Federal civilian · Moraph software

Food Safety Inspection Router

Send inspectors where the risk is, and let them record findings with or without a signal

Book a demonstrationRequest a technical briefingFactsheet

Overview

What you are buying

The Food Safety Inspection Router scores regulated food facilities by risk, using their violation history and current information such as recalls, complaints and laboratory results, and proposes inspection assignments and routes for supervisors to approve. Inspectors work from a mobile app that records findings offline and synchronizes when a connection returns. Every score, assignment and finding keeps its reasons, so the program can show how inspection resources were directed.

The problem it solves

Inspection programs have more facilities to cover than inspectors to cover them, and assignments are often built from fixed rotations, spreadsheets and local knowledge. Facilities with a history of problems can wait as long as those with clean records, while inspectors in rural districts lose time to long drives and to paper forms that are keyed in later because there was no signal on site. When oversight bodies ask why one facility was visited and another was not, the reasoning is hard to reconstruct.

  • Inspection frequency follows a rotation rather than the risk each facility presents
  • Signals such as recalls, complaints and lab results reach schedulers late or not at all
  • Field findings are written on paper or re-entered when the inspector is back in coverage
  • The reasons behind assignment decisions are hard to evidence for oversight and audit

Who uses it

  • Federal food safety inspection programs and their district offices
  • Field inspectors and investigators who visit processing and manufacturing facilities
  • Supervisors and schedulers who build inspection assignments
  • Risk and data analysts who maintain facility risk models
  • Program leadership, inspectors general and auditors who review how inspection resources are used

Requirements it supports

Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.)Egg Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.)FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, including risk-based inspection targeting (21 U.S.C. 350j)Federal Information Security Modernization Act (44 U.S.C. 3551 et seq.)Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act

The product supports these requirements; meeting them remains your organization’s responsibility.

See how it works

A short walkthrough

Illustrative screens with fictional sample data. They show the workflow, not any client’s data or configuration, and the layout of the product itself differs. A live demonstration uses the product with sample data.

  1. Step 1

    Facilities by risk

    Planners start from a ranked list of facilities in their district, with each score, the time since the last inspection and any new signals.

    FacilityTypeRiskLast inspectedNew signalsRequired visit
    Establishment E-40217 (fictional)Ready-to-eat processingHigh7 months agoLab resultNo
    Establishment E-38854 (fictional)Poultry slaughterHigh2 months agoComplaintYes
    Establishment E-41102 (fictional)Egg productsMedium5 months agoNoneNo
    Establishment E-39960 (fictional)Raw ground productMedium4 months agoRecall linkedNo
    Establishment E-42031 (fictional)Shelf-stable canningLow10 months agoNoneNo
    Planners start from a ranked list of facilities in their district, with each score, the time since the last inspection and any new signals.

  2. Step 2

    Why a facility ranks high

    Every score explains itself, so the planner and supervisor can judge whether to act on it.

    Establishment E-40217 (fictional) · Example County

    Facility type
    Ready-to-eat processing
    Risk band
    High
    Model version
    v4 (approved)
    Last inspection
    7 months ago, 2 findings
    Open findings
    1

    Contributing factors

    • Positive environmental sample reported by the laboratory
    • Sanitation finding at the last two inspections
    • Product type rated higher risk in the model
    • Longer than usual since the last visit
    Every score explains itself, so the planner and supervisor can judge whether to act on it.

  3. Step 3

    The proposed plan

    The Router proposes assignments and visit order for each inspector; the planner adjusts them and a supervisor approves.

    InspectorVisitsRequiredRisk-drivenEst. drivingStatus
    Inspector A (fictional)6245 h 10 minProposed
    Inspector B (fictional)5326 h 40 minAdjusted by planner
    Inspector C (fictional)7163 h 55 minProposed
    Inspector D (fictional)4227 h 20 minConflict of interest flagged
    The Router proposes assignments and visit order for each inspector; the planner adjusts them and a supervisor approves.

  4. Step 4

    Recording findings offline

    On site, the inspector works through the checklist on the device, with or without a signal, and the record waits to synchronize.

    Establishment E-40217 (fictional) · Offline

    Checklist
    Ready-to-eat processing
    Items completed
    31 of 38
    Findings
    1 noncompliance
    Photos
    4 attached
    Sync status
    Waiting for connection

    Finding draft

    • Condensation dripping over exposed product
    • Citation selected from the agency list
    • Two photos and the inspector's note attached
    On site, the inspector works through the checklist on the device, with or without a signal, and the record waits to synchronize.

