The FAT Disclosure Model

Each product label is evaluated across a set of transparency categories covering core aspects of animal production, sourcing, and processing.

For each category, FAT reports one of three outcomes:

• Disclosed — clear, specific, and reliable information is provided
• Partially disclosed — a claim is made, but details are limited or non-specific
• Not disclosed — no meaningful information is provided

A lack of disclosure is treated as a lack of information, not wrongdoing.

Country / Origin

FAT treats origin disclosure as meaningful when a label identifies where an animal was born, raised, and/or harvested.

• Full life-cycle disclosures (e.g., “born, raised, and harvested in the United States”) are treated as complete origin disclosure.
• State-level origin disclosures (e.g., “raised in Pennsylvania”) are also treated as meaningful origin information, even when a formal “Product of USA” claim is not used.

When present, these disclosures provide consumers with substantially more information than generic origin language.

Processor

FAT evaluates whether a label discloses who processed the product.

Processor disclosure may be recognized when a label:

• Identifies a USDA-inspected establishment through an establishment number, and
• Names the entity responsible for processing, packing, or distribution (e.g., “processed for,” “packed for,” or “distributed by”).

When both elements are present, FAT treats the processor as disclosed, even if the label does not use the phrase “processed by.”

Breed

FAT treats breed disclosure as complete when a specific breed or strain is named.

FAT also recognizes partial breed disclosure when labels describe meaningful breed characteristics that distinguish the animal from standard commercial breeds, even if a specific strain is not identified. Examples include descriptions such as “slow-growing breed,” which provide consumers with information that meaningfully narrows the range of possible breeds used.

Animal Welfare

FAT evaluates animal welfare disclosure based on whether labels describe housing conditions, management practices, or welfare-related characteristics.

General welfare claims (e.g., “cage-free,” “pasture-raised,” or “slow-grown”) are typically treated as partial disclosures unless accompanied by a defined standard or a third-party certification. These disclosures may still be meaningful to consumers, even when verification details are not provided.

Medicine / Antibiotics / Hormones

FAT recognizes medicine-related disclosures, including statements about antibiotic or hormone use.

In poultry, certain hormone-related statements reflect federal regulatory standards rather than differentiated husbandry practices. FAT may recognize such language as a partial disclosure and provide context so consumers understand its regulatory nature. This approach is intended to inform consumers without overstating the significance of boilerplate regulatory language.

Avoiding Double-Counting

Some label statements may relate to more than one transparency category. FAT applies interpretive rules to avoid double-counting the same information across multiple categories. For example, a “slow-growing breed” claim may inform both breed and animal welfare understanding, but is weighted to reflect its primary disclosure role. This ensures scores reflect the breadth of information disclosed, not repeated emphasis on a single claim.

What the FAT Score Represents

The FAT score summarizes how much information a label discloses across transparency categories. It does not indicate whether a product is “good” or “bad,” nor does it reflect safety, quality, or ethical judgment.

The score exists to help consumers compare labels on a consistent basis, understand what information is available, and identify what information is missing.