Tag Archives: Food Traceability

The State of Food Safety in 2026: Risks, Technology, and What FSQA Leaders Are Prioritizing Next

By Paddy McNamara
No Comments

Food safety in 2026 sits at a critical inflection point. Global supply chains remain fragile and volatile, regulatory scrutiny continues to intensify, and consumer tolerance for food safety failures is at an all time low. On the other side of the coin, food safety and quality assurance (FSQA) leaders are being asked to do more with fewer resources, manage risk proactively, respond to incidents faster and more effectively, and demonstrate compliance across increasingly complex operations. According to Mars company FSQA Director Vera Dickinson “coupling food safety with innovation is just a logical thing.”

The past year underscored a key truth: traditional, manual approaches to food safety management are no longer sufficient. As we move into 2026, FSQA executives are prioritizing digitization, data integration, and predictive technologies, not as “nice to have” tools, but as foundational capabilities for protecting public health and brand trust going forward into the future.

According to Brendan Niemira, IFT Chief Science and Technology Officer, “our food system is under pressure like never before. Climate change, resource scarcity, geopolitical disruptions, and rising consumer demands are creating unprecedented challenges. In 2026, those challenges will only intensify, but with those challenges comes opportunity for the food science community to turn uncertainty into innovation, complexity into clarity, and challenges into solutions.”

3 Persistent Pressures Defined Food Safety in 2025

1. Continued Supply Chain Complexity

While most problems that arose within the pandemic have eased, but with the U.S. tariffs policy changing so frequently, global sourcing still remains volatile. Ingredients often cross multiple borders, increasing exposure to contamination risks of country-specific germs, inconsistent regulatory oversight, and traceability gaps.

Larry Rehmann, former Diamond CEO an Senior Operations Leader said “food companies are in the business of managing risk.” FSQA teams are now responsible for monitoring risk well beyond their four walls and what they traditionally handled  and that has become an increasing focus as supply chain complexity has grown.

2. Heightened Regulatory Expectations

Regulators are demanding faster access to records, stronger preventive controls, and clearer accountability, all piled onto the plate of the FSQA. In the U.S., enforcement of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) continues to emphasize prevention, traceability, and rapid access to digital records. Similar regulatory trends are emerging globally.

3. Rising Consumer and Retailer Scrutiny

Word of food safety incidents travels faster than ever. Social media, online news, and retailer compliance programs amplify the reputational and financial damage of recalls, even when public health impacts are limited. As a result, food safety has become a board-level concern rather than a back-office compliance function.

When something goes wrong, almost everyone hears about it, all thanks to our age of exponentially increasing social media communication. On top of this, recent consumer trends have shown that the public has grown much more attentive to the quality of the food they consume in recent years and decades. This combined with the breadth of social media creates a difficult reputational playing field to please the public eye.

Food Safety by the Numbers: 2025 Snapshot

Despite advances in regulation and technology, foodborne illness remains a significant global public health issue. In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 48 million people experience foodborne illness each year, resulting in approximately 128,000 hospitalizations and 3,000 deaths annually. That’s about 7.25% of the U.S. population affected annually. These figures have remained relatively consistent year over year, underscoring the persistent nature of food safety risk. Peter Begg, Lyons Chief Quality Officer, underscores this truth. He noted that “microorganisms don’t care who you are.”

Globally, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 600 million people fall ill from contaminated food each year, leading to 420,000 deaths worldwide

Food recalls were also frequent in 2025, with pathogens such as Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella, and undeclared allergens continuing to be among the leading causes of regulatory action.

Top Priorities for FSQA Leaders in 2026

As organizations look ahead, several priorities are emerging as central to food safety strategy.

1. Proactive Risk Management

FSQA leaders are shifting away from cause and effect, incident-driven approaches toward proactive risk identification. This includes earlier detection of deviations, real-time monitoring of critical control points, and the use of predictive analytics to prevent issues before they escalate into recalls. Vera Dickinson, Founder, InnovaQ & Former FSQA at Mars & Mondelēz, sees AI being the copilot for food safety leaders in this respect. Instead of worrying about job replacement with AI, Dickinson encourages food safety leaders to adopt it and use it to more efficiently manage risk.

2. End-to-End Traceability

Traceability expectations are expanding beyond “one step forward, one step back.” Regulatory agencies and trading partners increasingly expect organizations to demonstrate end-to-end visibility across suppliers, co-manufacturers, and distribution channels, communication across the board. Faster traceability has been shown to reduce recall scope and response time

3. Continuous Audit Readiness

Rather than preparing for audits periodically, FSQA teams are prioritizing continuous audit readiness. Bryan Armentrout, VP at Whitewave Foods, said, “audits main; risk assessments prevent.” Digital recordkeeping and standardized workflows are becoming essential as regulators expect immediate access to complete and verifiable documentation. This also goes a long way in the eye of the public, a sort of, “nothing to hide,” approach.

4. Workforce Enablement

Labor shortages and high turnover continue to challenge food safety operations. Leaders are investing in systems that simplify training, reduce manual paperwork, and enable frontline teams to execute food safety programs consistently and accurately. The real challenge comes from finding the balance of efficient and timely onboarding that leads to proficient and effective workers.

The Expanding Role of AI in Food Safety

Like a growing tidal wave, artificial intelligence is moving from experimental use cases to practical application within food safety programs, being deployed on the front lines more and more frequently.

AI-enabled systems are increasingly used for anomaly detection, identifying patterns or deviations in operational data that may signal emerging risk. Predictive models can help prioritize inspections, preventive maintenance, and corrective actions by analyzing historical and real-time data more timely and effectively than a human counterpart.

Additionally, AI is being applied to document intelligence, supporting faster analysis of audit reports, corrective action records, and compliance documentation. These tools help FSQA professionals focus less on administrative review and more on risk mitigation and continuous improvement, staying ahead of the curve.

However, AI is not replacing food safety professionals. Instead, it brings both worlds together, augmenting human expertise, enhancing visibility, speed, efficiency, and decision-making across complex food systems.

The Benefits of Technology for Food Safety Programs

Across the industry, digital transformation is delivering measurable benefits:

Faster recall response: Digital traceability systems enable organizations to identify affected products and locations in hours rather than days, again, allowing for much more proactive responses.

