A separately accountable U.S. operation
Halal certification depends on competent people, Islamic authority, a halal-specific audit, an impartial decision, and records that connect the final certificate to the work performed. Publicly verifiable evidence matters because consumers and clients must be able to identify the certifier and understand what its certificate covers. This assessment evaluates the organizational accountability of RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA based on methodology 2.4.
RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA operates a U.S. branch at 5625 Cypress Creek Parkway, Suite 210, Houston, Texas. It is part of the global RACS network but maintains a distinct U.S. accreditation [2].
Entity and accreditation boundary
The assessed certification entity is RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA. The organization holds a current Tier A accreditation from the GCC Accreditation Center (GAC) under the GSO 2055-2 standard. This single recognized accreditation provides up to 1.00 control assurance and 0.75 operational evidence for the specific requirements assessed by GAC [1].
Halal Industry Exposé · Comprehensive Accountability Assessment
RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA is an active U.S. halal certification body operating as a branch or affiliate of the UAE-based RACS, with a verified U.S. address in Houston, Texas. Organizational accountability: 84% · Grade B · Substantially substantiated
High confidence. RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA receives 84%, Grade B. Certification activity is documented, with Tier A GAC accreditation for animal slaughtering, but full ownership and exact personnel identities are not public, and marketing claims conflict with the specific accreditation scope.
This comprehensive organizational accountability assessment combines the standardized score with the documented business-practice investigation. Flags explain evidence already scored inside the eleven fixed metrics and create no separate bonus or penalty points. The article does not rule that every certificate is invalid, prove that an undisclosed control does not exist, or infer anyone’s religion or intent.
Halal Certification Body Accountability Assessment version 2.4. Source cutoff September 13, 2026. Last reviewed September 13, 2026. Raw score 84.3500 out of 100, ordinarily rounded to 84%.
Trust overview
Green flags and red flags
These flags explain evidence already scored inside the eleven fixed metrics. They do not create separate bonus or penalty points.
Green flags
Active Client List
The organization publishes a list of certified clients with certificate expiry dates, providing operational evidence of certification activity.
Metrics: #9, #11
Score treatment: Supports operational and public scores in certificate traceability and operating history.
Boundary: The client list provides evidence of capacity and traceability.
Sources: [3]
Red flags
Scope Mismatch
The organization's website claims a broad certification scope (including cosmetics and various food categories), while the verified GAC accreditation schedule (HPC 0020) is limited to animal slaughtering.
Metrics: #8
Score treatment: Limits operational and public scores in standards, scheme, and certification scope.
Boundary: The mismatch limits the credit derived from accreditation but is not proof of invalidity for individual certificates.
Hidden Personnel
The identities, qualifications, and specific assignments of the personnel involved in halal auditing and decision-making remain not publicly verified.
Metrics: #4, #5
Score treatment: Limits public transparency scores in personnel competence and Islamic authority.
Boundary: Missing personnel evidence is not proof of invalidity.
Sources:
Accreditation examined
GAC · HPC 0020. GSO 2055-2. Active. Accredited Not publicly verified; expiry Not publicly verified.
Scope: GAC accreditation HPC 0020 covers animal slaughtering (poultry, lamb, and beef) under GSO 2055-2. No second current exact-entity accreditation was independently verified.
Third-party independence: GAC is a Tier A accreditation authority.
Status factor 100 percent; scope factor 100 percent; independence factor 100 percent; accreditation assurance factor 100 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. A recognized accreditation of the exact entity and scope can support the control layer and part of operational evidence; it never creates public-evidence credit or transfers across entities without the required bridge. 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.
90.00% of this metric; 5.40 of 6 weighted points. verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 3.60 points. The entity is recognized by GAC and maintains a U.S. presence in Houston, Texas. GAC accreditation provides full control and substantial operational assurance.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 1.13 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.68 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: The entity is recognized by GAC and maintains a U.S. presence in Houston, Texas. GAC accreditation provides full control and substantial operational assurance.
