Why a halal licensing name is not enough
A halal-conscious customer may see a licensing name on a wall, a website, or a public registration and reasonably assume that someone has already checked the ingredients, facility, process, people, records, and religious requirements behind the approval. Yet the name alone does not tell the consumer how the approval was reached or by whom. Accountability requires an identifiable method: the governing criteria, evidence examined, qualifications of the people doing the work, religious review, and authority that made the final halal and certification decisions.
That distinction matters when a certification body is active but publishes little about its certification system. A current client list can establish that the organization is operating, but it cannot substitute for evidence showing what was audited, which standard was applied, who reviewed the findings, or how the certificate remains controlled after issuance.
Entity and current certification activity
United Ulama Council of USA Inc. is the operating name used by a New York nonprofit religious-community organization. Its first-party website says the organization offers halal food and products licensing and lists several establishments. The same page identifies Mufty Hafiz Luthfur Rahman Qasimy as founder and president. An independent Candid profile identifies the exact nonprofit entity in New York and links to the same website. A founding date, complete board or membership roster, governing interests, and the certification program's organizational chart could not be independently verified from the reviewed public record. [1] [2]
New York's Department of Agriculture and Markets registration system names United Ulama Council of USA Inc. as the certifier for HD Halal Diner Inc. and Labbaik Supermarket Inc. Both establishments entered monthly visit information. Those government-hosted rows support current attributable activity, while remaining statements in the rows are treated as information supplied by the establishments rather than as independent findings by New York State. [3]
The reviewed sources consistently use the same organization name, but they show different New York street addresses and the first-party website does not explain whether either address is a current principal office, branch, or prior location. No public certificate was located to test the exact issuer, holder, site, scope, identifier, issue date, or expiry date.
Halal Industry Exposé · Comprehensive Accountability Assessment
United Ulama Council of USA Inc. halal food and products licensing program Organizational accountability and public certification-criteria disclosure: 5% Credibility Score · Grade F · Insufficiently substantiated
Moderate confidence. United Ulama Council of USA Inc. receives a 5% Credibility Score (Grade F) under Model B. Current halal-licensing activity is attributable through the organization's website and two New York government-hosted establishment registrations. No qualifying current comprehensive exact-entity accreditation was applied, so 4.0068 competence points derive only from requirement-specific control and operational evidence. Public evidence adds 0.7650 of 6 public-accountability points. The reviewed record does not publicly explain the accountable method, evidence, qualifications, religious review, or decision authority by which halal approval is reached.
- Competence assurance
- 4.0068 of 90
- Accreditation breadth
- 0.0000 of 4
- Public accountability
- 0.7650 of 6
This organizational accountability assessment measures evidence supporting identity, control, responsible people, Islamic authority, halal-specific work, standards, public certification criteria, certificate controls, correction access, and demonstrated operations. Each of 137 enumerated subrequirements is shown below. A not-verified finding means the reviewed record did not establish the item; it is not proof that the control does not exist, that wrongdoing occurred, or that any particular certificate lacks validity. New York's registration rows contain information entered by establishments and are treated as government-hosted registrant attestations of activity, not accreditation or independent verification of certification controls. Private evidence is described only at a non-identifying level. The existing series label is editorial branding and is not itself an allegation. Flags explain evidence already scored inside the twelve fixed metrics and create no separate bonus or penalty. The assessment is not a religious ruling, legal judgment, fraud finding, guarantee, or determination of certificate validity in any particular case. An undisclosed item is not treated as proof that no internal control exists.
USDHS Accreditation-Dominant Credibility Score version 4.0. Source cutoff September 15, 2026. Last reviewed September 15, 2026. Raw Credibility Score 4.7718 out of 100, ordinarily displayed as 5%.
Trust overview
Green flags and red flags
These flags explain evidence already scored inside the twelve fixed metrics. They do not create separate bonus or penalty points.
Green flags
Current attributable halal-licensing activity
The first-party website offers halal food and products licensing and lists establishments; New York's government-hosted registry names the organization as certifier for two current establishments.
Metrics: #1, #10, #12
Score treatment: Supports exact-entity identity, current client activity, and limited directory evidence.
Boundary: The registration data was entered by establishments. It is not accreditation and does not independently establish the certification method or every certificate's validity.
Red flags
Halal approval method and decision authority are not publicly established
The reviewed public record does not identify a controlled standard, certification-specific auditors, technical review, Islamic review, recorded findings, or final halal and certification decision authority.
Metrics: #3, #4, #5, #6, #8
Score treatment: Limits competence and public-accountability credit to the narrow evidence actually available.
Boundary: The finding records an evidence gap. It is not proof that no internal method exists or a determination of any particular certificate's validity.
No current comprehensive exact-entity accreditation verified
The reviewed record did not establish a current comprehensive independent accreditation for United Ulama Council of USA Inc. and its halal food and products licensing program.
Metrics: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #10, #11, #12
Score treatment: No automatic 90-point competence determination and no accreditation-breadth point apply.
Boundary: A New York establishment registration is not accreditation. The finding does not foreclose a later exact-entity credential submission.
How USDHS calculates the Credibility Score
Model B totals competence assurance from 0 to 90, distinct independent accreditation breadth from 0 to 4, and public accountability from 0 to 6. A current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation establishes competence within verified scope; affirmative contradictions reduce it requirement by requirement. Each additional distinct authority after the first adds one breadth point, capped at four. Public accountability remains separate. The 137 requirement statuses remain visible as the evidence record. Classification bands: A, 90 to 100, strongly substantiated; B, 80 to 89, substantiated; C, 70 to 79, partially substantiated; D, 60 to 69, material gaps; F, 0 to 59, insufficiently substantiated.