Improved compliance confidence: Centralized digital records reduce the likelihood of missing or incomplete documentation during inspections, keeping everyone on the same page.

Stronger cross-functional collaboration: Integrated platforms allow quality, operations, procurement, and leadership teams to operate from a single source of truth.

Roger Hancock, CEO, Recall InfoLink, went on the record as saying that “connected technology improves visibility, traceability, and recall response efficiency. While progress has been made, siloed systems and disconnected data make it harder to manage recalls effectively. The industry is finally shifting toward more responsive, tech-enabled food safety workflows”

Reduced financial impact: The Consumer Brands Association estimates that the average direct cost of a food recall can exceed $10 million, excluding long-term brand damage, making prevention and early detection financially critical.

Will Food Recalls Increase or Decrease in 2026?

The outlook for 2026 is mixed. In the short term, recall activity may remain steady or increase slightly, not necessarily because food is becoming less safe, but because detection, testing, and reporting capabilities continue to improve. Greater transparency often results in earlier identification of issues that previously went undetected. Think of it this way: a new wave of recalls in 2026 doesn’t signify steps backward, but rather shows the growth and advancement of food safety technologies doing its job better, catching already established food safety issues earlier and more frequently.

Over the longer term, organizations that adopt preventive, data-driven food safety systems early are expected to experience fewer large-scale recalls and more targeted product withdrawals, reducing both public health impact and business disruption.

What This Means for the Future of FSQA

Food safety in 2026 is no longer defined solely by compliance. The most resilient organizations are those that treat food safety as a strategic, technology-enabled function, supported by real-time data, predictive insight, and continuous improvement. Those willing to get ahead of the game will come out on top.

As regulatory expectations rise and supply chains grow more complex, the gap between digitally mature food safety programs and legacy, traditional approaches will continue to widen. For FSQA leaders, the path forward is clear: proactive risk management, enabled by data and technology, is essential to protecting both public health and brand trust in the years ahead.

How Item-Level Supply Chain Data Protects Food Safety and Reduces Waste

By George Dyche
No Comments

Every global supply chain faces constant pressures between economic shifts, tariffs, and logistics challenges. But disruptions in the food supply chain carry unique consequences. They don’t just impact bottom lines – they can lead to food insecurity, price spikes, widespread waste, and even create uncertainty about food safety. A single delay or temperature spike can mean spoiled produce, unsafe products, or empty shelves.

In the U.S. alone, food travels an average of 1,500 miles before reaching consumers – and every mile introduces risks. Managing this complexity requires more than just traditional tracking methods. Without accurate, item-level data, grocers and suppliers are forced to operate in the dark, making it difficult to respond quickly to these potential disruptions.

In a 2025 survey conducted by Impinj of supply chain leaders in the food and grocery sectors validates this challenge. While 90% of respondents believe their organization is equipped to drive accurate supply chain visibility, only one-third actually have a consistent, 360-degree, real-time view. This data accuracy gap makes it difficult to anticipate issues or respond quickly when disruptions occur, and it comes with a serious cost.

Closing the Data Accuracy Gap

To manage these challenges, many organizations are turning to item-level visibility technologies, such as RAIN RFID, which have become increasingly present across food supply chains. Unlike traditional barcodes that require manual line-of-sight scanning, RAIN RFID tags can be attached to or embedded in packaging and read in bulk. Employees can count thousands of items in seconds and generate rapid inventory reports, which increases the likelihood that they can identify errors before they become problems.

Major food retailers are already seeing results. Chipotle, for example, has adopted RFID to track food shipments to its 3,300 restaurants, while Kroger plans to deploy it enterprise-wide to support its omnichannel purchase strategy and improve inventory accuracy.

Technology like RAIN RFID isn’t just a tool, but a foundation for proactive management. More precise item-level information unlocks several opportunities for grocers, such as more targeted recalls, optimized inventory, and minimized waste. It is with this level of visibility that grocers can move from reacting to problems to strategically managing them – whether it’s responding to a major recall or reducing everyday waste.

Food Safety and the Cost of Blind Spots

Food safety has always been a top priority for grocers, especially as regulations evolve. Last year, the FDA postponed the compliance date for its Food Traceability Rule – a decision supported by many in the industry grappling with supply chain complexity. But delayed compliance requirements don’t eliminate risk.

Recalls are expensive, time-sensitive, and widely disruptive – and they illustrate how data blind spots can escalate quickly. In Q3 2025, the FDA logged 145 food recalls – its second-highest quarterly total since 2020.When grocers lack item-level visibility, even a single recall can trigger massive over-removal of products. Without knowing exactly which pallets or shipments are affected, or where those items are located on shelves, retailers may be forced to discard entire batches of product, including items that are safe. This over-removal not only amplifies financial losses but also undermines consumer trust and increases waste.

However, item-level visibility technologies like RAIN RFID enable retailers to gain a detailed record of each product’s journey from supplier to shipment to shelf. In the event of a recall, RAIN RFID can enable brands to remove only the affected items, reducing unnecessary food waste.

The Billions Lost to Everyday Waste

Routine spoilage and waste drain billions from grocery operations. Managing perishables across departments is inherently complex, and visibility gaps only make it worse.

ReFED, a US-based non-profit that works to reduce food loss and waste across the U.S. food system, estimated that the cost of surplus and wasted food for businesses and consumers reached a staggering $473 billion in 2022 alone. And last year, grocery and supply chain leaders felt the impact. According to Impinj’s 2026 report,  75% cited waste reduction as a major challenge, and respondents estimated losing an average of $79 million annually to food waste and spoilage.

Addressing these challenges requires more than just better forecasting. It demands item-level visibility into every product’s journey throughout the supply chain. RAIN RFID offers a practical way to close these visibility gaps, helping grocers track inventory and optimize it before it goes to waste.

Building a Smarter Food Supply Chain

While the food supply chain faces time-sensitive challenges and heavy regulation, innovative technologies are making it easier to manage operations, improve efficiency, and build resilience.

By leveraging item-level visibility through RAIN RFID, grocers and suppliers can close the data accuracy gap, create smart solutions for food safety, and reduce waste. The result is a smarter, more reliable food system that reduces losses and enables grocers to focus on delivering streamlined customer experiences.