  5. Step 5

    Supervisory review

    Once synchronized, the record goes to the supervisor, who confirms the findings and decides on follow-up.

    Inspection IN-77310 · Establishment E-40217 (fictional)

    1. Plan approved including this visitSupervisor
    2. Inspection recorded offline and signedField inspector
    3. Record synchronized, no conflictsSystem
    4. Finding confirmedSupervisor
    5. Follow-up inspection proposedRouter
    6. Follow-up approved for next planSupervisor
    Once synchronized, the record goes to the supervisor, who confirms the findings and decides on follow-up.

  6. Step 6

    Testing a model change

    Before a risk factor changes, the analyst sees how rankings would have shifted against past inspections, and the result is kept for approval.

    FactorCurrent weightProposedFacilities moving to HighPast findings capturedStatus
    Positive lab result3412+5Awaiting approval
    Time since last visit220No changeNo change
    Consumer complaint21-8-2Returned for review
    Before a risk factor changes, the analyst sees how rankings would have shifted against past inspections, and the result is kept for approval.

Workflows

The principal workflows

  1. Score

    Facility records, inspection history and current signals are combined into a risk score for each facility, with the factors behind the score shown in plain words.

    • Facility registry, inspection history and enforcement actions loaded from agency systems
    • Recalls, consumer complaints, laboratory results and outbreak notices added as they arrive
    • Data quality checks flag facilities with missing or conflicting records
    • The risk model scores each facility and lists the factors that contributed
    • Facilities whose score changed materially are flagged for the planner

  2. Plan

    The Router proposes which facilities each inspector should visit in the coming period and in what order, balancing risk, required inspection frequencies, travel time and inspector qualifications. A supervisor reviews and approves the plan.

    • Planner sets the period, district and available inspectors
    • Router proposes assignments and routes, with mandatory and risk-driven visits marked
    • Planner adjusts assignments for leave, conflicts of interest or local knowledge
    • Supervisor approves the plan, or returns it with comments
    • Approved assignments are pushed to inspectors' devices

  3. Inspect

    Inspectors open each assignment on a mobile device, see the facility's history and the reasons it was selected, and record observations, photos and findings, whether or not they have a connection.

    • Assignment, facility history and checklist downloaded before leaving coverage
    • Inspector records observations against the checklist, with photos and notes
    • Noncompliance findings recorded with the regulatory citation and evidence
    • Inspector signs the record on the device
    • Records synchronize when the device is back in coverage, with conflicts flagged for review

  4. Follow up

    Findings feed back into the facility's history and risk score. Noncompliance is routed for supervisory review and, where needed, follow-up inspection or referral for enforcement under the agency's procedures.

    • Supervisor reviews findings and confirms or returns them
    • Follow-up inspections proposed for facilities with open findings
    • Cases referred to the enforcement team where the agency's criteria are met
    • Facility risk score recalculated with the new findings
    • Outcomes reported to program leadership

Roles and permissions

Who does what in the product

Each role below is a starting point. During implementation we set them up to match your teams, and every action anyone takes is recorded in the audit trail.

Field inspector

Food inspector, consumer safety inspector, field investigator

Carries out assigned inspections and records observations and findings, online or offline.

Sees

  • Their own assignments and visit order for the current period
  • Each assigned facility's inspection history, open findings and the reasons it was selected
  • Checklists for the facility types they are qualified to inspect
  • Their own records awaiting synchronization or review

Does

  • Downloads assignments before travel
  • Records observations, photos and findings against the checklist
  • Selects the citation for each noncompliance finding
  • Signs the inspection record on the device
  • Reports when a visit could not be completed, with the reason
  • Records a conflict of interest when one exists

Cannot

  • Change their own assignments or the plan
  • Edit a record after it has been signed, except through a supervisor-approved correction
  • See facilities outside their assignments and district
Approvals
Their signed inspection records and findings are reviewed by a supervisor, who confirms or returns them.
Notified about
New or changed assignments, records returned for correction, and records that have not yet synchronized.

Supervisor

Supervisory inspector, district supervisor, frontline supervisor

Approves the inspection plan for their area and is accountable for the quality of findings and follow-up.

