Restaurants, cafés, pubs, schools, care/catering operations, event menus and household/voluntary settings that need a structured internal record before communicating current allergen information.
RecipeWanted Resources
UK 14-allergen working tool
Allergy Matrix Generator
Build, review, save locally, print and export a structured UK 14-allergen matrix for dishes or menu items without sending the working data to RecipeWanted.
UK 14-allergen frameworkLocal save + CSVReview checks
Interactive ResourceRuns without sending your entries to RecipeWanted.
Quick start
Before you start
Build a controlled UK 14-allergen working matrix that forces every regulated group into an explicit reviewed state, keeps evidence and cross-contact notes attached to each dish, and separates unresolved information from a clear tool review.
The current recipe, compound-ingredient details, current supplier/product specifications, any relevant precautionary information and your own documented cross-contact controls/risk assessment.
A reviewable 14-column matrix, blocker/advisory review report, browser-local saved draft, auditable CSV working copy and print/PDF working record.
Controlled 14-allergen matrixBlocking review findingsAdvisory context checksEvidence/source traceabilityCross-contact/control notesLocal draftCSV/Print
Examples for home cooking and teaching
Choose a relevant example and check the assumptions before using it in your kitchen or lesson.
Review a changing menu
Keep one controlled matrix for the exact menu/version and revisit affected dishes when recipes, suppliers or preparation controls change.
Separate ingredients from cross-contact
Use Contains for intentional allergens and use Cross-contact / precautionary risk only when there is a documented basis and a control/risk note.
Prepare written non-prepacked information
Use the matrix as an internal evidence record supporting accurate written information and staff/customer conversations; it is not itself a consumer guarantee.
Use this againReturn after any recipe, supplier, specification, ingredient, preparation, equipment or relevant process change, and whenever the recorded review date becomes due.
Save one explicit browser-local working record and reload it later. Previously saved records can be loaded in the same browser. This tool does not upload the matrix to RecipeWanted.
Practical shortcut: Add five blank dishes at once, keep the dish column sticky, and use the Focused Dish Review dialog on smaller screens instead of scrolling across the whole matrix for every edit.
Trust & safety at a glance
Use the result for the decision it was built to support
“Review checks clear” means only that the current on-screen record passed RecipeWanted’s completeness/consistency checks. It is not government approval, legal compliance, allergen-free status or proof of suitability for any individual.
Higher-consequence allergen evidence working record7 subject references · Reference register reviewed by RecipeWanted: 2026-09-23.
Organise a review of the UK 14 regulated allergen groups against current recipes, compound ingredients, supplier/product specifications and documented cross-contact information/controls.
Not a free-from/allergen-free guarantee, medical assessment, legal-compliance certificate, PPDS label replacement, customer allergy record, or proof that cross-contact has been eliminated.
The core matrix follows the UK 14-allergen framework. England/Wales/Northern Ireland and Scotland have separate competent-authority guidance. Businesses elsewhere must use the rules and competent authority that apply in their own location.
Dish names, evidence notes and optional saved drafts stay in the visitor browser. Do not enter customer names, diagnoses, medical details or other sensitive personal information. Affiliate, sponsor, Resource Card or analytics state cannot alter allergen statuses, review blockers, source requirements, precautionary-risk rules or result wording.
When to stop and verify:If recipe/specification evidence is uncertain, a supplier/process changed, cross-contact cannot be confidently assessed, a consumer has a specific allergy, or formal compliance is required, stop and verify the current product/recipe information and competent-authority/business procedure before relying on the matrix.
Privacy scope: this describes the working-data behaviour of this Resources tool only. Site-level cookies, analytics, consent and other storage/access technologies remain governed by RecipeWanted’s wider privacy/CMP configuration and applicable law.
Source scope: external authorities and specialist references support specific information; linking to them does not mean they have reviewed, approved or endorsed RecipeWanted.
How this Resource reaches its result
MethodControlled explicit-state allergen evidence matrix — no ingredient-name allergen inference
All result states originate from the visitor’s reviewed recipe/specification/risk evidence. RecipeWanted only checks record completeness and internal consistency.