Part 2
Numbered assessment metrics
1. Legal identity and standing
8 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
42.88% of this metric; 2.1441 of 5 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 1.9191 of 4.5000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.2250 of 0.3000 points.
Metric conclusion: Legal identity and standing earns 2.3750 of 5 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 8 enumerated subrequirements, 3 fulfilled, 2 partial, 3 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 42.88 percent: 8 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 1.9191 competence + 0.2250 public accountability = 2.1441 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 1.C1 — fulfilled: The certificate issuer is a resolvable legal entity.
Evidence route: First-party, government-hosted, and independent public sources. The organization uses the exact operating name United Ulama Council of USA Inc. on its official website; an independent nonprofit profile identifies the same incorporated entity; and New York's government-hosted halal-establishment registry names that entity as the certifier for two establishments.
Requirement 1.C2 — fulfilled: The entity is active or otherwise legally authorized to operate.
Evidence route: Independent nonprofit profile and current government-hosted registration. An independent nonprofit profile identifies the exact entity's current federal tax-exempt classification, while the first-party website and New York's government-hosted registry show current operating activity under the same name. No taxpayer identifier is reproduced in this assessment.
Requirement 1.C3 — not verified: Every public operating name, DBA, division, or brand used for certification is connected to the issuer.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record establishes the operating name and current public activity, but it does not independently establish this additional entity, relationship, or certificate-specific identity control. This is an evidence limitation, not proof that the control is absent or that a certificate is invalid.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Every public operating name, DBA, division, or brand used for certification is connected to the issuer.
Requirement 1.C4 — not verified: Material parent, subsidiary, affiliate, and predecessor relationships affecting certification authority are documented.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record establishes the operating name and current public activity, but it does not independently establish this additional entity, relationship, or certificate-specific identity control. This is an evidence limitation, not proof that the control is absent or that a certificate is invalid.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Material parent, subsidiary, affiliate, and predecessor relationships affecting certification authority are documented.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 1.O1 — not verified: Current certificates, contracts, or accreditation identify the same accountable issuer.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record establishes the operating name and current public activity, but it does not independently establish this additional entity, relationship, or certificate-specific identity control. This is an evidence limitation, not proof that the control is absent or that a certificate is invalid.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Current certificates, contracts, or accreditation identify the same accountable issuer.
Requirement 1.O2 — partial: The operating location and jurisdiction correspond to the entity or a documented branch.
Evidence route: Independent nonprofit profile and government-hosted registration. The independent nonprofit profile and New York registration rows place the organization in New York, but the public records show different street addresses and the first-party website does not document whether either address is the current principal office or a branch.
Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The operating location and jurisdiction correspond to the entity or a documented branch.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 1.P1 — fulfilled: The public can identify the accountable issuer and operating name.
Evidence route: First-party and government-hosted public sources. The first-party website publicly identifies United Ulama Council of USA Inc. as the organization offering halal food and products licensing, and New York's registry attributes two establishments' halal certification to the same organization.
Requirement 1.P2 — partial: The website, certificate, and public registry do not present materially conflicting issuer identities.
Evidence route: First-party, government-hosted, and independent public sources. The reviewed sources consistently use the United Ulama Council of USA Inc. name, but no public certificate was located and the public records show different street addresses without a documented branch or address-change explanation.
Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The website, certificate, and public registry do not present materially conflicting issuer identities.
2. Ownership and control
9 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.00% of this metric; 0.0000 of 8 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 7.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.4800 points.
Metric conclusion: Ownership and control earns 0.0000 of 8 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 9 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 0 partial, 9 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 9 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 2.C1 — not verified: Ultimate owners or members are identified.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Ultimate owners or members are identified.
Requirement 2.C2 — not verified: Ownership percentages or interests are established.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Ownership percentages or interests are established.
Requirement 2.C3 — not verified: Voting, management, or equivalent control rights are established.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Voting, management, or equivalent control rights are established.
Requirement 2.C4 — not verified: Related entities that could affect control are identified.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Related entities that could affect control are identified.
Requirement 2.C5 — not verified: Ownership continuity is established or preserved through istiṣḥāb absent contrary evidence.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Ownership continuity is established or preserved through istiṣḥāb absent contrary evidence.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 2.O1 — not verified: Ownership and control records are current, maintained, and available to an authorized verifier.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Ownership and control records are current, maintained, and available to an authorized verifier.
Requirement 2.O2 — not verified: No current record contradicts the established owner or control structure.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: No current record contradicts the established owner or control structure.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 2.P1 — not verified: Consumers can identify the controlling person or organization when ownership identity is part of the public accountability standard.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Consumers can identify the controlling person or organization when ownership identity is part of the public accountability standard.
Requirement 2.P2 — not verified: Private percentages, taxpayer data, signatures, and personal addresses need not be published when authoritative evidence establishes them.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A named founder and president establishes organizational leadership, not the complete nonprofit members, board, voting rights, governing interests, related entities, or controlling structure. The reviewed record did not independently establish this ownership-and-control requirement.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Private percentages, taxpayer data, signatures, and personal addresses need not be published when authoritative evidence establishes them.
3. Accountable leadership and governance
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
14.21% of this metric; 1.9888 of 14 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 1.7788 of 12.6000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.2100 of 0.8400 points.
Metric conclusion: Accountable leadership and governance earns 2.2050 of 14 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 1 fulfilled, 1 partial, 8 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 14.21 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 1.7788 competence + 0.2100 public accountability = 1.9888 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 3.C1 — fulfilled: Senior leadership is identified.
