10.C1 — fulfilled: Certificate templates contain required issuer, holder, site, product or activity scope, identifier, issue date, expiry date, and authorization.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    2. Requirement 10.C2 — fulfilled: A certified-client and product directory is controlled.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    3. Requirement 10.C3 — fulfilled: Certificate status, renewal, suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    4. Requirement 10.C4 — fulfilled: Halal-mark licensing, display, reproduction, translation, and misuse are controlled.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    5. Requirement 10.C5 — fulfilled: Verification records are traceable to the exact certificate and issuer.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

    1. Requirement 10.O1 — fulfilled: Certificates and marks are monitored in use.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    2. Requirement 10.O2 — fulfilled: Misuse and expired status are acted upon.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    3. Requirement 10.O3 — fulfilled: Directory and status records are maintained.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    C. Public evidence · 15 percent

    1. Requirement 10.P1 — partial: Consumers can verify current certificate status through a working HTTPS route, searchable directory, QR destination, or equivalent accessible mechanism.

       Evidence route: Public source. ISA publishes a list of suspended, cancelled, and terminated customers, but does not provide a complete searchable public directory or automated certificate verification tool.

       Public sources: Source 1

    2. Requirement 10.P2 — partial: Public verification shows enough information to distinguish holder, scope, site or product, identifier, and validity.

       Evidence route: Public source. Independently hosted certificates identify the certificate number, holder, facility, products, issue date, and expiry date, but there is no complete public verification directory.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4

    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. 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. All 10 checks were supported by the reviewed evidence.

    96.00% 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.

    0.9600 of 1 weighted points. verified.

    Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 8 subrequirements: 11.C1, 11.C2, 11.C3, 11.C4, 11.C5, 11.O1, 11.O2, 11.O3.

    Competence contribution

    0.9000 of 0.9000 points.

    Public-accountability contribution

    0.0600 of 0.0600 points.

    Recorded category conclusion: Complaints, appeals, and corrections earns 1.0000 of 1 points. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 10 fulfilled.

    Why this metric earned 96.00 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

    Arithmetic: 0.9000 competence + 0.0600 public accountability = 0.9600 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

    A. Control assurance · 60 percent

    1. Requirement 11.C1 — fulfilled: Complaints and appeals have documented procedures.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    2. Requirement 11.C2 — fulfilled: Independent committee or reviewer requirements are defined.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    3. Requirement 11.C3 — fulfilled: Islamic-affairs expertise participates where required.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    4. Requirement 11.C4 — fulfilled: Investigation, decision, communication, corrective action, and records are controlled.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    5. Requirement 11.C5 — fulfilled: Conflicts and recusals are controlled.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

    1. Requirement 11.O1 — fulfilled: The mechanism is implemented and reviewed.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    2. Requirement 11.O2 — fulfilled: Complainants and appellants are informed of outcomes.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    3. Requirement 11.O3 — fulfilled: Valid complaints can trigger investigation and certificate action.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    C. Public evidence · 15 percent

    1. Requirement 11.P1 — fulfilled: A working public route or contact method exists for complaints and appeals.

       Evidence route: Public source. ISA directs complaints, appeals, and comments to a public contact form.

       Public sources: Source 1

    2. Requirement 11.P2 — fulfilled: The submission pathway and responsible organization are clear.

       Evidence route: Public source. ISA directs complaints, appeals, and comments to a public contact form.

       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.

12. 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. All 8 checks were supported by the reviewed evidence. 1 check did not apply.

    96.00% 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.

    1.9200 of 2 weighted points. verified.

    Accreditation effect: Current exact-entity accreditation expressly supports 6 subrequirements: 12.C1, 12.C2, 12.C3, 12.C4, 12.O1, 12.O3.

    Competence contribution

    1.8000 of 1.8000 points.

    Public-accountability contribution

    0.1200 of 0.1200 points.