2. Ownership and control
Beneficial owners, percentages, controlling persons, governance rights, related parties, and conflicts.
82.50% of this metric; 8.25 of 10 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 6.00 points. GAC accreditation ensures ownership and control structures are documented internally. However, public ownership percentages and beneficial owners are not disclosed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 1.88 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.38 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: GAC accreditation ensures ownership and control structures are documented internally. However, public ownership percentages and beneficial owners are not disclosed.
3. Governance and accountable leadership
Named leadership, governing bodies, organizational structure, management responsibility, and accountable contacts.
86.25% of this metric; 12.07 of 14 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 8.40 points. Accreditation assesses leadership and governance. The Branch Manager is named publicly, but the full governing body and organizational structure are not detailed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 2.63 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 1.05 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation assesses leadership and governance. The Branch Manager is named publicly, but the full governing body and organizational structure are not detailed.
4. Personnel competence and authorization
Auditor, reviewer, technical-expert, and contractor qualifications, training, authorization, monitoring, and assignments.
82.50% of this metric; 14.85 of 18 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 10.80 points. Accreditation verifies personnel competence and monitoring. However, the specific identities, qualifications, and assignments of auditors and reviewers are not publicly verified.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 3.38 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.68 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation verifies personnel competence and monitoring. However, the specific identities, qualifications, and assignments of auditors and reviewers are not publicly verified.
5. Islamic authority and halal decision
Qualified Islamic-affairs personnel, governing authority, jurisprudential basis, review roles, and final halal decisions.
82.50% of this metric; 14.85 of 18 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 10.80 points. GAC accreditation ensures Islamic governance and decision-making comply with GSO 2055-2. However, the identities and qualifications of the Islamic-affairs experts and decision committee members are not publicly verifiable.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 3.38 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.68 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: GAC accreditation ensures Islamic governance and decision-making comply with GSO 2055-2. However, the identities and qualifications of the Islamic-affairs experts and decision committee members are not publicly verifiable.
6. Halal audit method and facility verification
Application, scope review, documents, on-site work, ingredients, processes, findings, corrections, reports, surveillance, and recertification.
86.25% of this metric; 12.07 of 14 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 8.40 points. Accreditation provides strong assurance of audit implementation. The website outlines the certification procedure, but specific audit reports or findings are not public.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 2.63 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 1.05 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation provides strong assurance of audit implementation. The website outlines the certification procedure, but specific audit reports or findings are not public.
7. Impartiality and decision separation
Conflicts, consultancy separation, impartiality oversight, and separation among audit, review, and certification decisions.
82.50% of this metric; 6.60 of 8 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 4.80 points. Accreditation requires impartiality controls. The certification process mentions a separate decision committee, but impartiality oversight mechanisms are not publicly detailed.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 1.50 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.30 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation requires impartiality controls. The certification process mentions a separate decision committee, but impartiality oversight mechanisms are not publicly detailed.
8. Standards, scheme, and certification scope
Governing standards, sectors, locations, exclusions, religious positions, certificate scope, and scheme boundaries.
80.00% of this metric; 3.20 of 4 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 2.40 points. Accreditation covers GSO 2055-2 for animal slaughtering. The public website claims a much broader scope including cosmetics and various food categories, creating a scope mismatch that limits operational and public scores.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 0.50 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 50 percent evidence factor; 0.30 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation covers GSO 2055-2 for animal slaughtering. The public website claims a much broader scope including cosmetics and various food categories, creating a scope mismatch that limits operational and public scores.
9. Certificate traceability and mark control
Current certificate verification, identifiers, holders, sites, products, dates, status changes, and mark misuse controls.
90.00% of this metric; 3.60 of 4 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 2.40 points. Accreditation supports certificate controls. The website lists certified clients with dates, providing good operational and public evidence, though a live search tool is absent.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.75 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.45 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation supports certificate controls. The website lists certified clients with dates, providing good operational and public evidence, though a live search tool is absent.
