The two CmiA chain-of-custody models support different statements. Under Hard Identity Preserved, the cotton share of a claimed yarn, fabric or garment must contain only CmiA cotton from nominated traders, and claimed materials must be segregated through the supply chain. Under Mass Balance, verified cotton may be blended or substituted, while the tracking system reconciles purchased and claimed volumes.[S1208] Mass Balance is a volume-control mechanism, not proof that verified fibre is physically present in a particular garment.
This is not a reason to dismiss Mass Balance. It can support demand for verified cotton where physical segregation would be costly or impractical. It is a reason to control language. A Mass Balance claim may support a statement about verified purchasing and volume reconciliation within the scheme's rules. It cannot support the stronger statement that a particular shirt contains identifiable Cameroonian cotton. HIP is the appropriate CmiA route when that stronger physical-origin statement is required.
HIP also demands operating discipline rather than a software label. The guidelines permit physical or temporal segregation, require clear marking and call for bale or lot identifiers on accompanying production, sales and transport records. Site-level assurance reviews documentation, records and physical controls.[S1208] Temporal segregation is especially relevant to a small factory. A dedicated line is not always necessary, but a documented production run, line clearance, status label and reconciliation are necessary.
The comparison in Exhibit 55 converts those requirements into procurement and communication decisions.
A garment factory must preserve identity through many-to-one and one-to-many transformations. Several bales can feed a yarn lot. Several yarn lots can feed a fabric batch. One fabric roll can serve several cutting markers, and one marker can create bundles for several sewing lines. The ledger therefore needs parent and child relationships, not a single copied certificate number. Each event should record input identifiers, output identifiers, site, timestamp, quantity, unit, operator role and source document.
The same structure must handle losses and exceptions. Cutting offcuts, rejected panels, rework, returned garments and subcontracted operations all change either quantity or custody. A manual adjustment should require a reason code and a second role's approval. A missing predecessor should block a physical-origin claim until resolved, even when the commercial invoice is valid. This is where a traceability system becomes an operating control rather than a reporting layer.
Physical markers can strengthen that control, but they do not replace it. A tracer attached to fibre may help test whether material is present, while a transaction ledger explains who transformed it and under which claim. Conversely, a digital token without a controlled material stream can be copied far more easily than the physical lot it purports to describe. GFT's design principle is to make independent evidence types agree: material observation, document, quantity and responsible actor.
12.4 Supply contracts must make the evidence deliverable enforceable
The purchase contract should define the evidence schedule as carefully as the fabric specification. Each order should identify the chain-of-custody model, expected registration scope, required transaction documents, lot-level quantity data and any restrictions on substitution or subcontracting. The supplier should know before production which records must arrive with the material and which discrepancy will place the receipt on hold. AbTF's own guidance makes registration and claim-specific documentation an operating requirement, so these fields should be procurement obligations rather than optional requests after shipment.[S1208]
Change control needs a named trigger. A different dyehouse, a new subcontracted sewing site or a replacement yarn lot can break the approved custody route even when the fabric looks identical. The supplier should notify that change before execution and supply the new site's evidence for review. The receiving team should then compare the actual delivery note, lot labels and transaction record against the approved route. A commercial acceptance of substitute material should not automatically become approval for the same origin claim.
Remedies should distinguish commercial and communications decisions. A buyer may accept a late document as an administrative delay, reject the material, or accept the material while withdrawing the physical-origin statement. Those are different actions with different consequences. The contract should preserve the right to correct the public record if later evidence contradicts an earlier claim, including instructions for labels, product pages and customer notifications.
Finally, retention and access must survive staff changes. The factory should be able to retrieve the complete evidence pack for a historical lot after the merchandiser has left and the supplier has changed account managers. Independent assurance works best when both parties know the sampling method, response window and acceptable source artefacts in advance. This turns due diligence from an annual questionnaire into a repeatable control, consistent with the OECD's emphasis on tracking effectiveness rather than treating assessment as a one-off exercise.[S1210]