 

Connected Factory, manufacturing

Predictive, Preventive, Powerful: The Future of Data-Driven Food Safety

By Wiggs Civitillo
No Comments
Connected Factory, manufacturing

Food safety is at an inflection point. Regulations are shifting, deadlines are moving, and technology is advancing faster than most organizations can keep up. The FDA’s FSMA 204 Traceability Rule is a clear signal: data is now central to compliance, consumer trust, and competitive resilience. But here’s the hard truth — extending compliance dates doesn’t extend the shelf life of risk. Outbreaks won’t wait until 2028. Consumer expectations won’t wait either.

The challenge before us is simple but daunting: can the food industry shift from a reactive mindset — responding after the fact — to a predictive and preventive one, powered by data?

From Reactive to Predictive

For decades, food safety has been a compliance exercise. Check the box, pass the audit, and move on. That model doesn’t work anymore. The industry has too much complexity, too many blind spots, and too much at stake.

The next era of food safety will be defined by predictive tools — artificial intelligence, machine learning, anomaly detection, and real-time visibility platforms that allow us to see risk before it becomes crisis. Imagine spotting a deviation in cold chain patterns before it leads to spoilage, or detecting unusual movement in supply chains that hints at fraud. These tools exist today, but they can only succeed if the data feeding them is complete, consistent, and trusted.

What’s Holding Us Back

So why aren’t we there yet? The barrier isn’t the lack of technology. The tools exist. The real problem is data fragmentation and trust.

  • Fragmentation: Every player in the food chain speaks a slightly different “data language.” A grower might record harvest time in one format, while a processor logs it differently, and a retailer doesn’t capture it at all. Even when companies are technically compliant, the data sets don’t align. What should be a continuous record ends up a patchwork that’s hard to stitch together in real time.
  • Manual Workarounds: In too many cases, people are still rekeying data from one system into another, or relying on email, PDFs, or even phone calls to close gaps. These workarounds introduce errors and slow response times. In a recall, hours matter — and a manual process can be the difference between containment and escalation.
  • Trust & Control: Many companies hesitate to share data because they fear it will be used against them — to negotiate harder, cut margins, or reveal competitive strategies. This lack of trust creates bottlenecks. Without a neutral space, every data exchange feels like a negotiation rather than a collaboration.
  • Short-Term Compliance Thinking: Too often, data-sharing investments are framed only in terms of passing an audit or meeting FSMA 204 requirements. That keeps the focus narrow: “What’s the minimum we need to do?” rather than, “How do we build a system that gives us real-time visibility, predictive insight, and long-term resilience?”

The result is that AI and machine learning don’t have clean, connected data to work with. Instead of unlocking predictive power, they reinforce the fragmentation — analyzing partial views that miss the bigger picture. In other words, bad or siloed data doesn’t just limit progress; it actively undermines the promise of next-gen tools.

What Needs to Change

If we want predictive, preventive, and truly powerful food safety systems, we need to rethink how we share data. That means moving from a “winner take all” mentality to an ecosystem mindset — where data isn’t a competitive advantage but a shared asset.

The key isn’t ripping and replacing existing systems. The food industry has invested heavily in ERP, WMS, quality, and compliance platforms — and those systems aren’t going anywhere. What we need is a neutral connectivity layer: a translator that lets each system keep doing what it does best, while still moving data securely and consistently across trading partners.

Neutrality matters. If one player owns the data exchange, others will always hesitate. But when no one company controls the pipes, collaboration becomes possible. That’s when we can unleash the full potential of AI, machine learning, and real-time analytics — because the data finally flows freely.

With connected, high-quality data, predictive models can detect anomalies earlier. Preventive actions become possible before outbreaks spread. And companies can move beyond compliance to true resilience — strengthening trust with consumers and trading partners alike.

The Call to Leadership

This isn’t about compliance dates or government mandates. It’s about leadership. The companies that lean into collaboration, prioritize interoperability, and invest in data quality will define the future of food safety. They will turn regulation into trust, compliance into resilience, and risk into competitive advantage.

The future of food safety is predictive. It’s preventive. It’s powerful. But only if we decide, as an industry, to break down silos and build systems that can truly talk to each other.

We don’t have 30 months to wait. The opportunity — and the responsibility — is right in front of us.

Track and Trace, traceability, supply chain

Traceability Is a Competitive Advantage, Not Just a Regulation

By Ellie Gabel
No Comments
Track and Trace, traceability, supply chain

Traceability adoption in the food and beverage industry is normalizing. It is expanding across jurisdictions, highlighting a desire for greater food safety. Legislators and technological innovations are in a perfect place to enable the most advanced solutions in history.

They will enhance operational productivity while promoting a trustworthy brand. Compliant companies are global health stewards, and customers demand food chain traceability to reduce risk. It is time to be an early adopter.

Regulatory Drivers in Food Chain Traceability

The Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in the U.S. asserts that the global supply chain is responsible for maintaining public health. Traceability is a central tenet, emphasizing more robust recordkeeping and faster removal of potentially contaminated products.

The European Union also requires traceability as part of the General Food Law Regulation. If the source presents a safety concern, manufacturers are required to recall it and notify the authorities to determine whether it demands greater attention. Traceability highlights how food safety is a national affair.

Food quality control guidelines vary worldwide, and many prioritize safety. The Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points framework forces companies to identify potential biological, physical and chemical contamination sources. Analyses must cover the food’s origin, working environment and transportation medium. Other valuable guidelines include the Good Manufacturing Practices and nationally specific legislation. These have laid the foundation for new regulations.

Noncompliance will cost companies more than auditor fines. Quality oversights will begin without tracking traceability, driving customers to more adherent and reputable businesses. Additionally, organizations must deal with adverse health care implications if they neglect adherence.

Digital Tools Powering Modern Food Chain Traceability 

Data management, food manufacturing
Managing the data required for FSMA compliance is an ideal example of the importance of pursuing digital transformation in food manufacturing facilities. (Image courtesy of One Neck IT Solutions, LLC

Manual documentation is sufficient for tracking food. However, modern tech expedites the process and eliminates tedium, increasing the likelihood of continuous compliance. It allows companies of all sizes to commit more to enhancing traceability and maximizing the value of those efforts to achieve competitive advantages. These are some of the most notable:

  • Blockchain: Rapidly validates and uploads immutable digital certifications and logs transactions
  • The Internet of Things (IoT): Automatically senses and scans smart tags to enable real-time food monitoring
  • Cloud infrastructure: Seamlessly eliminates siloes and encourages collaboration through immediate information sharing
  • RFID tags: Quickly capture metadata about food sources
  • Enterprise resource planning systems: Immediately connects stakeholders throughout the food’s value chain in a single dashboard

Markets like the IoT will have an estimated potential worth of $12.6 trillion by 2030 because of the value it could bring to manufacturers worldwide.