Evidence route: First-party public source. The first-party website identifies Mufty Hafiz Luthfur Rahman Qasimy as founder and current president, satisfying identification of senior organizational leadership without inferring certification-decision authority or professional qualifications.
Public sources: Source 1
Requirement 3.C2 — not verified: Organizational structure and reporting lines are defined.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Organizational structure and reporting lines are defined.
Requirement 3.C3 — not verified: Certification decision authority is assigned.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certification decision authority is assigned.
Requirement 3.C4 — not verified: Required governance, impartiality, and Islamic-affairs committees exist.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Required governance, impartiality, and Islamic-affairs committees exist.
Requirement 3.C5 — not verified: Senior management is accountable for the certification system.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Senior management is accountable for the certification system.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 3.O1 — not verified: Governance roles and committees are implemented and reviewed.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Governance roles and committees are implemented and reviewed.
Requirement 3.O2 — not verified: Certification decisions follow assigned authority.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certification decisions follow assigned authority.
Requirement 3.O3 — not verified: Management review and internal oversight occur.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Management review and internal oversight occur.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 3.P1 — partial: Responsible leadership and principal governance roles are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: First-party public source. The president is publicly named, but the website does not identify the certification program's principal governance, impartiality, technical-review, Islamic-affairs, or certification-decision roles.
Public sources: Source 1
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Responsible leadership and principal governance roles are publicly identifiable.
Requirement 3.P2 — not verified: The public can understand who is accountable for halal decisions and certification decisions.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The president is publicly named, but the reviewed record did not establish the certification program's organizational structure, reporting lines, committees, assigned certification authority, management review, or implemented governance control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The public can understand who is accountable for halal decisions and certification decisions.
4. Qualified personnel
14 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.00% of this metric; 0.0000 of 18 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 16.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 1.0800 points.
Metric conclusion: Qualified personnel earns 0.0000 of 18 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 14 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 0 partial, 14 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 14 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 4.C1 — not verified: Competence criteria exist for technical auditors.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Competence criteria exist for technical auditors.
Requirement 4.C2 — not verified: Competence criteria exist for Islamic-affairs experts.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Competence criteria exist for Islamic-affairs experts.
Requirement 4.C3 — not verified: Competence criteria exist for reviewers and decision makers.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Competence criteria exist for reviewers and decision makers.
Requirement 4.C4 — not verified: Muslim-status requirements are applied where the governing standard requires them.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Muslim-status requirements are applied where the governing standard requires them.
Requirement 4.C5 — not verified: Training, education, experience, and sector competence are defined.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Training, education, experience, and sector competence are defined.
Requirement 4.C6 — not verified: Authorization, assignment, monitoring, and performance review are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Authorization, assignment, monitoring, and performance review are controlled.
Requirement 4.C7 — not verified: External personnel and contractors satisfy the same applicable requirements.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: External personnel and contractors satisfy the same applicable requirements.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 4.O1 — not verified: Current personnel records demonstrate qualification and authorization.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Current personnel records demonstrate qualification and authorization.
Requirement 4.O2 — not verified: Audit teams contain the required technical and Islamic expertise.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Audit teams contain the required technical and Islamic expertise.
Requirement 4.O3 — not verified: Assignments match sector and scope competence.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Assignments match sector and scope competence.
Requirement 4.O4 — not verified: Personnel performance and continuing competence are monitored.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Personnel performance and continuing competence are monitored.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 4.P1 — not verified: Responsible personnel roles are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Responsible personnel roles are publicly identifiable.
Requirement 4.P2 — not verified: A reasonable public qualification basis is available for principal technical and Islamic authorities.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: A reasonable public qualification basis is available for principal technical and Islamic authorities.
Requirement 4.P3 — not verified: Private personnel files, degree numbers, and every assignment record need not be published when accreditation verifies competence.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish certification-specific auditors, technical reviewers, Islamic-affairs personnel, competence criteria, qualifications, authorizations, assignments, contractor controls, or continuing-performance review. No qualification is inferred from a name or title.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Private personnel files, degree numbers, and every assignment record need not be published when accreditation verifies competence.
5. Islamic authority and halal decision rights
11 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
1.50% of this metric; 0.2700 of 18 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 16.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.2700 of 1.0800 points.
Metric conclusion: Islamic authority and halal decision rights earns 0.6750 of 18 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 11 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 1 partial, 10 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 1.50 percent: 11 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.2700 public accountability = 0.2700 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 5.C1 — not verified: Qualified Muslim Islamic-affairs experts are appointed.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Qualified Muslim Islamic-affairs experts are appointed.
Requirement 5.C2 — not verified: Muslim decision makers are used where required.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Muslim decision makers are used where required.
Requirement 5.C3 — not verified: The Islamic-affairs committee has defined composition and authority.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The Islamic-affairs committee has defined composition and authority.
Requirement 5.C4 — not verified: Halal interpretations, disputed questions, and escalations have a controlled decision path.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Halal interpretations, disputed questions, and escalations have a controlled decision path.
Requirement 5.C5 — not verified: Islamic authority is independent of sales and client pressure.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Islamic authority is independent of sales and client pressure.
Requirement 5.C6 — not verified: Final halal and certification decision rights are unambiguous.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Final halal and certification decision rights are unambiguous.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 5.O1 — not verified: Islamic experts participate in audit, review, and decision functions as required.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Islamic experts participate in audit, review, and decision functions as required.
Requirement 5.O2 — not verified: Committee or expert decisions are documented and implemented.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Committee or expert decisions are documented and implemented.
