Food fraud vulnerability assessment
A VACCP-style assessment with a transparent, rule-based score. Every factor, weight and band is shown, so you can explain the rating to an auditor or customer instead of citing an unexplained AI number.
1 — Ingredient and supplier
2 — Score each factor
1 is the lowest rating on each scale, 5 the highest. Two factors — supplier relationship and existing verification controls — are protective, so a high rating lowers your vulnerability.
Documented adulteration, substitution, dilution or mislabelling for this commodity in credible databases, recall notices or literature.
3/5 — Occasional reports
How much money an adulterator stands to gain relative to the effort and risk.
3/5 — Moderate gain
Number of intermediaries, brokers, repackers and country transfers between origin and your receiving dock.
3/5 — Few intermediaries
How hard adulteration is to detect with the testing and inspection you realistically perform.
3/5 — Targeted testing needed
Shortages, crop failures or geopolitical disruption create incentive to substitute.
3/5 — Occasional tightness
Sharp or unpredictable price movement in the last 24 months.
3/5 — Moderate swings
Length of relationship, transparency, audit history and willingness to share upstream information.
3/5 — Established, some visibility
Specification checks, CoAs, authenticity testing, mass balance, unannounced audits, traceability verification.
3/5 — Some verification activity
3 — Result
This material
High50/100 vulnerability index
Risk drivers
No factor was rated as a significant driver.
Existing strengths
Nothing is currently reducing this vulnerability.
Recommended mitigation & verification
Maintain your existing verification programme and reassess when the supplier, origin or market conditions change.
FoodReport AI provides AI-assisted decision support. Regulatory requirements and food-safety decisions should be verified by qualified professionals and against applicable current regulations.
Method: weighted average of the factors above, normalised to 0–100. Bands: Low <30, Medium 30–49, High 50–69, Very high ≥70. No regulator prescribes a fraud score; this is a documented internal method aligned with the hazard-analysis logic in Codex CXC 1-1969 and the economically motivated adulteration consideration in 21 CFR 117.130(b)(2).
Discuss this result with the assistant