Market Forces and Transparency as a Brand Differentiator

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 9.9 million people experience foodborne illness every year. As a result, customer expectations for transparency and safety are rising. Norovirus was the most common, leading to the most hospitalizations, with salmonella causing the most deaths.

Brands as large as Walmart are using traceability to obtain a market advantage. It leveraged blockchain in its food supply ecosystem to track mango sales in U.S. stores and pork in Chinese locations. The system used digital certificates to validate authenticity and shortened provenance identification from seven days to 2.2 seconds.

The research was an important food chain traceability win for Walmart because customers had all but lost faith in romaine lettuce after a massive recall. The trial was so successful that Walmart will require leafy green suppliers to use the system.

Food sellers also differentiate themselves with traceability because it supports farmers’ livelihoods. Improving detectability and tracking locates the illness source faster, narrowing it down to one or a few origins. Governments can communicate these concerns with a recall, potentially pulling products before they hit shelves.

The swiftness preserves farmers’ reputations, who may struggle with the changing growing seasons. Food manufacturers that protect stakeholders will also see their public image shift in their favor. The initiative promotes them as thought leaders and essential collaborators in the volatile industry.

Operational Benefits of Integrating Traceability

Integrating traceability offers organizations benefits beyond compliance adherence. Every advantage reinforces positive brand perception, creating additional competitive advantages.

Traceability streamlines supply chains and recall processes. The technology and data visibility speed up the triage phase, identifying contaminated products faster. Employees spend less time investigating and more time communicating with authorities and stakeholders about what matters most.

Additionally, data-driven decision-making will create cost savings. Companies no longer carelessly throw away products because they have a more precise idea of what is contaminated due to improved inventory management and live stock updates.

Turning Compliance Into Competitive Advantage 

Food chain traceability is an organizational growth tool. Many view it as a regulatory hurdle, but it promotes accountability and transparency. Customers and clients will appreciate the commitment to public safety and quality, deepening their brand loyalty to the most dedicated. Corporations adopting traceability guidelines early will reap these benefits and more, scaling into new heights of profitability and efficiency.

Raw chicken breast

How the Fieldale Farms Corporation Transformed Its Laboratory Operations with a Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS)

By Janet Smith, Kim Waters
No Comments
Raw chicken breast

For over 50 years, Fieldale Farms Corporation has built a reputation as one of the world’s largest independent poultry producers. Rooted in Northeast Georgia, this family-owned business remains committed to providing premium, healthy poultry products to customers in over 50 countries. With the ability to provide product packaging, fully cooked products, and other specialty items, Fieldale is a trusted one-stop source for quality poultry products.

Under the brand Springer Mountain Farms, Fieldale was the pioneer in raising poultry without the use of antibiotics as well as the first poultry producer to be American Humane Certified. With cutting-edge technology and a rigorous commitment to safety, Fieldale ensures every product meets the highest standards of quality for customers around the globe.

For years, the Fieldale Farms laboratory team depended on Microsoft Access databases and Excel spreadsheets to manage its laboratory data. While these tools served their purpose in the past, growing testing demands soon exposed their limitations.

One significant challenge was the lack of a comprehensive audit trail, which made it difficult to trace data changes and ensure accuracy. Also determining whether all samples were processed, testing was completed and protocols followed required extensive manual effort.

“We could not easily trace what method had been used and the technicians responsible without investing significant time and effort,” said Janet Smith, Manager of the Laboratory at Fieldale Farms.

The Fieldale lab required a modern software solution to simplify sample login, enhance tracking, ensure accurate result entry with a detailed audit trail, support strong QA/QC processes, and enable seamless electronic data transfer with laboratory instruments.

To tackle these challenges, Fieldale Farms’ ISO 17025 and USDA FSIS-accredited lab adopted a cloud-based LIMS. With this upgrade, the lab now enjoys full traceability. “Now, we can trace the sample all the way from the front door to final reporting knowing the technicians, methods, and equipment involved each step without a lot of paperwork review,” said Smith.

“With the LIMS, we achieve audit trail capabilities that were absent before,” said Smith. Any changes to validated and/or approved results will spawn an audit trail.  The LIMS audit trail stores the original result, the date and time stamp of the original result, the person that entered the original result and the new result, the date and time stamp of the new result, the user that made the change, and finally the new result. In addition, the LIMS will prompt the user to enter a reason for the change of the result.

Generating reports used to be a tedious time drain, diverting valuable time and resources from core laboratory functions. “Before, I often had to recreate reports for each “new/different” type of sample/customer when I didn’t have a template that was acceptable due to the reports being “static” – containing specific methods that often didn’t fit every scenario,” said Smith. The LIMS allows for dynamic reporting adaptable to different testing methods and client requirements. Reporting is now faster, more accurate, and far less frustrating.

Fieldale Farms Laboratory Team 

Another key benefit for the lab is instrument integration. “Parsing files from the instrument directly into the LIMS database is also a favorite.  No more data transcription errors and it is quick,” said Smith. The LIMS integrates seamlessly with the lab’s Leco Protein Analyzer, PCR, and NIR Spectrometer.

By adopting a modern, cloud-based LIMS solution, the lab eliminated the need for expensive hardware investments and avoided the hassle of setup and maintenance. With no need for specialized IT staff, the system runs smoothly with automatic updates, reducing staff workload and minimizing downtime. The result: improved productivity, streamlined operations, and uninterrupted lab performance.

SGS, food safety

SGS Launches FSMA 204 Food Traceability Solutions

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
SGS, food safety

SGS, a testing, inspection and certification company, has launched comprehensive, integrated FSMA 204 Food Traceability Solutions to help food manufacturers and producers meet the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) latest Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) Section 204 requirements.