Sees

  • Risk rankings and plans for their district
  • All inspection records and findings from their inspectors
  • Synchronization conflicts and incomplete visits
  • Required visits due and overdue

Does

  • Approves or returns proposed plans
  • Reviews and confirms or returns inspection findings
  • Resolves synchronization conflicts
  • Approves follow-up inspections
  • Refers findings for enforcement where agency criteria are met
  • Approves corrections to signed records

Cannot

  • Approve a plan they built themselves as planner; another supervisor approves it
  • Change the risk model or its weights
  • Edit or delete entries in the audit trail
Approvals
Approves plans, findings, follow-ups, referrals and record corrections for their area.
Notified about
Plans awaiting approval, findings ready for review, synchronization conflicts, and required visits at risk of being missed.

Planner

Scheduler, workload planner, district planning specialist

Turns the Router's proposals into a workable plan for a district or circuit.

Sees

  • Risk rankings, required visits and signals for their district
  • Inspector availability, qualifications and recorded conflicts
  • Proposed assignments and estimated travel

Does

  • Sets the planning period, district and available inspectors
  • Runs the Router's proposal
  • Adjusts assignments and visit order, recording the reason for each change
  • Submits the plan for supervisor approval
  • Replans when an inspector is unavailable or an urgent signal arrives

Cannot

  • Approve their own plan
  • Remove a required-frequency visit without supervisor approval
  • See or edit inspection findings beyond facility history
Approvals
Every plan they submit is approved by a supervisor before it reaches inspectors.
Notified about
Signals that raise a facility's priority, inspector absences, and plans returned with comments.

Risk analyst

Data analyst, risk modeler, program analyst

Maintains, tests and documents the risk model so scores remain sound and explainable.

Sees

  • Risk model versions, factors and weights with their history
  • Scores and past inspection outcomes across districts
  • Data quality results from incoming feeds

Does

  • Proposes changes to factors and weights
  • Tests proposed changes against past inspections
  • Documents results for approval and audit
  • Reviews data quality problems with the owning systems

Cannot

  • Put a model change into effect without approval
  • Approve plans or findings
  • Change individual facility scores by hand
Approvals
Model changes they propose are approved by the program's designated approver, usually a program manager, before they take effect.
Notified about
Model tests completed, data feed failures, and decisions on proposed changes.

Enforcement officer

Enforcement investigator, compliance officer, enforcement program specialist

Receives findings referred for enforcement and records the agency's decision and actions.

Sees

  • Findings referred to their team, with the inspection record and evidence
  • The facility's inspection and enforcement history
  • Follow-up inspection results for referred facilities

Does

  • Accepts or returns referrals
  • Records enforcement decisions and actions taken under agency procedures
  • Requests follow-up inspections
  • Closes referrals with the outcome

Cannot

  • Change inspection findings
  • Change plans or assignments
  • Change the risk model
Approvals
Enforcement decisions follow your agency's own approval chain, which is recorded against the referral.
Notified about
New referrals and follow-up inspection results on open referrals.

Auditor (read-only)

Internal reviewer, inspector general staff, program auditor (under temporary access)

Reviews how inspection resources were directed and how findings were handled, without being able to change anything.

Sees

  • Risk scores and their factors, plans and approvals within the granted scope
  • Inspection records, findings and follow-up
  • Model change history and tests
  • The audit trail

Does

  • Searches and reads records within their scope
  • Exports records and reports, with each export logged
  • Leaves review notes where the agency enables them

Cannot

  • Change, approve or delete anything
  • See records outside the scope and dates granted
  • Keep access after it expires
Approvals
Their access is approved by a program manager or administrator, with a scope and an end date.
Notified about
Nothing by default; access granted and expiring is confirmed to the person who approved it.

Administrator

Application administrator, program systems administrator

Manages users, roles, districts and checklists on behalf of the program, without deciding inspection outcomes.

Sees

  • Users, roles, districts and qualifications
  • Checklists, citations and planning rules
  • Device enrollment status and the record of permission changes

Does

  • Adds and removes users, or maps them from single sign-on groups
  • Maintains districts, circuits and inspector qualifications
  • Maintains checklists and citation lists
  • Runs access review reports

Cannot

  • Approve plans or findings
  • Grant themselves an inspection or supervisory role without a second administrator
  • Change the risk model
Approvals
Changes to checklists and planning rules are approved by a program manager.
Notified about
Access reviews coming due, unused accounts and devices that have not synchronized for a period your policy sets.