Requirement 5.O3 — not verified: Certification cannot be issued contrary to the authorized halal decision.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certification cannot be issued contrary to the authorized halal decision.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 5.P1 — partial: The principal Islamic authority or committee is publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: First-party and government-hosted registrant-attributed sources. The organization presents itself as a council of Islamic scholars and names its founder and president. Two New York registry entries, using information entered by the establishments, describe the organization as a religious-scholar authority mentored by imams and scholars. The reviewed record does not identify a certification-specific Islamic-affairs committee or state who exercises final halal-decision authority.
Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The principal Islamic authority or committee is publicly identifiable.
Requirement 5.P2 — not verified: The public can understand who has final halal-decision authority.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The organization presents a religious-community identity, but the reviewed record did not establish this certification-specific appointment, qualification, committee, decision path, independence safeguard, documented participation, or final halal authority.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The public can understand who has final halal-decision authority.
6. Halal-specific audit and certification controls
15 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.00% of this metric; 0.0000 of 14 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 12.6000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.8400 points.
Metric conclusion: Halal-specific audit and certification controls earns 0.0000 of 14 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 15 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 0 partial, 15 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 15 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 6.C1 — not verified: Application and application review are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Application and application review are controlled.
Requirement 6.C2 — not verified: The audit program and audit time are determined by scope, risk, complexity, sites, and prior results.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The audit program and audit time are determined by scope, risk, complexity, sites, and prior results.
Requirement 6.C3 — not verified: Stage-one and stage-two audits are used where applicable.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Stage-one and stage-two audits are used where applicable.
Requirement 6.C4 — not verified: Audit teams perform halal-specific document and facility review.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Audit teams perform halal-specific document and facility review.
Requirement 6.C5 — not verified: Sampling, inspection, and accredited laboratory testing are controlled where applicable.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Sampling, inspection, and accredited laboratory testing are controlled where applicable.
Requirement 6.C6 — not verified: Audit reports and nonconformities are documented.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Audit reports and nonconformities are documented.
Requirement 6.C7 — not verified: Independent review and certification decisions are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Independent review and certification decisions are controlled.
Requirement 6.C8 — not verified: Surveillance and recertification are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Surveillance and recertification are controlled.
Requirement 6.C9 — not verified: Suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.
Requirement 6.C10 — not verified: Outsourced work remains under HCB responsibility.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Outsourced work remains under HCB responsibility.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 6.O1 — not verified: The current certification system implements each applicable control.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The current certification system implements each applicable control.
Requirement 6.O2 — not verified: Surveillance or accreditation assessment verifies continued implementation.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Surveillance or accreditation assessment verifies continued implementation.
Requirement 6.O3 — not verified: No affirmative evidence shows reliance on an unauthorized third party for the halal decision.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: No affirmative evidence shows reliance on an unauthorized third party for the halal decision.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 6.P1 — not verified: The certification pathway and principal stages are publicly understandable.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The certification pathway and principal stages are publicly understandable.
Requirement 6.P2 — not verified: The public can identify the governing scheme and certificate status consequences.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish the application, scope review, halal-specific audit, sampling, reporting, corrective-action, independent-review, decision, surveillance, recertification, withdrawal, or outsourced-work control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The public can identify the governing scheme and certificate status consequences.
7. Impartiality, conflicts, and independence
11 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.00% of this metric; 0.0000 of 6 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 5.4000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.3600 points.
Metric conclusion: Impartiality, conflicts, and independence earns 0.0000 of 6 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 11 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 0 partial, 11 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 11 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 7.C1 — not verified: An impartiality policy and risk process exist.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: An impartiality policy and risk process exist.
Requirement 7.C2 — not verified: An impartiality committee or equivalent mechanism operates.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: An impartiality committee or equivalent mechanism operates.
Requirement 7.C3 — not verified: Consulting and certification conflicts are prohibited or controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Consulting and certification conflicts are prohibited or controlled.
Requirement 7.C4 — not verified: Financial, commercial, and relationship threats are identified and mitigated.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Financial, commercial, and relationship threats are identified and mitigated.
Requirement 7.C5 — not verified: Recusal and independent decision rules exist.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Recusal and independent decision rules exist.
Requirement 7.C6 — not verified: Outsourced and external personnel are subject to impartiality and confidentiality controls.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Outsourced and external personnel are subject to impartiality and confidentiality controls.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 7.O1 — not verified: Impartiality risks are reviewed periodically.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Impartiality risks are reviewed periodically.
Requirement 7.O2 — not verified: Conflicts and recusals are documented.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Conflicts and recusals are documented.
Requirement 7.O3 — not verified: Certification decisions remain independent of audit, sales, and consulting pressure.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certification decisions remain independent of audit, sales, and consulting pressure.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 7.P1 — not verified: The impartiality commitment and complaint route are publicly accessible.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The impartiality commitment and complaint route are publicly accessible.
Requirement 7.P2 — not verified: The public can identify the separation between certification and prohibited consulting.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not establish an impartiality policy, risk process, committee, conflict control, recusal rule, consulting separation, periodic review, or independent certification-decision safeguard for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The public can identify the separation between certification and prohibited consulting.
8. Standards, scheme, and certification scope
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.00% of this metric; 0.0000 of 3 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 2.7000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.1800 points.
Metric conclusion: Standards, scheme, and certification scope earns 0.0000 of 3 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 0 partial, 10 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 8.C1 — not verified: Governing standard names and versions are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Governing standard names and versions are controlled.