FSMA 204 aims to enhance food safety by improving supply chain traceability. It targets high-risk foods on the Food Traceability List and mandates detailed recordkeeping, traceability plans and rapid data sharing.

While the compliance deadline is January 20, 2026, many retailers are already seeking early adoption by suppliers.

Naghmeh Raiyat, Global Head of Food Assurance at SGS, said: “As the compliance deadline for FSMA 204 approaches, businesses face mounting pressure to enhance their traceability systems. Thanks to our extensive knowledge of FSMA requirements, we have developed a solution that will empower businesses with the tools and confidence to not only achieve compliance but also build more resilient and transparent supply chains. Ultimately, this marks another welcome step forward in strengthening consumer trust in food safety.”

Designed to address the increasingly complex compliance needs of stakeholders in the food industry, FSMA 204 Food Traceability Solutions combine FSMA 204 audits, training and the TRAKKEY digital traceability platform:

  • FSMA 204 audits: ensures that organizations meet the FDA’s rigorous traceability requirements. These audits focus on verifying the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of Key Data Elements (KDEs) and Critical Tracking Events (CTEs). By assessing the readiness of traceability systems, the audits support the swift identification and removal of contaminated food products to safeguard public health
  • FSMA 204 training: provides food businesses with the knowledge and skills to implement robust traceability plans. Available online and in person, these courses cover critical aspects of FSMA 204, including traceability rules, KDEs and CTEs, enabling organizations to navigate FDA inspections and meet regulatory demands confidently
  • TRAKKEY digital traceability platform: ensures real-time supply chain-wide visibility. Validated by billions of annual transactions, TRAKKEY integrates effortlessly into existing IT systems and workflows, offering a scalable and powerful tool to:
    • Enhance outbreak investigations: quickly identify contamination sources to enable faster responses
    • Reduce recalls: pinpoint contaminated products to minimize financial losses
    • Improve product information: insights into the origin, processing and distribution of food items
    • Streamline data sharing: efficient communication between trading partners

For more information about the FSMA 204 Food Traceability Solutions, please visit: https://www.sgs.com/en/services/fsma-204-food-traceability-solutions

Why now is the time to prepare for FSMA 204

By Geoff Olsen
No Comments

In recent years, food recalls have become a concern for the food and beverage (F&B) industry, with regulatory bodies tightening oversight as the number of recall-related incidents continues to rise. The F&B industry is no stranger to recalls, but recent trends indicate a steady increase in frequency, with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) issuing 313 recalls in 2023, an 8% increase from the previous year. This uptick can be attributed to various factors, including the detection of undeclared allergens, which made up almost half of food recalls last year, and contamination by harmful bacteria such as Listeria, Salmonella, and E. coli.

Consumers are taking notice of these continuous food recalls as a new Gallup poll revealed that Americans’ perspective of the grocery industry has turned negative due to inflation and food safety concerns. It also showed that, for the first time, Americans have more negative views (47%) than positive (33%) of the grocery industry. The growing number of recalls, plus consumer concerns, has intensified calls for stricter compliance and enhanced traceability within the food supply chain.

Major Changes Are Coming

These recalls have become a persistent public health problem, with over 1,100 Americans falling ill from foodborne illnesses linked to recalled products. However, significant steps are being taken to address these concerns in the next few years. To reduce the number of foodborne illnesses, the FDA introduced the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) 204, a regulation requiring F&B businesses to provide detailed traceability information within 24 hours of a recall. Starting in January 2026, this rule will focus on tracking food inputs from suppliers, enabling companies to pinpoint the source of contamination more efficiently.

FSMA 204 will bring major changes to the F&B industry by enhancing traceability requirements for high-risk foods. The rule mandates that companies must improve tracking across the supply chain to ensure key data points are recorded at critical stages of food production, processing, and distribution. This means F&B businesses must implement more stringent record-keeping processes, invest in technology for real-time tracking, and increase collaboration with suppliers to ensure compliance.

However, many organizations aren’t prepared to undergo the data process transformations needed to align with this new traceability rule. Below are a few actionable steps companies can take to prepare their supply chains for FSMA 204:

Investing in Solutions to Streamline Reporting

Despite the wide scale impact FSMA 204 will have across the F&B industry, a main challenge for companies will be updating and investing in new systems and processes to comply with the rule. FSMA 204 mandates that F&B companies provide detailed, accurate traceability data within a 24-hour window during a recall, which requires modern technology capable of handling real-time information. Many existing systems are outdated or not equipped to meet this new level of compliance. As a result, suppliers will need to adopt new software, train staff, and overhaul data management processes. These changes are certain to be time-consuming and raise operational costs. The complexity of this process, especially in a global and multifaceted supply chain, can be overwhelming without the right tools in place.

In addition, suppliers face the challenge of integrating these new systems with their broader supply chain networks. Ensuring seamless communication between suppliers, manufacturers, and retailers is essential for meeting the strict reporting timelines under FSMA 204. The coordination required to share and track data effectively across multiple partners adds an additional layer of complexity. Suppliers must also ensure their traceability solutions are scalable to accommodate future growth and evolving regulations, all while maintaining business continuity and protecting their bottom line.

Investing in scalable technology not only ensures compliance but also enhances business resilience. It provides better visibility into the supply chain, helping businesses respond quickly to disruptions, recall situations, or emerging food safety threats. Furthermore, these solutions enable businesses to streamline their data-sharing processes with trading partners, improving collaboration and reducing the time and resources spent manually documenting transactions.

While this can be costly, investing in robust technology systems and implementing effective food safety quality programs for employees provides the benefit of demonstrating a commitment to food safety and helps ensure smoother operations.

A few solutions suppliers can consider include advanced technologies like supply chain control towers and blockchain. These solutions provide real-time insights into inventory, orders, and potential disruptions, allowing companies to trace food origins and pinpoint contamination sources quickly. Supply chain control towers centralize data collection, management, and analysis, streamlining reporting processes, while blockchain offers a secure, tamper-proof record that ensures data consistency and transparency across all participants in the supply chain. By leveraging these technologies, suppliers can enhance traceability, reduce contamination risks, and build greater consumer trust.