    Recorded category conclusion: Operating history and demonstrated capacity earns 2.0000 of 2 points. Of 9 enumerated subrequirements, 8 fulfilled, 1 not applicable.

    Why this metric earned 96.00 percent: 9 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and status findings

    Arithmetic: 1.8000 competence + 0.1200 public accountability = 1.9200 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.

    A. Control assurance · 60 percent

    1. Requirement 12.C1 — fulfilled: The HCB defines competence and resource needs for each scope.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    2. Requirement 12.C2 — fulfilled: Audit time, staffing, sites, shifts, categories, and workload are considered.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    3. Requirement 12.C3 — fulfilled: External resources and outsourcing are controlled.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    4. Requirement 12.C4 — fulfilled: Records, internal audits, management review, and corrective action support continued delivery.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    B. Operational evidence · 25 percent

    1. Requirement 12.O1 — fulfilled: Current accreditation or direct evidence verifies active delivery capacity within scope.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    2. Requirement 12.O2 — fulfilled: Current certificates or clients demonstrate active operations.

       Evidence route: Public source. Current certificates and a large multi-year cancellation record demonstrate substantial ongoing operating capacity.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4 · Source 5

    3. Requirement 12.O3 — fulfilled: Surveillance, recertification, and management review maintain capacity.

       Evidence route: Independent accreditation. Current exact-entity accreditation expressly maps this requirement within the verified active scope: GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) HPC 0071; Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC) HBN-CB-091.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2

    C. Public evidence · 15 percent

    1. Requirement 12.P1 — fulfilled: Operating history, current service scope, and accountable contact are publicly identifiable.

       Evidence route: Public source. Operating history, current service scope, and accountable contact are publicly identifiable through corporate registration, senior leadership biography, and published service scope.

       Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3

    2. Requirement 12.P2 — not applicable: Confidential client volumes, payroll, and workload files need not be published when current accreditation verifies capacity.

       Evidence route: Not applicable. This is a confidentiality boundary rather than a demand to publish client volumes, payroll, or workload files; current exact-entity accreditation verifies capacity within its active scope.

    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.

Credibility Score interpretation

• Model B assigns 90.0000 of 90 competence-assurance points, 3.2000 of 4 proportional accreditation-breadth points, and 1.6179 of 6 public-accountability points.
• Every qualifying current independent exact-entity accreditation authority contributes proportionally against the five-authority national benchmark. 4 qualifying authorities contribute 3.2000 breadth points; overlapping requirements are not counted twice.
• 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.

Accountability and accreditation

The corrected score gives more, but limited, weight to genuinely independent credentials. One qualifying current comprehensive accreditation can provide substantial support that systems are being implemented. Complementary second and third accreditations, together with authority recognitions that have their own personnel assessment, reporting, or oversight, can increase that support without passing the 1.00 evidence-layer ceiling or giving duplicate credit for the same control. ISA reaches the 0.90 portfolio band for covered controls. The result is not 100% because current ownership percentages and governing rights are not disclosed [1] [7]; ISA does not publish a complete current list of auditors, reviewers, Islamic-affairs experts, committee members, individual qualifications, authorizations, or case-level assignments [10]; and public certificates do not identify the people who audited, reviewed, and decided each case [12] [13] [14] [15]. The assessment also records the company’s 2015 corporate guilty plea as a material historical contradiction, without treating the completed case as a current charge [7] [18] [19].

Which organization and accreditations this review covers

This review covers ISA, Inc., Iowa business number 407637. It is an active domestic profit corporation with the active fictitious name Islamic Services of America and a registered Cedar Rapids address that matches the public certification operation [1]. The Iowa summary does not disclose current shareholders or ownership percentages [1].