10. Complaints, appeals, and corrections
Complaint and appeal routes, timing, independent review, records, corrections, escalation, and non-retaliation.
82.50% of this metric; 1.65 of 2 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 1.20 points. Accreditation ensures a documented complaints process exists. However, no formal complaint or appeal procedure is published on the website.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.38 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 25 percent evidence factor; 0.07 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation ensures a documented complaints process exists. However, no formal complaint or appeal procedure is published on the website.
11. Operating history and demonstrated capacity
Corroborated timeline, current activity, clients, sectors, personnel resources, and workload matched to competent capacity.
90.00% of this metric; 1.80 of 2 weighted points. partially verified.
Accreditation effect: GAC accreditation supports control and operational assurance.
- A. Control assurance, 60 percent
- 100 percent evidence factor; 1.20 points. Accreditation and the public list of certified clients demonstrate ongoing capacity and operating history within the required timeframe.
- B. Operational evidence, 25 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.38 points. Operational implementation is supported by accreditation.
- C. Public evidence, 15 percent
- 75 percent evidence factor; 0.23 points. Public transparency is reflected in the factor.
Metric conclusion: Accreditation and the public list of certified clients demonstrate ongoing capacity and operating history within the required timeframe.
Part 3
Conclusion
Strongest findings
- Current Tier A GAC accreditation for animal slaughtering.
- Published certified clients list.
- Branch Manager named publicly.
Material gaps
- Identities and qualifications of personnel involved in auditing and Islamic decision-making are not publicly verified.
- Scope mismatch between broad marketing claims and specific accreditation.
- Full public ownership percentages are not disclosed.
Unresolved questions
- Who are the specific individuals serving on the Certification Decision Committee and as Islamic-affairs experts?
- What are the public ownership percentages of the U.S. entity?
Score interpretation
- Raw score: 84.3500. The displayed score uses ordinary rounding.
Material records are rescored under the same rules, whether they raise or lower the result. Submit documentary evidence through the secure evidence and correction form.
Conclusion
RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA is a substantiated halal certification body. Its current GAC accreditation provides strong assurance for its core controls. However, material gaps remain regarding public transparency. The identities of personnel involved in auditing and Islamic decision-making are not publicly verified, and there is a significant scope mismatch between the broad claims on its website and its specific accreditation for animal slaughtering [1] [4].
Corrections and responsive evidence
RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA may submit responsive records through the [secure documentary-evidence form](/submit-evidence?article=racs-quality-certificates-issuing-services-llc-usa-accountability-assessment). HIPS assesses material evidence under the same methodology whether it raises or lowers a score.
A submission should identify the exact organization, statement, metric, source, effective dates, scope, responsible people, and requested correction. Publication is not conditional on a response, and no organization has a veto over a documented finding.
This assessment explains public evidence and organizational accountability. It does not replace the controlling HIPS standard, an accreditation or certification decision, a religious ruling, or legal advice.
Frequently asked questions
Why does RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA receive 84%, Grade B?
Methodology 2.4 gives 64 percent of the score to accountable leadership, qualified personnel, Islamic authority, and halal-specific audit capability. RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA has Tier A GAC accreditation for animal slaughtering, but full ownership and exact personnel identities are not public.
Is RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA currently accredited?
Yes, GAC identifies the exact entity RACS Quality Certificates Issuing Services LLC-USA, accreditation HPC 0020.
Does a high score mean every certificate is valid?
No. This assessment measures structural accountability, transparency, and verifiable credentials, not the religious validity of specific products.
Why are private documents not included?
The methodology relies on public records and publicly verifiable evidence, while allowing the organization to submit responsive controlled documents through the secure documentary-evidence form.
How can the certifier improve its score?
Scores can be improved by publishing full ownership details, exact personnel identities and authorizations, and resolving the scope mismatch between marketing claims and specific accreditation.