Enhancing Data Consistency

Data consistency works in tandem with the integration of new technologies. The success of any traceability system under FSMA 204 relies on the consistency and accuracy of data collected throughout the supply chain. However, one of the most significant challenges businesses face is ensuring that data is recorded uniformly across different suppliers and systems. Inconsistent or incomplete data can lead to gaps in traceability, making it difficult to track products effectively or respond quickly to a recall. With the new regulation requiring detailed traceability information within 24 hours of a recall, any discrepancies or gaps in data could lead to delays in identifying contamination sources.

To ensure data consistency, suppliers can implement standardized data collection practices and utilize integrated technologies, such as supply chain control towers and blockchain. By implementing uniform data entry protocols across the entire supply chain, suppliers can avoid errors, discrepancies, and miscommunication that often result from inconsistent or fragmented data. Standardization helps streamline reporting and ensures that all parties—from suppliers to distributors—are working from the same set of accurate, reliable information.

Bringing Employees Along on the Journey

Investing in technology and ensuring data consistency are vital steps in preparing for FSMA 204, but they are only part of the equation. For these initiatives to succeed, businesses must also invest in their employees through training and education. Compliance with FSMA 204 requires everyone involved in the food supply chain to understand their role in the traceability process and the importance of accurate data reporting.

Training programs can be implemented at all levels of the organization to educate employees on the new traceability requirements and how they affect day-to-day operations. This includes not only teaching staff how to use new software solutions but also fostering a culture of accountability and food safety awareness, including setting up conversations with employees at every stage of the supply chain. Employees must understand that even minor data collection or reporting lapses can have significant consequences, from costly recalls to legal penalties and damage to brand reputation.

Continuous education is also key to keeping up with the evolving regulatory landscape. As food safety regulations change and new technologies emerge, businesses must keep their teams informed and updated. This can be achieved through regular workshops, webinars, or online courses that keep employees engaged and equipped with the latest knowledge.

The Cost of Non-Compliance

Failure to comply with FSMA 204 can lead to serious consequences for both suppliers and retailers. The FDA has the authority to enforce various penalties, including civil or criminal actions in federal court. It’s important to remember that this rule is considered mandatory, and parties will be under real pressure from the government if they don’t take the necessary steps to ensure the traceability requirements under this act. Non-compliance can lead to legal repercussions for both companies and suppliers in the form of lawsuits and litigation. In addition, the FDA has the authority to impose significant fines, sanctions, and criminal penalties for non-compliance.

Suppliers that are unable to meet FSMA 204 requirements may also face financial loss and damage to the company’s reputation as retailers and manufacturers may decide to switch to more reliable partners. Compliance penalties can also result in lost sales and brand damage that can impact consumers’ decisions.

Operationally, non-compliance with FSMA 204 can disrupt supply chain processes, leading to delays in identifying and resolving contamination issues. The inability to quickly trace food inputs can result in prolonged and costly recalls. Furthermore, non-compliance can strain relationships with trading partners who rely on accurate traceability data for product safety.

Preparing for FSMA 204 requires a multifaceted approach that combines technology, data standardization, and employee engagement. By investing in solutions that streamline reporting, enhance data consistency, and bring employees along through training and education, F&B companies can position themselves for success. These actions will help ensure compliance with FSMA 204 and lead to more efficient, transparent, and resilient supply chains, ultimately improving food safety for consumers.

Allergens

How Can US Food Businesses Navigate Labeling Regulations While Ensuring Compliance?

By Fred Whipp
No Comments
Allergens

With nearly 1 in 4 US citizens reporting a food allergy, the importance of mitigating against cross-contamination in-store and throughout the whole supply chain is becoming increasingly recognized. As reports of allergy tragedies related to food negligence continue to spiral, it begs the question as to whether the food industry is truly and wholly compliant with regulations, such as the FASTER Act.

The Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education and Research Act or FASTER Act marks the first time that food allergen labeling has been expanded since the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA). Launched on January 1st, 2023, in the US, the FASTER Act identified sesame as the ninth major food allergen, requiring manufacturers to list and specify the allergen’s presence in packaged foods.

Despite more rigorous regulations being put in place, cases relating to the misleading labeling of food products remain an issue. Earlier this year, the FDA issued a warning to Bimbo Bakery for falsely listing allergens, including sesame, on its food labels in the US. The warning comes amid reports of manufacturers adding allergens to product labels and recipes to rule out the risk of cross-contamination and cleaning procedures required by new labeling laws.

What is the FASTER Act?

The FASTER Act is both a recognition and validation of the seriousness of sesame allergies and sensitivities, promoting R&D for more effective diagnosis and prevention. The Act requires all restaurants and catering companies to ensure all food produced and packed for sale in the same premises has a complete ingredient list identifying all ingredients on the product label, including sesame, the ninth major allergen. It also requires that food manufacturers using sesame in their products ensure procedures are in place, such as thoroughly cleaning equipment across production lines, to avoid cross-contamination.

However, as we have seen, despite more stringent regulations being put in place, there have been numerous cases of manufacturers responding to new labeling laws by intentionally adding sesame as a listed allergen on previously allergen-free products to avoid the rigorous cleaning processes needed to avoid any points of cross-contamination. This practice has been criticized by various organizations, including most notably the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which filed a regulatory petition to the FDA in 2023, urging the FDA to address manufacturers intentionally or unnecessarily adding sesame to their formulations or product labels.

Despite the introduction of the Act, reports of negligence are still occurring, exposing a somewhat backward approach to the future of food safety. Not only does this actively risk undermining customer trust, but it also further limits food choices for individuals with allergies.

Keeping compliance central

To remain compliant, food providers and catering companies must establish robust channels of communication with their suppliers to remain informed of any changes to formulations or manufacturing and production processes. Alongside this, staff training in allergens is essential, making employees aware of changes to in-house menus, recipes or stock to provide a comprehensive allergen list to customers upon request.

Manually checking ingredients across every PPDS (prepacked for direct sale) item is not always practical in large facilities, especially when multiple players in the supply chain are involved. One of the most effective ways to maintain accurate ingredient and allergen details is with the help of specialist software that automates updates to nutritional and allergen information across various systems and sites, saving valuable time while ensuring labelling remains accurate by leveraging real-time updates and data.