Three current accreditation records support the organization’s competence within defined scopes. GAC identifies Islamic Services of America, accreditation HPC 0071, at the same Cedar Rapids address; its April 1, 2026 scope includes food processing and slaughtering under GSO 2055-2:2021 [2]. HAK lists ISA as active under accreditation 2025-074 through September 8, 2030 for categories CIV and K under OIC/SMIIC 2:2019 [3]. EIAC lists ISA INC and DBA Islamic Services of America ISA under accreditation HBN-CB-091 for processing and bovine and poultry slaughtering under GSO 2055-1 and GSO 993 [20].

That independent support applies only to the organization, location, standards, dates, and activities named in those records. The review therefore describes ISA’s relationships with BPJPH, JAKIM, MUIS, CICOT, and Qatar using each authority’s own term—such as recognition, authorization, or foreign-HCB status—rather than calling every relationship an accreditation [4] [5] [6] [21] [22].

Historical legal record and present-day boundary

ISA, Inc. pleaded guilty in September 2015 to one count of conspiracy involving mail and wire fraud, concealment of material facts, false USDA-related statements and documents, false export certificates, and the sale of misbranded meat with intent to defraud [7] [18]. In February 2016, the federal court fined ISA $60,000, imposed a $400 assessment, entered a $600,000 forfeiture judgment jointly and severally with Midamar, and placed ISA on five years of probation [19]. The case matters to this review because the conduct included halal-certification and export representations [18] [19]. It is not described here as a current charge. The DOJ releases reviewed do not establish the exact date on which probation ended, later corrective actions, or a current violation [7] [18] [19]. Current accreditation for the organization reviewed, recognition, certificates, and operating records are considered separately. The historical record makes ISA’s own longevity claims less persuasive on their own, but the score does not apply a second, separate penalty after accounting for that evidence.

What the public can see about certification rules

This disclosure review asks a different question from accreditation: can an ordinary consumer identify the standard or scheme, its current version, the approving authority, and the important halal positions that govern this body’s certifications? The governing basis and several central positions are public, but important criteria or version controls are still unavailable.

For governing documents, scope, and certificate communication, the reviewed sources show that ISA certifies meat and poultry, further processed foods, bakery products, health and beauty products, dairy, pharmaceuticals, flavors, and non-consumables [25].

The remaining questions could not be classified with confidence because they were not sufficiently disclosed. ISA refers to an 'HS Index' and 'HS Standards' with five distinct classes for slaughter, but does not publicly provide the actual criteria, the version, or the standards’ text. No current version or effective date for a governing standard is publicly disclosed. ISA says it is built on classical fiqh from Sunni schools, modern fiqh research, and global halal standards, but it does not specify one madhab or a particular multi-madhab method. It does not publicly disclose particular supplementary schemes or their order of precedence. There is no public information on whether important religious positions, such as slaughter method or HS class, appear on the certificate. ISA provides a list of suspended or cancelled customers, but no comprehensive public client register or automated certificate-verification tool is available. This is a limit of the public record; it does not show that ISA has no internal rule.

For slaughter and poultry controls, the reviewed sources show that ISA accepts machine slaughter for poultry when all conditions are met, including proper intention, tasmiyyah, and correct knife placement. It requires the operator to pronounce tasmiyyah at the start of the machine and encourages its recitation for each bird as much as line speed permits. It requires the animal to be alive when slaughtered, and says gas stunning may be used so long as it does not cause death before the halal cut. It requires severing the trachea, esophagus, and jugular veins. It also requires the person performing the slaughter to be a Muslim, Jew, or Christian (Kitabbi) [27] [29].

The remaining question on gas stunning could not be classified with confidence because ISA says gas stunning is mainly recommended for poultry and may be used if it does not cause death, while also stating that its position depends on ongoing research and specific cases. This is a limit of the public record; it does not show that ISA has no internal rule.