Permissions at a glance

ActionInspectorSupervisorPlannerRisk analystEnforcementAuditorAdmin
View facility risk scoresOwn work onlyFullFullFullView onlyView onlyNo access
Build and adjust plansNo accessFullFullNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Approve plansNo accessApprovesNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Record inspections and findingsOwn work onlyFullNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Confirm findings and approve correctionsNo accessApprovesNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Resolve sync conflictsNo accessFullNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo access
Refer findings for enforcementNo accessFullNo accessNo accessView onlyView onlyNo access
Record enforcement decisionsNo accessView onlyNo accessNo accessFullView onlyNo access
Test risk model changesNo accessView onlyNo accessFullNo accessView onlyNo access
View audit trailNo accessView onlyNo accessNo accessNo accessView onlyView only
Manage users, checklists and rulesNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessNo accessFull
  • Full
  • Own work only
  • Approves
  • View only
  • No access

How access is controlled

  • Model changes are put into effect by the program's designated approver, usually a program manager, through a separate approval role; the analysts who propose and test changes cannot apply them.
  • Nobody approves their own work: planners do not approve their own plans, and a supervisor who built a plan needs another supervisor to approve it.
  • Roles are configured with you during implementation. You can rename them, create custom roles, and limit them by district, circuit or facility type, so each team sees only the work it is responsible for.
  • Staff sign in through your identity provider, and every permission change is recorded in the audit trail. Auditors get temporary read-only access with a defined scope and an end date.

Features

What it does

Explainable risk scores

Each facility's score lists the factors behind it, such as recent findings, product type, volume and open recalls, so a supervisor can see why it ranks where it does.

Proposed assignments and routes

Assignments and visit order proposed for each inspector, taking account of risk, required frequencies, travel time and qualifications. A supervisor approves every plan.

Offline mobile inspection

Checklists, facility history and assignments are available on the device without a connection, and findings synchronize when coverage returns.

Conflict-aware synchronization

When the same record was changed in two places while a device was offline, both versions are kept and the conflict is shown to a supervisor to resolve.

Configurable checklists

Inspection checklists by facility and product type, each item linked to the regulatory citation your agency uses.

Photo and evidence capture

Photos, sample identifiers and notes attached to the finding they support, with the time and the inspector recorded.

Signal intake

Recalls, complaints, laboratory results and outbreak notices linked to the facilities they concern, so they can raise a facility's priority.

Mandatory frequency tracking

Facilities that must be inspected at a set frequency are tracked separately, so risk-based planning never displaces a required visit.

Qualification and conflict checks

Assignments respect inspector qualifications for the facility type and any recorded conflicts of interest.

Model governance

Risk model versions, factor weights and the tests run before each change are recorded, and changes need approval before they take effect.

Follow-up and referral

Open findings tracked to follow-up inspection or referral, with the decision and its reason recorded.

Audit trail

Who scored, planned, approved, inspected and changed what, and when, for every facility and assignment.

Integrations

How it connects to your systems

Connects toHowWhat flows
Facility registryFacility identifiers, locations, product types and establishment details from your agency's registry, by scheduled file or API.In: facility records and status changes.
Inspection and enforcement historyPast inspections, findings and enforcement actions from your existing systems, mapped during implementation.In: historical inspections, findings and actions.
Laboratory resultsSample results from the laboratory information systems your agency uses, linked to the facility and sample.In: sample identifiers, analytes and results.
Recalls and complaintsRecall notices and consumer complaint records from the agency's intake systems.In: recall and complaint records with the facilities they name.
Mobile device managementThe mobile app is deployed and managed through your agency's mobile device management, so device policies and remote wipe stay under your control.In: device enrollment and policy status.
Single sign-onStaff sign in through your identity provider (SAML or OpenID Connect), including PIV-backed authentication where your agency uses it.In: user identity and group membership for role assignment.
Work APIScores, plans, findings and follow-up status available to your data warehouse and reporting tools through the Moraph Work API.Out: risk scores, assignments, findings and outcomes.

Each integration is confirmed in discovery and specified in the design. See how an engagement progresses.