Can it be reproduced?Deterministic under this version
The same metadata, dish rows, 14 statuses, evidence references and cross-contact/control notes produce the same blocker/advisory review under contract 3.0.0.
Evidence7 registered references · RecipeWanted review CURRENT · 2026-09-23
Official FSA/FSS material supports the UK framework and operational boundaries; linking to those authorities does not mean they reviewed or approved RecipeWanted.
IndependenceNo paid or analytics influence over the result
The specialist contract declares that commercial relationships and analytics do not alter this tool's results. The specialist contract disables runtime AI for this tool.
Uncertainty stays explicit: Supplier formulations, recipes, labels, cross-contact controls and law/guidance can change. “No identified source” is limited to the evidence reviewed and is never a free-from conclusion.
Evidence reference: RWRES-170921A9D9B3CC95 — a RecipeWanted integrity/reference fingerprint for this release evidence set, not certification or third-party endorsement.
Report a factual or method concern if a source conflicts with the tool, a calculation appears wrong, or a boundary needs review.
Allergen evidence checklist
Build allergen information from current evidence, not assumptions
Check each dish against the UK 14 regulated allergen groups using current ingredient labels and supplier information. Every allergen starts as unknown. Record the evidence for each dish; if cross-contact is a concern, record the risk and controls too. Use this as a working checklist, not a promise that food is safe for a particular person.
Lock the exact recipe
Review the recipe/product actually being served, including compound ingredients, garnishes, sauces, stocks and processing aids where relevant.
Check current specifications
Supplier recipes and precautionary statements change. Record what evidence you reviewed rather than relying on memory.
Separate presence from cross-contact
Contains and precautionary risk are different evidence decisions. A blanket “may contain” approach is not a substitute for controls and risk assessment.
Treat change as a review trigger
Recipe, supplier, ingredient, preparation, equipment or process changes can invalidate an older record immediately—even before its planned review date.
Critical scope boundary
RecipeWanted checks the completeness and internal consistency of the working record. It does not certify allergen-free status, consumer suitability, legal compliance, PPDS labelling or elimination of cross-contact. If evidence is uncertain, stop and verify it before relying on the matrix.
Controlled working matrix
Review every dish against all 14 regulated groups
Add the record name, dates and reviewer details, then check all fourteen cells for each dish. Use Focused Dish Review on smaller screens or whenever a single-row workflow is easier than the wide matrix.
Browser-local working dataNothing you type into this matrix is sent to RecipeWanted by this tool. “Save on this device” uses local browser storage only after you choose it.
Anyone with access to the same browser profile may be able to read a saved draft. Do not enter customer names, diagnoses, medication or other sensitive personal/medical information.Controlled states
Four states — deliberately no “safe” status
Not checked
No conclusion has been recorded. It remains visibly unresolved and blocks a clear tool review.
Contains / declared ingredient
The allergen is intentionally present as an ingredient or processing aid that needs allergen information under the rules applying to the food.
Cross-contact / precautionary risk
Use only where supplier information or a documented risk assessment identifies a real unavoidable cross-contact risk that cannot be sufficiently controlled.
No identified source in reviewed evidence
No source was identified in the recipe/specification evidence reviewed. This is never a free-from, allergen-free or zero-cross-contact claim.
Active dishes0
Rows passing checks0
Rows needing review0
Unchecked cells0
Matrix review
REVIEWBlocking review items
Advisory context checks
A clear tool review means the record passed these completeness checks only. Continue with the business/legal/consumer verification process that applies to the food.
Wide overview: scroll horizontally to inspect all 14 groups. The dish column stays visible. On a phone or for detailed review, use Focused Dish Review from the first column.
| Dish / item | Celery | Gluten cereals | Crustaceans | Eggs | Fish | Lupin | Milk | Molluscs | Mustard | Tree nuts | Peanuts | Sesame | Soya | Sulphites | Specific / other allergen details | Recipe / specification / evidence checked | Cross-contact / control note | Row actions |
|---|
Specificity and sulphites
Where cereals containing gluten, crustaceans, fish, molluscs or nuts are C/P, identify the specific food where relevant (for example wheat, prawns or almonds). For sulphur dioxide/sulphites, the more-than-10 mg/kg or 10 mg/L threshold, expressed as total SO₂ in food ready to eat or reconstituted as instructed, must be assessed from real product/process evidence; this matrix does not calculate it.