For ingredients and the production environment, the reviewed sources show that ISA prohibits all porcine (pig)-derived ingredients. Animal-derived ingredients from other permitted animals are allowed only if the animal was slaughtered in a halal manner. ISA strictly prohibits wine, alcoholic beverages, and all other intoxicants, including cooking with wine, and advises avoiding products with alcohol content above 0.1%. It requires all ingredients and processing aids to be halal, evaluates enzymes and release agents to make sure they are not from porcine sources or animals not slaughtered in a halal manner, and considers other products on the same processing line as a factor that may affect a product’s halal status [28] [16].

The reviewed sources do not publicly disclose a specific sanitation or ritual-cleansing method, such as a seven-washing method. This is a limit of the public record; it does not show that ISA has no internal rule.

This disclosure measure asks whether the public can understand a stated position, not whether the position is the most restrictive one. A position disclosed within a recognized scholarly range is not penalized merely because another body follows a different view.

What evidence could improve the result

This section identifies the evidence that could support a higher result for Islamic Services of America (ISA). It does not mean a control is absent simply because the reviewed public record did not establish it. Any submission must match the organization being reviewed, 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. Private records can support evidence of controls or operations when they can be authenticated, but they do not receive public-transparency credit unless the organization makes the important information public.

• Ownership and control (Metric 2): A current authoritative ownership filing or authenticated controlled record for Islamic Services of America (ISA) should identify beneficial owners, ownership percentages, voting or governance rights, controlling persons, related entities, and conflict controls for the organization being reviewed.
• Governance and accountable leadership (Metric 3): A current governing-body roster and organization chart for Islamic Services of America (ISA) should identify accountable leaders, their roles, appointment or authority basis, management responsibilities, and organization-level accountability for certification decisions.
• Personnel competence and authorization (Metric 4): A current personnel roster or independently assessed controlled record for Islamic Services of America (ISA) should identify auditors, technical experts, reviewers, contractors, qualifications, sector experience, halal and audit training, authorization scope, assignments, monitoring, and competence review.
• Islamic authority and halal decisions (Metric 5): Current Islamic Services of America (ISA) records should identify the Islamic-affairs experts or decision body, qualifications, appointment, jurisprudential basis, review responsibility, organization-level authority, and traceable participation in final halal decisions.
• Halal audit method and facility verification (Metric 6): A current controlled Islamic Services of America (ISA) audit procedure and corroborating recent files should show 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 (Metric 7): A current Islamic Services of America (ISA) policy on impartiality and separating decisions, plus implementation records, should identify conflict review, separation from consultancy, oversight membership, and separation among audit, technical review, Islamic review, and certification decisions.
• Public certification criteria and position disclosure (Metric 9): A current public Islamic Services of America (ISA) declaration or equivalent methodology should cover the governing standard and version, religious basis, scope and exclusions, practical halal positions, precedence among supplementary schemes, certificate communication, and the public verification route.
• Certificate traceability and mark control (Metric 10): A current public Islamic Services of America (ISA) certificate directory or verification method should show the certificate identifier, holder, site, products or scope, effective and expiry dates, live status, suspension or withdrawal, and enforceable controls over mark use and misuse.
• Complaints, appeals, and corrections (Metric 11): A current public Islamic Services of America (ISA) procedure should identify how to submit complaints, appeals, and correction requests; acknowledgement and response timing; independent review; records; re-examination; corrective action; and protection against retaliation or equivalent fairness safeguards.
• Operating history and demonstrated capacity (Metric 12): Current independently verifiable Islamic Services of America (ISA) operating records should show its timeline, active clients or certificates, sectors and locations served, workload, surveillance activity, and capable personnel capacity matched to that workload.

Corrections, appeals, and claiming this certification body

ISA, Inc., operating as Islamic Services of America, or another affected party may submit responsive records through the secure documentary-evidence form. Material evidence is assessed using the same methodology whether it would raise or lower 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 organization being assessed. That authority must be verified with qualifying documents and an independently confirmable official contact channel. A claim remains private and pending until review. It does not give editorial control, disclose other submissions, or automatically change an article, Credibility Score, Grade, or ranking.