Security and privacy

How your data is protected

United States hosting

Data is hosted in Moraph's United States region only.

Cleared support lane

Support tickets from federal clients are handled only by US citizens with active security clearances.

Protected data on devices

Data held offline on a device is encrypted, limited to the inspector's current assignments, and removed once synchronized and no longer needed.

Encryption and keys

Client data is encrypted, with keys Moraph staff cannot use without explicit, time-bound authorization.

Complete audit trail

Every view, change, approval and synchronization is logged with the person and time, and cannot be edited.

Tested releases

Every release passes security testing gates before it ships, and a software bill of materials is maintained for the product. Moraph is SOC 2 Type II and ISO/IEC 27001 audited.

Company-wide controls, independent audits (SOC 2 Type II and ISO/IEC 27001) and data residency are described in our Trust Center, where you can request the evidence pack.

Reporting

What you can report on

10 standard reports, grouped by who uses them. Each shows who it is for, how it can be broken down, how it is delivered and what it is used for. The data behind them is also available to your own reporting tools.

Operational

Plan completion

For supervisors and planners

Inspections planned, completed, incomplete and carried over, with the reason recorded for each visit not completed.

Break down by
District, Inspector, Facility type, Planning period
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Seeing whether plans are realistic and where work is slipping.

Required visits due

For supervisors and program managers

Facilities with a required inspection frequency, when each is due, and whether it is planned.

Break down by
District, Due window, Facility type, Planned or unplanned
Delivered as
Live dashboard; scheduled email
Used for
Making sure no required inspection is missed while risk-based visits are added.

Synchronization status

For supervisors and administrators

Inspection records waiting to synchronize, devices that have not synchronized recently, and conflicts awaiting resolution.

Break down by
District, Inspector, Record age, Conflict type
Delivered as
Live view
Used for
Making sure field records reach the system and conflicts are resolved.

Program

Facilities by risk and coverage

For program managers and leadership

Facilities in each risk band and the time since each was last inspected.

Break down by
Risk band, District, Facility type, Time since last inspection
Delivered as
Live dashboard; PDF; CSV export
Used for
Showing that inspection effort follows risk across the program.

Findings and follow-up

For supervisors, program managers and enforcement staff

Noncompliance findings by citation, their follow-up inspections and referrals, and how each was closed.

Break down by
Citation, Facility type, District, Outcome, Period
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Tracking open findings to resolution and spotting recurring problems.

Inspector workload

For supervisors and program managers

Visits, travel and time on site per inspector and district over time.

Break down by
Inspector, District, Period, Visit type
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Balancing workloads and supporting staffing decisions.

Signal response

For planners and program managers

Recalls, complaints and laboratory results received, the facilities they concerned, and whether and when a visit followed.

Break down by
Signal type, District, Outcome, Period
Delivered as
Live dashboard; CSV export
Used for
Checking that new information reaches planning and leads to action where warranted.

Governance and audit

Risk model change history

For program managers, risk analysts and auditors

Every change to factors and weights, the test behind it, who proposed and approved it, and when it took effect.

Break down by
Model version, Factor, Approver, Change date
Delivered as
Live view; PDF and CSV export
Used for
Evidencing that the model was tested, approved and documented.

Plan adjustments

For program managers and auditors

Where planners or supervisors changed the Router's proposal, and the reason recorded for each change.

Break down by
District, Planner, Reason, Period
Delivered as
Live view; CSV export
Used for
Showing how human judgment shaped plans and spotting patterns worth reviewing.

Audit trail extract

For auditors and inspector general staff

Who did what, when and why for a selected facility, plan, inspection or period.

Break down by
Record, User, Action, Date range
Delivered as
On request in the product; CSV and PDF export
Used for
Answering audit requests for evidence without assembling it by hand.

Exports, access and evidence

  • Every report can be exported to CSV, and summary and evidence reports to PDF. Reports can be scheduled to arrive by email for the people entitled to see them.
  • Filters can be saved, so a supervisor or program manager keeps their own views of their district or program.
  • Scores, plans, findings and outcomes are available through the Moraph Work API for your data warehouse or business intelligence tools.
  • Reports respect each viewer's role: an inspector sees their own work, a supervisor their district, and program leadership the whole program.
  • Governance and audit reports can be run as of a past date and give the same result each time. Running and exporting a report is itself recorded in the audit trail.