Requirement 8.C2 — not verified: Accredited or claimed categories, activities, products, sites, and locations are defined.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Accredited or claimed categories, activities, products, sites, and locations are defined.
Requirement 8.C3 — not verified: Exclusions and limitations are defined.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Exclusions and limitations are defined.
Requirement 8.C4 — not verified: Supplementary destination-market schemes are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Supplementary destination-market schemes are controlled.
Requirement 8.C5 — not verified: A precedence rule resolves conflicts between base and supplementary requirements.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: A precedence rule resolves conflicts between base and supplementary requirements.
Requirement 8.C6 — not verified: Clients receive the applicable version and scope.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Clients receive the applicable version and scope.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 8.O1 — not verified: Certificates and audits use the correct current standard and scope.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certificates and audits use the correct current standard and scope.
Requirement 8.O2 — not verified: Scope changes and version changes are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Scope changes and version changes are controlled.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 8.P1 — not verified: The principal standard, version, category, and certification scope are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The principal standard, version, category, and certification scope are publicly identifiable.
Requirement 8.P2 — not verified: The public can determine whether supplementary schemes apply and how conflicts are resolved.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not identify a controlled governing halal standard, version, complete certification scope, exclusion, supplementary scheme, precedence rule, client document, or operative version-control process required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The public can determine whether supplementary schemes apply and how conflicts are resolved.
9. Public certification criteria and position disclosure
20 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
0.00% of this metric; 0.0000 of 8 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 7.2000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.4800 points.
Metric conclusion: Public certification criteria and position disclosure earns 0.0000 of 8 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 20 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 0 partial, 20 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 0.00 percent: 20 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.0000 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 9.C1 — not verified: The public disclosure is authorized, versioned, dated, and controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The public disclosure is authorized, versioned, dated, and controlled.
Requirement 9.C2 — not verified: It identifies the governing Islamic and technical authority.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: It identifies the governing Islamic and technical authority.
Requirement 9.C3 — not verified: It addresses every applicable Form 1002-D field or marks it not applicable.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: It addresses every applicable Form 1002-D field or marks it not applicable.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 9.O1 — not verified: Public criteria match the operative certification scheme.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Public criteria match the operative certification scheme.
Requirement 9.O2 — not verified: Changes to criteria are reflected in the controlled public version.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Changes to criteria are reflected in the controlled public version.
Requirement 9.O3 — not verified: Supplementary-scheme positions and precedence are kept current.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Supplementary-scheme positions and precedence are kept current.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 9.P1 — not verified: Religious or jurisprudential basis.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Religious or jurisprudential basis.
Requirement 9.P2 — not verified: Supplementary destination-market schemes and precedence.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Supplementary destination-market schemes and precedence.
Requirement 9.P3 — not verified: Mechanical poultry slaughter.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Mechanical poultry slaughter.
Requirement 9.P4 — not verified: Mechanical-line tasmiyah.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Mechanical-line tasmiyah.
Requirement 9.P5 — not verified: Slaughter-person requirements and supervision.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Slaughter-person requirements and supervision.
Requirement 9.P6 — not verified: Stunning and reversibility.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Stunning and reversibility.
Requirement 9.P7 — not verified: Alive-at-cut control.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Alive-at-cut control.
Requirement 9.P8 — not verified: Minimum vessel requirement.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Minimum vessel requirement.
Requirement 9.P9 — not verified: Pork and animal derivatives.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Pork and animal derivatives.
Requirement 9.P10 — not verified: Alcohol and ethanol.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Alcohol and ethanol.
Requirement 9.P11 — not verified: Processing aids and ingredient sources.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Processing aids and ingredient sources.
Requirement 9.P12 — not verified: Shared lines and cross-contact.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Shared lines and cross-contact.
Requirement 9.P13 — not verified: Sanitation or ritual cleansing.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Sanitation or ritual cleansing.
Requirement 9.P14 — not verified: Certificate-level position communication.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed public record did not publish a controlled, dated certification-criteria disclosure answering this requirement. This records a public-information limit and does not establish what rule the organization may apply internally.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certificate-level position communication.
10. Certificate traceability and mark control
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
4.41% of this metric; 0.1324 of 3 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.1324 of 2.7000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.1800 points.
Metric conclusion: Certificate traceability and mark control earns 0.1250 of 3 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 1 partial, 9 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 4.41 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.1324 competence + 0.0000 public accountability = 0.1324 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 10.C1 — not verified: Certificate templates contain required issuer, holder, site, product or activity scope, identifier, issue date, expiry date, and authorization.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certificate templates contain required issuer, holder, site, product or activity scope, identifier, issue date, expiry date, and authorization.
Requirement 10.C2 — not verified: A certified-client and product directory is controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: A certified-client and product directory is controlled.
Requirement 10.C3 — not verified: Certificate status, renewal, suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certificate status, renewal, suspension, withdrawal, cancellation, and scope reduction are controlled.
Requirement 10.C4 — not verified: Halal-mark licensing, display, reproduction, translation, and misuse are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Halal-mark licensing, display, reproduction, translation, and misuse are controlled.
Requirement 10.C5 — not verified: Verification records are traceable to the exact certificate and issuer.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Verification records are traceable to the exact certificate and issuer.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 10.O1 — not verified: Certificates and marks are monitored in use.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Certificates and marks are monitored in use.
Requirement 10.O2 — not verified: Misuse and expired status are acted upon.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Misuse and expired status are acted upon.
Requirement 10.O3 — partial: Directory and status records are maintained.
