Allergenmanagement
Allergen management with batch-level evidence. Because "the label was right" needs proof, per batch.
Undeclared allergens are the most common cause of food recalls in Ireland and the UK — and almost every case traces to the same gap: the label said one thing, the batch contained another, and no record connects the two. Keystone closes that gap structurally: every batch carries its recipe version and the actual ingredient lots consumed, so the declaration on the label has a per-batch evidence trail behind it.
Home › Allergen Management for Food Manufacturing
Proof points
In one glance.
- Every batch records its recipe version + actual ingredient lots consumed
- Supplier allergen alert → affected batch and customer list in minutes
- Versioned specs: historic batches resolve against the recipe current when made
- Supports FIC (Reg. 1169/2011) declaration diligence with real records
Where allergen incidents start
Not in the kitchen — in the paperwork gap.
The classic undeclared-allergen incident isn't a rogue ingredient; it's drift. A supplier reformulates and the new spec carries mustard. A recipe changes but the label artwork doesn't. A substitution happens on the floor at 6am and nobody writes it down. Each is a records problem before it's a labelling problem — and the investigation afterwards asks precisely what your records can't answer: which batches were made with the new spec, from which date, and who received them? Keystone answers it structurally: ingredient lots link to supplier specs, batches record actual consumption, and spec changes are versioned with effective dates.
The working controls
Allergen control as records, not vigilance.
- Batch-level consumption — Not "this product contains" — "this batch consumed these lots". The difference is what an investigation, an auditor or a retailer technical team actually asks for.
- Supplier alert response — A supplier reports undeclared sesame in a lot: pick the lot, see every batch that consumed it (directly or through sub-assemblies), every customer, every quantity — in minutes.
- Versioned recipes and specs — Reformulations carry effective dates. Batches made before the change resolve to the old spec; after, the new — so historic declarations stay defensible.
- QC checkpoints — Label-verification and changeover checks record against the batch, building the due-diligence file as a by-product of production.
Scope, honestly
Evidence engine — not artwork management.
Keystone is the record layer: what each batch contained and where it went. It does not generate label artwork or legally validate your declarations — your labelling process and technical review remain yours. What it removes is the terrifying question in every allergen investigation: 'can we prove what was actually in it?' Prepared food, bakery and dairy producers feel this most; the batch-consumption model is the same across all of them.
FAQs
Frequently asked.
Does Keystone generate allergen labels?
No — it holds the evidence behind them: per-batch recipe versions and actual ingredient lots. Batch codes and dates flow to your labels; artwork and legal declarations remain with your labelling process.
What happens when a supplier reformulates?
The ingredient spec is versioned with an effective date. Batches record which version they consumed, so "which batches carry the new allergen profile, from when" is a lookup, not an investigation.
Can it handle allergen alerts through sub-assemblies?
Yes — if the affected lot went into a sauce that went into a meal, the trace follows the whole tree to finished product and customers, with quantities.
Does this help with a BRCGS or retailer audit?
Allergen management is a standing item in both. Batch-level consumption records, versioned specs and attached QC checks are exactly the evidence those audits sample.
What about cross-contact / "may contain"?
Scheduling and changeover controls stay physical, but Keystone records the checks (changeover cleaning, line clearance) against batches — the documented diligence behind your cross-contact policy.