Controlled method
Move from recipe evidence to maintained customer information
The matrix is strongest when it is one maintained record inside a wider allergen-management process rather than the single source of truth.
- 01
Identify the exact food/version
Use separate rows or matrices when the same menu name can refer to materially different recipes or suppliers.
- 02
Trace compound ingredients
Check sauces, spice mixes, stocks, marinades, toppings, bakery components, oils and other compound ingredients against current product information.
- 03
Record intentional allergens
Use C when the reviewed evidence identifies the regulated allergen as intentionally present. Add specific cereal/nut/fish/shellfish detail where relevant.
- 04
Assess cross-contact separately
Use P only where there is a real evidence/risk basis. Record the source and the control/risk-assessment note; never use P to replace segregation, cleaning or other reasonable controls.
- 05
Review, communicate and maintain
Resolve every ?, verify how information must be presented for the food type/jurisdiction, and immediately revisit affected rows after any relevant change.
UK 14-allergen reference
Understand what each regulated group covers
The fourteen groups are the UK mandatory allergen framework—not a list of every food someone can react to.
Celery
Celery includes stalks, leaves, seeds and celeriac; celery salt and compound ingredients can also contain celery.
Cereals containing gluten
Wheat (including spelt and Khorasan wheat), rye, barley, oats and their hybridised strains are the regulated cereal group. Record the specific cereal where relevant.
Crustaceans
Examples include prawns, crab, lobster and crayfish. Record the specific crustacean where relevant.
Eggs
Eggs can appear directly or through compound ingredients, bakery products, sauces, glazes and coatings.
Fish
Fish and allergenic fish-derived ingredients are covered. Record the specific fish where relevant.
Lupin
Lupin flour, seeds and derived ingredients can occur in bread, pastry, pasta and speciality foods.
Milk
Milk and allergenic milk-derived ingredients are covered. Lactose-free does not necessarily mean milk-allergen-free.
Molluscs
Examples include mussels, oysters, scallops, squid, octopus, cockles, whelks and snails. Record the specific mollusc where relevant.
Mustard
Mustard seeds, powder, paste and mustard-containing compound ingredients are included.
Nuts
The regulated tree-nut group includes almonds, hazelnuts, walnuts, cashews, pecans, Brazil nuts, pistachios and macadamia nuts. Record the specific nut where relevant.
Peanuts
Peanuts are a separate regulated allergen group from tree nuts.
Sesame
Sesame seeds and sesame-derived ingredients such as tahini and sesame oil can be relevant.
Soya
Soybeans/soya and allergenic soya-derived ingredients are included; product formulation must be checked rather than inferred from the ingredient name alone.
Sulphur dioxide / sulphites
UK allergen labelling applies above 10 mg/kg or 10 mg/L, expressed as total SO₂ in the food ready to eat or reconstituted as instructed. This matrix does not calculate concentration; verify the finished-product evidence separately.
Information-format & safety boundary
The matrix supports the process; it does not replace the rules
How allergen information must be provided depends on the food, packaging/presentation and jurisdiction. Use current competent-authority guidance for the actual operation.
The 14 groups are not every allergy
People can react to foods outside the regulated fourteen. Keep wider ingredient information available where relevant and never treat this matrix as a complete medical-allergy list.
Non-prepacked food
Current FSA best practice supports written allergen information, either upfront or on request, backed by a conversation with the consumer about their allergen requirements. The matrix can support that internal written evidence.
PPDS needs the actual label checked
PPDS food requires the food name and full ingredients list with regulated allergens emphasised where required. A back-of-house matrix cannot prove the label is correct.
Precautionary information needs a real basis
Current FSA guidance says PAL such as “may contain” should follow a risk assessment identifying an unavoidable cross-contact risk that cannot be sufficiently controlled. Generic blanket warnings can mislead.