Evidence route: First-party and government-hosted public sources. The first-party site lists establishments under halal-food and products licensing, and New York's registry corroborates two named current establishments. The site does not publish a controlled directory with certificate identifiers, validity dates, scope, suspension, withdrawal, or expiry status.
Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Directory and status records are maintained.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 10.P1 — not verified: Consumers can verify current certificate status through a working HTTPS route, searchable directory, QR destination, or equivalent accessible mechanism.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Consumers can verify current certificate status through a working HTTPS route, searchable directory, QR destination, or equivalent accessible mechanism.
Requirement 10.P2 — not verified: Public verification shows enough information to distinguish holder, scope, site or product, identifier, and validity.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. The reviewed record did not establish the required certificate content, validity control, status verification, directory field, mark-use rule, misuse response, or exact certificate traceability for this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Public verification shows enough information to distinguish holder, scope, site or product, identifier, and validity.
11. Complaints, appeals, and corrections
10 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
3.00% of this metric; 0.0300 of 1 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.0000 of 0.9000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0300 of 0.0600 points.
Metric conclusion: Complaints, appeals, and corrections earns 0.0750 of 1 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 10 enumerated subrequirements, 0 fulfilled, 2 partial, 8 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 3.00 percent: 10 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.0000 competence + 0.0300 public accountability = 0.0300 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 11.C1 — not verified: Complaints and appeals have documented procedures.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Complaints and appeals have documented procedures.
Requirement 11.C2 — not verified: Independent committee or reviewer requirements are defined.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Independent committee or reviewer requirements are defined.
Requirement 11.C3 — not verified: Islamic-affairs expertise participates where required.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Islamic-affairs expertise participates where required.
Requirement 11.C4 — not verified: Investigation, decision, communication, corrective action, and records are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Investigation, decision, communication, corrective action, and records are controlled.
Requirement 11.C5 — not verified: Conflicts and recusals are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Conflicts and recusals are controlled.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 11.O1 — not verified: The mechanism is implemented and reviewed.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The mechanism is implemented and reviewed.
Requirement 11.O2 — not verified: Complainants and appellants are informed of outcomes.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Complainants and appellants are informed of outcomes.
Requirement 11.O3 — not verified: Valid complaints can trigger investigation and certificate action.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. A general contact form is public, but the reviewed record did not establish the documented complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, Islamic expertise, investigation, decision, outcome communication, recusal, corrective action, or certificate-response control required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Valid complaints can trigger investigation and certificate action.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 11.P1 — partial: A working public route or contact method exists for complaints and appeals.
Evidence route: First-party public source. The website provides a public contact form and organization contact details, but it does not label the route for complaints and appeals or publish the procedure, review safeguards, timelines, or escalation path.
Public sources: Source 1
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: A working public route or contact method exists for complaints and appeals.
Requirement 11.P2 — partial: The submission pathway and responsible organization are clear.
Evidence route: First-party public source. The organization and a general submission route are publicly identifiable, but the route is not presented as a complaint-and-appeal pathway and the responsible reviewer, decision process, and escalation mechanism are not stated.
Public sources: Source 1
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The submission pathway and responsible organization are clear.
12. Operating history and demonstrated capacity
9 objective subrequirements are scored as fulfilled (1), partial (0.5), not verified or contradicted (0), or excluded when genuinely not applicable.
10.32% of this metric; 0.2065 of 2 weighted points. not publicly verified.
Accreditation effect: No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so this metric receives no automatic accreditation competence determination or breadth credit.
- Competence contribution
- 0.1765 of 1.8000 points.
- Public-accountability contribution
- 0.0300 of 0.1200 points.
Metric conclusion: Operating history and demonstrated capacity earns 0.2417 of 2 points in the underlying requirement record. Of 9 enumerated subrequirements, 1 fulfilled, 1 partial, 7 not independently verified, 0 contradicted, and 0 excluded as not applicable.
Why this metric earned 10.32 percent: 9 requirements, evidence routes, sources, and actions for 100 percent
Arithmetic: 0.1765 competence + 0.0300 public accountability = 0.2065 points. Accreditation-breadth points are added once at the overall level.
A. Control assurance · 60 percent
Requirement 12.C1 — not verified: The HCB defines competence and resource needs for each scope.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: The HCB defines competence and resource needs for each scope.
Requirement 12.C2 — not verified: Audit time, staffing, sites, shifts, categories, and workload are considered.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Audit time, staffing, sites, shifts, categories, and workload are considered.
Requirement 12.C3 — not verified: External resources and outsourcing are controlled.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: External resources and outsourcing are controlled.
Requirement 12.C4 — not verified: Records, internal audits, management review, and corrective action support continued delivery.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Records, internal audits, management review, and corrective action support continued delivery.
B. Operational evidence · 25 percent
Requirement 12.O1 — not verified: Current accreditation or direct evidence verifies active delivery capacity within scope.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Current accreditation or direct evidence verifies active delivery capacity within scope.
Requirement 12.O2 — fulfilled: Current certificates or clients demonstrate active operations.
Evidence route: First-party and government-hosted public sources. The official website publishes a current halal-food and products licensing list, and New York's government-hosted registry independently attributes HD Halal Diner Inc. and Labbaik Supermarket Inc. to United Ulama Council of USA Inc. as certifier. The registry content is establishment-entered attestation of current activity, not accreditation or independent verification of certification controls.
Requirement 12.O3 — not verified: Surveillance, recertification, and management review maintain capacity.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Surveillance, recertification, and management review maintain capacity.
C. Public evidence · 15 percent
Requirement 12.P1 — partial: Operating history, current service scope, and accountable contact are publicly identifiable.