Deployment

Where and how it runs

Moraph cloud, United States

Hosted and operated by Moraph in the United States region, with data kept in the US.

Dedicated environment

A single-tenant environment for agencies that require isolation, scoped in the proposal.

With a managed service

Optionally run alongside a Moraph managed service for administration, model monitoring support and integration support.

Security controls, independent audits and data residency are set out in our Trust Center. Engagement models and what drives a quotation are on Working with Moraph.

Implementation

What a rollout involves

The general phases are on Working with Moraph. For this product, they involve the following.

Data mapping

We map your facility registry, inspection history, laboratory and complaint data to the Router's model and agree the file or API schedule. We need data extracts and a contact from each owning system.

Risk model configuration

Risk factors and weights are set with your program and risk staff, documented, and tested against past inspection outcomes before approval.

Planning rules

Required frequencies, districts, circuits, travel constraints, qualifications and conflict rules are configured to match your procedures.

Checklists and citations

Inspection checklists are built for each facility and product type, with each item linked to your agency's citations.

Mobile rollout

The app is packaged for your mobile device management, and offline use is tested in the districts with the weakest coverage before go-live.

Pilot and training

A pilot district runs the Router alongside current scheduling for a period you choose, and inspectors, planners and supervisors are trained on their own workflows.

Limitations

What it does not do

Worth knowing before you evaluate it.

  • The Router proposes; it does not decide. Inspection plans are approved by a supervisor, and findings and enforcement decisions belong to your agency.
  • Risk scores depend on the completeness and quality of the facility, inspection and signal data you provide, and should be reviewed periodically as that data changes.
  • It does not replace inspection frequencies set in law or regulation. Required visits are planned alongside risk-driven ones.
  • Offline use covers the inspector's downloaded assignments. Facility records not downloaded beforehand are not available without a connection.
  • It is not a laboratory information system or a recall management system. It uses results and notices from the systems your agency already has.
  • Moraph holds no FedRAMP authorization for this product. We provide control documentation to support your agency's own authorization decision.
  • It is not designed for classified information.
  • The mobile app requires agency-managed devices that meet the supported operating system versions listed in the proposal.

Evaluation checklist

What to test in a demonstration or pilot

Questions worth putting to us, and to any other vendor you are considering.

  1. Load a sample of your facility and inspection history and compare the Router's ranking with where your inspectors actually found problems
  2. Check that each risk score's explanation would make sense to a supervisor and an auditor
  3. Ask a planner to build a period's plan for one district and note what they still need to adjust by hand
  4. Take the mobile app to a site with no coverage, record an inspection and confirm it synchronizes correctly
  5. Confirm that required-frequency visits are never dropped from a plan
  6. Review role separation: who can propose, approve and change plans, findings and the risk model

Questions

Frequently asked questions

Does the Router decide which facilities get inspected?

No. It proposes assignments and routes with the reasons behind them. Planners adjust them and a supervisor approves every plan.

What happens when inspectors have no signal?

Assignments, facility history and checklists are downloaded beforehand, and inspectors record findings on the device. Records synchronize when the device is back in coverage, and any conflicting changes are shown for review.

Can we set our own risk factors?

Yes. Factors and weights are configured with your program staff during implementation, tested against past inspections, and changed later only through the approval step.

Is it FedRAMP authorized?

No. Moraph holds no FedRAMP authorization for this product. We provide control documentation to support your agency's own authorization decision.

Who owns the data?

Your agency does. How it is returned to you and deleted at the end of the agreement is set out in the contract.

Is there an accessibility conformance report?

Ask for one through the procurement request form at /how-to-buy/request, naming the version you are evaluating.

Next steps

Evaluate Food Safety Inspection Router

Book a demonstration

See the product working with sample data, focused on your workflows.

Request a demonstration

Request a technical briefing

Architecture, integrations, security and hosting, with our engineers and your technical team.

Request a briefing

Factsheet

This page on two sides, to share with colleagues or add to your evaluation file.

Open the factsheet

Buying through a formal procurement? See How to buy for purchasing routes, accessibility conformance reports and company information. Documentation: Food Safety Inspection Router guides on docs.moraph.com (getting started and security guides are public; setup, administration and integration guides are for client accounts). Support: Food Safety Inspection Router support guide.

Related products