The future of process management platforms

Food businesses must consider using process management platforms in 2024 to not only ensure but also document that staff follow protocol stringently. This could involve assigning employees digital checklists or logbooks to complete to make certain they have understood new formulations or changes to an existing one. By automating these processes, the highest levels of compliance will be met, both assuring head offices of proper in-house operations and providing records of this in case of inspection.

By integrating IoT technology embedded in process management platforms leveraging sensors, RFID tags and smart thermostats, food businesses can ensure the real-time monitoring of food storage conditions like temperature, humidity and expiration dates, as well as improved supply chain visibility and end-to-end traceability. Examples include cold storage facilities, delivery trucks and even stockrooms equipped with IoT sensors that systematically check, log and alert staff to changes in temperatures or changes to products in the stockroom. When employees are made aware of the storage location of food products and their various allergen content within the stockroom, cross-contamination is more easily avoided, allowing for the easier identification and separation of food products and taking extra precautions to ensure packaging is kept intact when handling.

Improved supply chain traceability

Integrating advanced technologies throughout the supply chain further safeguards against food contamination and promotes confidence, compliance and thus protection from food to farm. Radio frequency identification (RFID) tags document the complete journey from origin to destination by transmitting location and sourcing data to companies, updating them on the exact whereabouts of each product throughout its journey to them. This way, any issues relating to product recall or batch contamination can be traced back through the chain, identifying locations of potential food safety breaches, such as a facility also handling other allergen products.

Installing IoT cameras in manufacturing facilities further enforces quality control by inspecting food products, flagging lapses in improper packaging or the presence of allergens in the facility, automating much of the processes behind compliance with food safety practices. Although the upfront cost of implementing such technologies is expensive, businesses will, in time, reap the benefits of reduced labour costs and improved operational consistency, bolstering their supplier-to-customer relations.

Supply chain traceability is equally important when considering downstream supply chain operations, such as in-country transportation. IoT sensors fitted in refrigerated packaging or vehicles track shipment and courier conditions in real-time, automatically alerting drivers to allergen products on board or changes in temperatures. If the reason for improper storage conditions proves challenging to rectify, drivers will be redirected to nearby facilities where food products can be temporarily stored when equipment malfunctions to ensure the longevity, hygiene and quality of perishable goods.

Time saving without cutting corners

The FASTER Act recognizes and highlights the importance of strict quality control, regulating the accurate labeling of products and mitigating cross-contamination in manufacturing and production facilities. With the right technology and systems in place, equipping businesses with the necessary tools, such as mpro5, the task at hand becomes significantly more manageable.

Process management platforms that automate lengthy manual tasks provide time-saving benefits and further reduce the likelihood of businesses cutting corners when allergen labeling by enforcing compliance. By integrating technologies to create an IoT infrastructure from food to farm, all stakeholders will benefit from the assurance that their products are safe for consumption, whatever the dietary or allergen requirement.

By improving traceability, providing real-time data and ensuring correct storage, waste is reduced, and customer safety is rightfully centered at the heart of all operations. In doing so, food businesses can maintain compliance with safety standards and identify and address potential food safety risks within the wider supply chain whilst cultivating customer confidence and trust once the products are in-store.

Food Safety Technology Can Protect Businesses from Recalls and Other Risks

By Colin Rose, Patricia Baxter
No Comments

Recalls represent one of the largest threats to a food company’s profitability and reputation. In recent years, technology solutions such as cloud-based software have been introduced to better prepare and safeguard businesses.

According to the US Department of Agriculture, more than 300 food products were recalled last year, representing a significant 31% increase compared with 2022. The reasons behind recalls vary and include food containing contaminated items such as metal or plastic, exposure to pathogens and undeclared allergens on product labels. The Centers for Disease Control estimates that each year, roughly one in six Americans (or 48 million people) gets sick from foodborne diseases. Recalls represent one of the largest threats to a food company’s profitability and reputation. In recent years, technology solutions such as cloud-based software have been introduced to better prepare and safeguard businesses.

Supply Chain Connectivity

Despite advances in technology, many food manufacturers and processors still rely on manual tools and management across their supply chains. Manual systems can result in major issues during a crisis, including errors in inputting or updating data and miscommunication, such as being unable to quickly reach multiple vendors and suppliers at a given time.

Proper and comprehensive supply chain management is critical to food safety. In the instance of a recall, businesses must be able to quickly activate their recall management plan, disseminating important information both up and down the supply chain while documenting to meet certification and regulatory requirements. It’s key that all suppliers – local, national and international – demonstrate that they are compliant with all relevant food and market regulations. Product source information must also be tracked and searchable in records.

Robust and proactive document control can help an organization avoid recalls by quickly identifying risky suppliers or non-compliant ingredients.

Innovative Solutions Support Recalls

Several new technologies are being employed to support greater traceability and transparency across the food supply chain. With cybersecurity attacks now being a risk that can result in product recalls, more companies are investing in information security solutions to further protect their data. Certifications to standards such as ISO/IEC 27001, which has requirements for establishing, managing and maintaining an information security management system help businesses to demonstrate that they follow an international standard for managing security controls. This can provide an added level of assurance that cybersecurity risks have been identified and safeguarded.

Some companies are now using RFID to tag and track food items. QR codes and bar codes can be scanned on easily accessible devices such as smartphones and tablets, providing instant access to records to ensure traceability.

Cloud-based software also allows companies to manage complex and critical data more confidently. NSF TraQtion® is a new software solution that directs suppliers to an online portal to upload documents, complete questionnaires and communicate. Beyond supplier data, cloud-based software can also be used for recipe management and storage, tracking complaints, label compliance and setting company-wide standards. By simplifying and digitizing data, documents and records collection, leaders can instantly access information during audits and assessments, allowing for quick delivery when program documentation is requested or required.

If not properly and swiftly handled, a recall or outbreak can cost a business tens of thousands of dollars or more. By using cloud-based technology to put an easily accessible and implementable risk management plan in place, businesses can be better prepared for a food safety incident. Overall, software can minimize back-and-forth messaging, urgent data requests, meetings and calls by digitizing and streamlining both communication and documentation.

How to Select the Right Tech Solutions

When preparing for a potential recall, it’s important to be proactive. Start with identifying the pain points in the organization’s risk management plan and then see if there are tools that can be used to strengthen the plan and address its weaknesses. While some tools may require greater investment, this can pay off in the long run when you consider how detrimental recalls can be.