Evidence route: First-party and government-hosted public sources. The first-party website identifies the organization, current halal licensing service, licensed establishments, president, and accountable contact route; New York's registry corroborates current certifier activity. The reviewed record does not establish a founding date, certification-program timeline, current certificate documents, or a documented operating-history chronology.
Public sources: Source 1 · Source 2
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Operating history, current service scope, and accountable contact are publicly identifiable.
Requirement 12.P2 — not verified: Confidential client volumes, payroll, and workload files need not be published when current accreditation verifies capacity.
Evidence route: Not independently verified. Current public activity is attributable to the organization, but the reviewed record did not establish the competence planning, workload controls, staffing, outsourcing, internal review, surveillance, recertification, management review, or accredited confidential-capacity assurance required by this item.
Needed for 100 percent: Provide evidence sufficient to fulfill: Confidential client volumes, payroll, and workload files need not be published when current accreditation verifies capacity.
Part 3
Conclusion
Strongest findings
- Metric 1 identifies the exact operating organization and current New York activity through first-party, independent, and government-hosted sources.
- Metric 12 confirms current attributable licensing activity through a first-party establishment list and two New York registration entries.
- Metric 3 identifies the organization's founder and president while reserving separate certification-governance and decision-authority questions.
Material gaps
- No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified, so no 90-point competence determination or breadth point applies.
- The reviewed record does not establish the accountable halal-approval method, auditor and reviewer qualifications, religious review, or final decision authority.
- The governing standard, public certification criteria, certificate validity controls, impartiality safeguards, and complete complaint-and-appeal procedure remain not independently verified.
Unresolved questions
- Which controlled halal standard and current version govern the licensing program?
- Who performs the facility and document audit, what qualifications do those people hold, and what halal-specific evidence do they record?
- Who performs the Islamic review, who makes the final halal and certification decisions, and how are those decisions documented and protected from commercial pressure?
- How can a consumer verify the exact holder, site, scope, issue date, expiry date, and current status of a certificate or license?
- What documented complaint, appeal, correction, suspension, withdrawal, and recertification procedures apply?
Credibility Score interpretation
- Model B assigns 4.0068 of 90 competence-assurance points, 0.0000 of 4 distinct-independent-authority breadth points, and 0.7650 of 6 public-accountability points.
- No qualifying current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was applied; competence is normalized from the same control and operational requirement evidence used across the national set.
- The New York registry supports current attributable activity only. It does not establish the organization's governing standard, auditor competence, religious review, final halal-decision authority, certificate controls, or accreditation.
- 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. Submit documentary evidence through the secure evidence and correction form. An authorized representative may 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.
How the halal approval was reached is not publicly explained
The central limitation is not simply that the public cannot see who visited an establishment. The reviewed record does not explain the accountable pathway by which halal approval is reached: which application and scope are reviewed, which standard and version govern the work, what ingredient and process evidence is examined, what halal-specific observations occur, what qualifications and authorizations the reviewers hold, how Islamic questions are decided, or who has final authority to issue, suspend, withdraw, or renew the certification.
The organization's religious-community identity and the public title of its founder and president support limited leadership and Islamic-authority transparency. They do not, by themselves, establish professional qualifications, auditor competence, certification-specific Islamic appointment, independent technical review, or final halal-decision authority. The score therefore gives only the narrow credit supported by those disclosures and leaves the separate personnel, governance, and decision requirements not independently verified. [1] [3]
The same boundary applies to complaints and appeals. A general contact form creates a way to reach the organization, so it receives partial public-route credit. It does not establish a controlled complaint-and-appeal procedure, independent reviewer, conflict safeguards, timing, outcome communication, escalation, corrective action, or certificate response.
Accreditation and verification boundary
No current comprehensive independent exact-entity accreditation was verified for United Ulama Council of USA Inc. New York's establishment registrations are not accreditation records and do not assess the organization against a halal certification-body standard. Model B therefore assigns no automatic 90-point competence determination and no distinct-authority breadth point.
The resulting competence score is not a default floor. It is calculated only from the control and operational requirements that the reviewed record affirmatively supports. The same rule leaves unverified items at zero without treating nondisclosure as misconduct or proof that an internal control does not exist.
Public certification criteria and position disclosure
The reviewed first-party and authoritative public record did not identify a controlled governing standard or version, a complete certification scope, exclusions, supplementary destination-market schemes, precedence rules, or a dated public methodology. It also did not establish public positions on the Form 1002-D subjects, including mechanical slaughter, tasmiyah, stunning, alive-at-cut controls, vessel requirements, pork derivatives, alcohol, processing aids, shared lines, sanitation, and certificate-level communication.
These items remain not publicly disclosed for assessment purposes. That means an ordinary consumer could not determine the organization's operative position from the reviewed record; it does not mean USDHS has determined what private position the organization follows. The first-party licensed-establishment list and the two New York registrations provide limited activity and directory evidence, but they do not provide certificate identifiers, validity dates, exact scope, or a reliable current-status mechanism. [1] [3]
Conclusion
United Ulama Council of USA Inc. receives a raw Credibility Score of 4.7718, displayed as 5% and Grade F. The reviewed record establishes a resolvable nonprofit identity, named senior leadership, current halal-licensing activity, two government-hosted establishment attestations, a limited establishment list, and a general contact route. It does not yet substantiate the certification-system competence, accreditation, governing criteria, qualified personnel, Islamic and technical review, final decision authority, certificate controls, or public complaint procedure needed for a materially higher result.