N does not mean “free from”
No identified source is limited to the evidence reviewed. Free-from claims need separate controls and must never be inferred from a green/clear matrix review.
Review dates do not replace change control
A future review date does not make old evidence current after a supplier, recipe, ingredient or preparation process changes.
Official sources
Use the authority that applies to your operation
Food Standards AgencyAllergen guidance for food businesses
England, Wales and Northern Ireland guidance on the 14 regulated allergens, allergen information and effective allergen management. Check the source for current guidance.
Open official source →Food Standards AgencyAllergen information for non-prepacked foods — best practiceBest-practice context for written information, consumer conversations, other allergens and keeping allergen information accurate.
Open official source →Food Standards AgencyOfficial allergen icons, posters and matricesOfficial matrix/icon examples for providing written allergen information for non-prepacked food.
Open official source →Food Standards AgencyPPDS allergen labelling hubCurrent PPDS toolkit, technical guidance, precautionary-labelling resources and sector-specific guidance.
Open official source →GOV.UK / Food Standards AgencyIntroduction to allergen labelling for PPDS foodIntroduction to PPDS allergen labelling for England, Northern Ireland and Wales.
Open official source →Food Standards AgencyPrecautionary allergen labelling checklistChecklist explaining that precautionary allergen labelling should follow a risk assessment identifying an unavoidable risk that cannot be sufficiently controlled.
Open official source →Food Standards ScotlandSafely managing allergens in your food businessScottish guidance on allergen information, staff training, preparation controls, cleaning and cross-contact management.
Open official source →Release source-set review: 2026-09-08. Guidance and law can change. RecipeWanted’s Trust & Safety review cadence remains separate and must be renewed when due or when a registered source/boundary changes.
Practical questions
Questions to resolve before operational reliance
Does N or a clear review mean the dish is allergen-free?
No. N means only that no source was identified in the evidence reviewed. “Review checks clear” means the record is complete under this tool’s rules. Neither proves free-from status, zero cross-contact or suitability for an individual.
Why can’t RecipeWanted infer allergens from a recipe or dish name?
Because allergen status depends on the exact current ingredients, compound ingredients, processing aids, supplier formulations and cross-contact evidence. Name-based inference would create false certainty in a higher-consequence decision.
Can this replace a PPDS label?
No. Use the matrix behind the process, then separately verify the actual PPDS label requirements, including the food name, full ingredients list and allergen emphasis.
When should P be used?
Only when supplier information or a documented risk assessment identifies a real unavoidable cross-contact risk that cannot be sufficiently controlled. The matrix therefore requires both an evidence reference and a cross-contact/control note whenever P is selected.
What if the recipe changes after I completed the matrix?
Treat the affected entry as needing review immediately. A future “review due” date does not make an earlier assessment valid after a relevant change.
Why identify wheat, almonds, prawns or a specific fish?
Several regulated headings cover groups of foods. More specific information can be important for accurate ingredient/allergen communication and for understanding what the source evidence actually says.
What about allergies outside the UK 14?
The fourteen are the regulated UK framework, not every possible food allergy or intolerance. The details field can record other relevant ingredient information, but the tool does not make medical suitability decisions.
Does cooking destroy food allergens?
Do not assume normal cooking makes an allergen safe. Allergen control needs ingredient, separation, cleaning and process management appropriate to the operation.
Why is saved data browser-local?
It avoids creating a central RecipeWanted profile or server database of business allergen working records. The trade-off is that the saved draft belongs only to that browser profile and must be managed/removed by the user.
What should I do if a consumer has a specific allergy?
Use the complete current recipe/product evidence and your established allergen procedure, communicate clearly, and follow the competent-authority/business process that applies. Do not treat this generic working matrix as a customer-specific medical assurance.
Continue across RecipeWanted
Use the next route for the next question
Related Resources handle the next practical job. The ecosystem handoffs add another useful format when a visual, video, current update, longer article or wider recipe browse answers something different. Cooking Education remains the deeper teaching layer.