As we look at recalls and technology solutions, we must acknowledge that the requirement for full compliance to the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) 204 rule is January 20, 2026. For those applicable, technology will play a major role in the FDA’s recordkeeping requirements and 24-hour turnaround of an electronic, sortable spreadsheet for traceability of products. In most cases, with larger-scale operations, this can only happen with the utilization of new and emerging software.

The goal of technology implementation is to create a more sustainable food system. With earlier identification and traceability of adulterated products, the removal and retrieval process from commerce will be faster and, in turn, should result in a decrease of incidents reducing illness and potential deaths.

Digital solutions will also help to fill the gaps for root cause investigations, thus more efficiently allowing for enhanced preventative actions and training to avoid recurrence. While onboarding of new technology can sometimes be costly, over time, the ROI of reduced recalls and product losses can increase revenue gains and negate the initial investment.

Food is a global commodity, and advancing technology and innovations in system processes can help move the supply chain forward in delivering safe, quality consumable products around the world. Now is the time to lead the industry forward for a safer, more sustainable future for both companies and consumers. We must invest in technology solutions within our food supply chain to continue advancing human and planet health.

Food Traceability and Authentication in the AI Era

By Maria-Eleni Dimitrakopoulou
No Comments

Food traceability provides comprehensive information about a product’s history and origin, facilitating efficient recalls and supply chain management. However, distinct types of food fraud, such as concealment, counterfeit, and mislabelling, pose significant challenges. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and new regulatory measures, like the FDA’s traceability rule, enhance food safety and authenticity, fostering a more transparent and reliable food supply chain.

In the intricate web of the global food supply chain, ensuring the safety and authenticity of consumables stands as a paramount concern. Food traceability, defined as the ability to provide comprehensive information about the history and origin of a product throughout its journey, emerges as a cornerstone in this endeavour. This meticulous documentation not only facilitates supply chain management but also empowers swift actions such as recalls in the event of safety or quality breaches.

Beyond its logistical benefits, food traceability assumes a pivotal role in safeguarding consumer interests. By serving as a fundamental component of food safety and quality assurance, traceability ensures transparency and accountability at every stage of production and distribution. However, the efficacy of a traceability system is inherently tied to the credibility of its origins, paving the way for the convergence of food traceability and authentication.

Unveiling the Shadows: The Challenge of Food Adulteration

In an era plagued by instances of food adulteration and mislabelling, the imperative for robust authentication mechanisms becomes increasingly apparent. Reports from international and national research bodies shed light on a myriad of cases spanning various food categories, from wine and spirits to olive oil, fish, meat, and beyond. This pervasive challenge underscores the need for stringent standards and regulatory frameworks to combat fraudulence and uphold consumer trust.

Food fraud manifests in several forms, each presenting unique challenges for detection and prevention. For example:

  • Concealment involves hiding inferior or harmful ingredients within a product to avoid detection. An example of this is the addition of melamine in milk to falsely increase protein content readings, which led to a major scandal in China.
  • Counterfeit products replicate and sell a product under the guise of a well-known brand, often with substandard quality. These fake products can range from everyday items like bottled water to high-end goods like wines and spirits. Counterfeiting not only deceives consumers but also damages brand reputations and violates intellectual property rights.
  • Botanical Authentication ensures that plant-based products are derived from the claimed species and not substituted with cheaper alternatives. This is particularly important for products like herbal supplements, teas, and spices. For instance, saffron, one of the most expensive spices in the world, is often adulterated with less expensive substances such as dyed corn stigmas or safflower.
  • Geographical Origin fraud involves misrepresenting the region from which a product originates. Certain regions are known for producing specific high-quality foods and beverages, such as Champagne from France or Parmigiano Reggiano cheese from Italy. Mislabelling products to benefit from these reputations deceives consumers and undermines genuine producers.
  • Substitution entails replacing a high-value ingredient with a lower-cost one. This is common in products like olive oil, honey, and seafood. For example, extra virgin olive oil might be diluted with cheaper oils, or expensive fish species like tuna might be replaced with less costly ones like escolar. This not only cheats consumers but can also pose health risks.
  • Mislabelling involves incorrectly listing ingredients or nutritional information on labels. An example is claiming a product is organic when it is not.
  • Dilution involves adding water or other substances to increase the volume of a product. For instance, diluting fruit juices with water and not declaring it.
  • Unapproved Enhancements involve using unauthorized substances to enhance the appearance or quality of a product. An example is adding unauthorized dyes to make a product look fresher or more appealing.
  • Theft and Resale refers to stealing products and reintroducing them into the market through unauthorized channels. For example, reselling stolen goods without proper storage conditions.
  • Artificial Additives involves using artificial ingredients to mimic the qualities of a natural product. For example, adding synthetic vanilla flavor instead of natural vanilla extraction

The New Traceability Rule of FDA

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has introduced a new traceability rule aimed at enhancing the ability to trace the origin of foods throughout the supply chain more efficiently. This rule mandates that companies maintain more rigorous records of their supply chains, focusing on high-risk foods. The implementation of this rule is expected to significantly improve the speed and accuracy of traceability in the event of a foodborne illness outbreak or contamination incident, thus ensuring faster recalls and reducing the risk to public health.

The Dawn of a New Era: Advancements in Food Fraud

As the spectre of food fraud looms large, there arises an urgent demand for sophisticated analytical techniques to authenticate foodstuffs with precision and reliability. Here, the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI) heralds a new era of innovation. AI-driven algorithms can sift through vast datasets, identifying patterns and anomalies that elude traditional methods. Machine learning models can analyse complex chemical compositions, flagging deviations indicative of adulteration or mislabelling. By harnessing the power of AI, authorities can fortify their efforts in safeguarding consumer interests and preserving the integrity of the global food market.

Charting the Course Ahead: Toward a Safer, More Authentic Future

In the pursuit of food safety and quality, the symbiotic relationship between traceability and fraud, bolstered by AI technologies, emerges as a beacon of hope. By fortifying supply chain transparency and deploying cutting-edge analytical methods, stakeholders can navigate the complexities of the modern food landscape with confidence and integrity. The integration of the FDA’s new traceability rule further strengthens this endeavour, ensuring a safer and more reliable food supply chain for all.