This assessment should be read as an evidence map, not a verdict on every product or establishment. It identifies what the present record supports, what remains unresolved, and exactly what evidence could change the score under the same national methodology. This accountability assessment applies the published USDHS methodology as an evidence-review framework; it does not replace the controlling HIPS standard or make a religious ruling on any certificate or product.
What evidence would change the remaining deductions
This section states what evidence would support a higher score for United Ulama Council of USA Inc. It does not imply that a control is absent merely because the reviewed public record did not establish it. A submission must match the exact assessed entity, identify dates and scope, and show who was responsible for implementation and decision-making.
Qualifying records may be public or may be submitted privately through the secure evidence pathway. Private records may support control or operational assurance when they can be authenticated, but they do not create public-transparency credit unless the organization makes the material information public.
- Metric 1 — Legal identity and operating status: A current authoritative state entity record and a current certificate template showing the exact issuer, operating name, jurisdiction, principal office or documented branches, holder, site, scope, identifier, issue date, and expiry date.
- Metric 2 — Ownership and control: Current governing records identifying nonprofit members or board, voting and management rights, controlling persons or organizations, governing interests, related entities, conflicts, and continuity for the exact assessed entity.
- Metric 3 — Governance and accountable leadership: A current governing-body roster and organogram identifying certification leadership, committees, reporting lines, management accountability, certification authority, and review responsibilities.
- Metric 4 — Personnel competence and authorization: Current criteria and records for auditors, technical experts, Islamic-affairs experts, reviewers, contractors, qualifications, sector experience, halal and audit training, authorization scope, assignments, monitoring, and continuing competence.
- Metric 5 — Islamic authority and halal decision: Current records identifying the certification-specific Islamic authority or committee, appointments, qualifications, jurisprudential basis, review responsibility, independence safeguards, and traceable participation in final halal decisions.
- Metric 6 — Halal audit method and facility verification: A controlled procedure and representative recent files showing application review, scope, ingredients and process evaluation, audit planning and time, on-site observations, sampling, findings, corrective actions, independent review, decision, surveillance, and recertification.
- Metric 7 — Impartiality and decision separation: A current impartiality policy and implementation records identifying risk review, consulting separation, conflicts, recusals, oversight, confidentiality, and separation among audit, sales, technical review, Islamic review, and certification decision.
- Metric 8 — Standards, scheme, and certification scope: A current controlled halal standard or scheme identifying version, effective date, sectors and locations, exclusions, supplementary schemes, precedence, scope-change controls, certificate scope, and responsible issuing entity.
- Metric 9 — Public certification criteria and position disclosure: A current authorized public declaration covering the governing standard and version, religious basis, scope and exclusions, practical halal positions, supplementary-scheme precedence, certificate communication, and public verification route.
- Metric 10 — Certificate traceability and mark control: A current public directory or verification route showing certificate identifier, holder, site, products or scope, effective and expiry dates, live status, suspension or withdrawal, and enforceable mark-use and misuse controls.
- Metric 11 — Complaints, appeals, and corrections: A current public procedure identifying submission routes, acknowledgement and response timing, independent review, Islamic expertise when required, conflict safeguards, outcome communication, escalation, records, corrective action, and certificate response.
- Metric 12 — Operating history and demonstrated capacity: Current independently verifiable records showing the certification program's timeline, active certificates, sectors and locations served, resources and workload, surveillance activity, management review, and competent personnel capacity matched to that work.
Corrections, appeals, and claiming this certification body
United Ulama Council of USA Inc. or another affected party may submit responsive records through the secure documentary-evidence form. Material evidence is evaluated under the same methodology whether it raises or lowers the Credibility Score.
An authorized representative may also use Claim this certification body. The claimant must document identity, role, and authority to act for the exact assessed entity through qualifying documentation and an independently confirmable official contact channel. A claim remains private and pending until reviewed; it does not confer editorial control, disclose other submissions, or automatically change the article, Credibility Score, Grade, or ranking.
A correction request should identify the exact entity, statement, metric, source, effective dates, scope, responsible people, and requested correction. Publication is not conditional on a response, and no organization has a private veto over a documented finding.
Frequently asked questions
Why does United Ulama Council of USA Inc. receive a 5% Credibility Score, Grade F?
Current halal-licensing activity is attributable to the organization, but no current comprehensive exact-entity accreditation or public evidence establishes most certification-system competence controls. The reviewed record also does not explain the governing standard, qualified audit and review personnel, Islamic review, final halal-decision authority, certificate status controls, or complete complaint-and-appeal procedure.
Is United Ulama Council of USA Inc. currently active as a halal certifier?
Its first-party website offers halal food and products licensing, and New York's government-hosted registration system names it as certifier for two establishments. Those rows support attributable activity but remain information entered by the establishments, not accreditation or a state finding that every certification control was met.
Is United Ulama Council of USA Inc. independently accredited?
No current comprehensive independent accreditation was verified for the exact entity and assessed licensing program. A New York establishment registration is not accreditation. The organization may submit a current credential showing the issuing authority, standard, exact entity, dates, scope, sites, and restrictions for review.
Does Grade F invalidate United Ulama Council certificates?
No. Grade F means the reviewed evidence supports only a small portion of the 137 accountability requirements under Model B. It is not a religious ruling or a determination of any particular certificate, establishment, or product.
What would most materially change this assessment?
The most material evidence would identify the controlled governing standard, certification scope, qualified auditors and reviewers, certification-specific Islamic authority, halal-specific audit records, independent technical and religious review, final decision authority, impartiality controls, certificate status mechanism, complaint procedure, and any current comprehensive exact-entity accreditation.