Book a meeting Find a partner Pest controller?Go to the PCO area → Menu

Compliance

Certifications: what the standards require for pest monitoringCertifications: what the standards require

IFS, BRCGS, FSSC 22000, HACCP, DIN 10523: every standard words it differently, but in the end the audit checks the same thing: whether you can prove what happened on site between two inspections.Every standard words it differently, but the audit checks the same thing: what happened on site between two inspections.

As of 10/2026 · sources linked directly on the page

Book a meeting Find a partner

Standards, associations and regulations

Key facts at a glance

Records for everyone

Complete records for everyone involved: pest controller, quality assurance and auditor see the same data in one software.

Trends instead of spot checks

The IFS guideline on pest control describes digital monitoring as the new state of the art, and AIB International also sees sensors on traps as technical progress. Instead of twelve spot checks a year, you get a continuous history.

The expert's job

Evaluating the data, controlling pests and setting up the systems remain the job of trained pest controllers.

Every dayevery station reports, instead of 12 spot checks a year

At the push of a buttonaudit report as a PDF, instead of compiling the paper binder

Poison-freemonitoring, bait only once an infestation is confirmed

Standard by standard

What your standard requires for pest monitoring

Every standard words it differently, but the question is the same: can you prove what happened on site between two inspections? Expand each one to see what is required, what the system delivers and where it stops.

IFS FoodFood production, private labels Retail and industry, usually as a customer requirement

Required

IFS Food version 8, chapter 4.13: documented, risk-based measures with a bait location plan (4.13.2), documented inspections and measures (4.13.4) and an effectiveness check including trend analysis (4.13.7).

What the system delivers

A continuous history per station instead of spot checks, a response chain with time stamps, trends per site, an export for the auditor.

Not covered

Proof of competence, hazard analysis, choice of active ingredients.

Learn moreIFS Food and pest control IFS Food at the publisher IFS IFS Food version 8 (PDF), chapter 4.13

BRCGS Food SafetyGlobal standard, mainly for UK exports British retail, international buyers

Required

Global Standard Food Safety Issue 9, chapter 4.14: a preventive program, records of inspections and measures, trend analysis and an at least annual, documented in-depth survey by an expert.

What the system delivers

The trend analysis is a view of data that is generated anyway, not an extra report that needs to be maintained.

Not covered

The program itself, the annual in-depth inspection, structural pest proofing.

Learn morePest management under BRCGS BRCGS Food Safety at the publisher

FSSC 22000ISO 22000 plus prerequisite programs International, common among brand manufacturers

Required

ISO/TS 22002-1, section on pest control: a named responsible person, a documented program with target pests, methods and schedule, plus traps and detectors at key locations.

What the system delivers

The proof of function per station shows that monitoring ran for the whole period, which is exactly the gap left by spot checks.

Not covered

The rest of the prerequisite program, internal audits.

Learn moreFSSC 22000 and pest control FSSC 22000 at the Foundation FSSC

HACCPlegal basis in the EU Every food business, regardless of certification

Required

Regulation (EC) No 852/2004, Annex II, Chapter IX, point 4: “Adequate procedures are to be in place to control pests.” Monitoring proves that they work.

What the system delivers

Proves that the prerequisite is effective over the whole period, not just on inspection day.

Not covered

The HACCP plan, defining CCPs, verification.

Learn moreHACCP and pest control Regulation (EC) No 852/2004, Annex II

DIN 10523German standard for the food sector State of the art in Germany: auditors and authorities refer to it

Required

Planning, carrying out and documenting pest control, assessed on a risk basis.

What the system delivers

The data basis for the risk assessment: where there really is activity, over time, per area.

Not covered

The assessment itself, which remains the job of the expert.

Learn moreWhat DIN 10523 requires

IFS Logistics & BRCGS S&DStorage, handling, transport Logistics providers in the food sector

Required

Preventive, documented pest management for storage and handling areas, with inspections at set intervals and documented measures.

What the system delivers

This is where the leverage is greatest: stations report from areas that otherwise only see a person during inspection rounds.

Not covered

Structural pest proofing, assessment and control by the expert.

Learn moreIFS Logistics BRCGS Storage and Distribution

QS certification markMeat, fruit, vegetables, animal feed Producers and processors along the supply chain

Required

Documented pest monitoring as part of self-inspection: inspections at least monthly unless a risk assessment specifies otherwise, permanent baiting only as a justified exception.

What the system delivers

One export per site and period that proves self-inspection without extra effort.

Not covered

The rest of self-inspection, traceability.

Learn moreQS Qualität und Sicherheit

GMP and GDPPharma: manufacturing and distribution Pharmaceutical manufacturers and wholesalers

Required

Premises protected against insects, rodents and other animals, and a preventive pest control program (EU GDP guideline 3.2.1), documented in a traceable way.

What the system delivers

Every event with time stamp and response, without access to the validated network: the stations transmit via LoRa.

Not covered

Validation, qualification, the quality system.

Learn moreEU GMP guidelines (EudraLex Volume 4)

The standards are revised regularly. What counts is always the version you are certified against. This overview puts things into context, it does not replace the text of the standard.

Since July 2026: no proof, no poison

The purely preventive use of poison bait (permanent baiting regardless of infestation) is in principle no longer permitted under current biocide law. The legal order is clear: toxic bait may only be used once an infestation has been confirmed beyond doubt, and this proof must be provided before control begins.

For businesses this means: poison-free monitoring has gone from a nice-to-have to a legal and audit-relevant requirement. Anyone who used to lay permanent poison bait purely as a precaution now has a major gap in their hygiene concept. A digital monitoring system meets the obligation to provide proof before poison is used, without time-consuming extra inspection rounds by staff.

What the pest control company keeps

No sensor earns a certification. Expertise, assessing the situation and the control measures themselves remain with the pest control company. Every one of the standards listed requires this, and digital monitoring does not change that.

What changes is the basis for decisions: instead of a snapshot every four weeks, a history that shows where there really is activity. The decision is still made by a person with proof of competence.

Frequently asked questions

Short answers

Do I need a separate system for each certification?

No. The requirements for records overlap almost completely across IFS, BRCGS, FSSC 22000, HACCP and DIN 10523: plan, inspection, response and history. The only difference is how the report is structured, not what data it contains.

Does this also apply if we only work to HACCP?

Yes. HACCP is the legal basis for every food business in the EU, and pest control is a basic hygiene prerequisite there. Digital monitoring proves that it works over the whole period and not just on inspection day, even without a certificate on the wall.

We are audited by customers, not by a certification body. Does this apply to us too?

Yes, the standard is the same and often stricter. Customer audits ask specifically about the period between two inspections, because that is where the risk to their own brand lies. A continuous history per station answers exactly that question.

Do all stations have to be digital for certification?

Not necessarily. It makes sense where a complete history matters, for example in goods receiving, storage and production. Manual inspections remain part of the program and are recorded in the same traplinked App.

This is what the records look like DIN 10523 BRCGS

Any questions?

A conversation clears up more than three pages of text.

Book a meeting Back to overview