A correction request should identify the organization being assessed, the 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

Does this score mean ISA certificates are invalid?

No. This is an organizational accountability assessment, not a religious ruling that every ISA certificate is invalid. The score reflects the strength of publicly verifiable evidence and independent accreditation for the certifier’s systems, not the halal status of individual products.

Why is the result not 100% despite three qualifying current comprehensive accreditations?

The accreditations provide strong support for controls and operations, but the score also requires publicly verifiable information. ISA does not receive 100% because current ownership percentages, a complete roster of personnel and their qualifications, and a complete searchable public certificate directory are not fully public.

How does the 2015 legal case affect the result?

The historical record makes it less appropriate to rely only on ISA’s own longevity claims. The score accounts for that concern once rather than applying a second, separate penalty. Current accreditation for the organization reviewed, recognition, certificates, and operating records are assessed separately.

Is ISA recognized by international authorities?

Yes. Alongside accreditations from GAC, HAK, and EIAC, records from BPJPH, JAKIM, MUIS, CICOT, and Qatar MOPH separately establish current state or Islamic-authority recognition or authorization.

What information could improve the result?

The most consequential additional information would be a current ownership and governance record; a public organization chart; names, qualifications, authorizations, and roles for current auditors, reviewers, Islamic-affairs experts, and committee members; complete current certificate verification; and complaint and appeal procedures that state timing and independence controls.

References

1. Iowa Secretary of State Business Entities Search; ISA, Inc., business number 407637
2. GAC Accreditation Certificate and Scope, Islamic Services of America, HPC 0071, issued April 1, 2026
3. HAK Halal Accreditation Certificate 2025-074, Islamic Services of America
4. JAKIM, Recognized Foreign Halal Certification Bodies and Authorities, effective August 21, 2026
5. MUIS e-Service, recognized ISA entry
6. USDA FAS, Indonesia’s Expanding Halal Standards with Trade Impacts on the Horizon, August 27, 2025
7. U.S. Department of Justice, Midamar and ISA Owners Plead Guilty
8. ISA biography for Jalel Aossey
9. Philippine Accreditation Bureau, GSO 2055-2:2021 Assessment Checklist
10. ISA, How to Halal Certify Your Company Products
11. ISA Halal Awareness Overview Training Presentation
12. ISA Halal Product Certificate 1216-25-39615, Ventura Coastal
13. ISA Halal Product Certificate 1103-25-39438, Greenwood Associates / Chicago Processed Fruit Group
14. ISA Halal Product Certificate 1207-25-39555, Monument Chemical
15. ISA Halal Product Certificate AC-0318-26-000006, DuBois Chemicals
16. ISA, Basics of ISA Halal Certification
17. ISA, Suspended, Cancelled, Terminated Customer List
18. U.S. Department of Justice, Halal Distributor and Halal Certifier Plead Guilty
19. U.S. Department of Justice, Prison Term and Nearly $1 Million in Judgments Ordered Against Midamar Founder, Midamar, and ISA
20. EIAC Directory, ISA INC and DBA Islamic Services of America ISA, HBN-CB-091
21. CICOT, Announcement on Recognition of Foreign Halal Certification Bodies
22. Qatar Ministry of Public Health, Authorized List of Halal Bodies; exact ISA query
23. Certification Process
24. Halal Slaughter (HS) standards
25. Your Guide to the Global Halal Market™
26. Differences Between ‘Halal’ and ‘Zabiha Halal’
27. Hand Slaughter versus Machine Slaughter
28. FAQs
29. Gas Killing and its Halal Relevance in Poultry Processing

Related audit-readiness guidance

• How USDHS Calculates a Halal Certification Body Credibility Score
• 2026 U.S. Halal Certification Bodies Ranked by Credibility Score
• American Halal Foundation Comprehensive Accountability Assessment: 96% Credibility Score, Grade A

Browse all USDHS Insights