01Food Storage Tools
Keep storage dates, freezer history and handling checks in a separate working record when the same menu workflow needs them.
Open related Resource → 02Gluten-Free & Allergen SubstitutionsOpen the related Cooking Education route for deeper method and explanation.
03Storage & Food SafetyOpen the related Cooking Education route for deeper method and explanation.
04Ingredient GuidesOpen the related Cooking Education route for deeper method and explanation.
05Search RecipesApply the tool or decision inside a complete RecipeWanted dish.
Legal, privacy & fair-use notice
Free Resources, with clear limits and clear data boundaries.
RecipeWanted Resources provides general cooking information, deterministic calculations, planning aids and reference tools. It is not legal, medical, dietetic, allergy, regulatory or other professional advice, and it does not replace product labels, manufacturer instructions, competent-authority guidance or qualified professional advice where those are needed.
Each tool explains how it handles your entries. This Resources analytics dataset does not retain recipe or ingredient names, pantry lists, allergy, dietary or health information, other free text, exact quantities, visitor/session/account IDs, IP addresses, user-agent strings or referrer URLs.
This Resources statistics layer is currently enabled and records only allowlisted aggregate interaction and coarse workflow/build-shape counters. Daily aggregate buckets are retained for up to 730 days. Aggregate results are for RecipeWanted/QHE internal RecipeWanted service improvement only; they are not sold or used by this layer for advertising measurement, individual profiling or cross-site tracking.
Any reasonable fair-use or availability rules for free tools are separate from privacy law. Access is not conditional on participating in Resources analytics, and “fair use” is not treated as consent or as a legal basis for collecting personal data. On instrumented Resources pages, the usage-statistics panel provides a simple, free objection control.
Wider site/infrastructure scope: ordinary hosting, security, caching, firewall, consent-management or server-log systems may process technical request information outside the Resources aggregate dataset. Those systems remain governed by RecipeWanted’s wider privacy/CMP arrangements and published privacy information. This Resources notice does not claim that every web request is anonymous.
External authorities linked elsewhere in Resources support specific facts or methods; their inclusion does not mean they approve or endorse RecipeWanted. If a higher-consequence decision is uncertain, stop and verify it with the appropriate current source.First-party usage statistics
Help RecipeWanted learn what is actually useful
Resources records aggregate usage statistics such as qualified tool views, whether a working surface is started, route-level value actions, coarse read depth, broad workflow/build-shape buckets and which non-commercial RecipeWanted handoffs are used. Build-shape signals are deliberately coarse (for example, a small/medium/large row-count bucket or a selected calculator mode): RecipeWanted does not send the recipe name, ingredient list, pantry items, allergen/dietary choices, free text or exact quantities to this analytics dataset; it does not create a visitor/session ID; and it does not store IP addresses, user-agent strings or referrer URLs in the analytics dataset.
Purpose: help RecipeWanted/QHE decide which free tools, workflows, supporting content and first-party integrations to improve next. Aggregate statistics may be reviewed internally across QHE only for that same RecipeWanted service-improvement purpose. They are not sold and are not used by this layer for advertising measurement, cross-site tracking or individual profiling. Free access is not conditional on this measurement: opting out does not disable or reduce any Resource tool.
What is counted and retained?
Allowed counters include 5-second qualified views, 30 seconds of visible engagement, 50%/90% read depth, first working-surface use, selected non-commercial feature/export/continuity actions, hub task choices, broad allowlisted workflow/build-shape buckets and RecipeWanted internal/ecosystem handoffs. Counts are merged directly into UTC daily buckets and retained for up to 730 days under the current admin setting. The only browser preference this layer writes is the first-party objection cookie after you choose to opt out; removing the objection deletes that preference. This describes the Resources aggregate dataset only; ordinary hosting, security, caching, firewall, consent-management or server-log systems remain governed separately by RecipeWanted’s wider privacy/CMP arrangements.
Privacy informationYou can object simply and free of charge at any time. The preference applies only to this first-party Resources statistics layer.
Next step
Use the tool, then get back to cooking.
Resources should remove friction around the task rather than become another layer to manage.
