How to Verify a Laboratory
Before relying on a third-party Certificate of Analysis, confirm that the testing laboratory is traceable through an official accreditation directory and that the report contains the fields your quality system expects.
Why directory verification matters
Suppliers may present COAs from laboratories you have never worked with. Accreditation bodies maintain public directories so buyers can confirm legal entity names, certificate status, and method scope. Directory confirmation is a desktop step — it does not replace batch testing when your program requires it.
Start with our official resources page for accreditation body links and a six-step lookup workflow.
Report fields to review
The following fields are commonly expected on peptide test reports and COAs. Missing or inconsistent data may warrant follow-up before batch release.
| Field | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Laboratory legal name | Must match the entity listed in the accreditation body’s official directory. |
| Laboratory site address | Multi-site labs may test at only some accredited locations. |
| Accreditation body | Identifies which official directory to search (for example CNAS, UKAS, A2LA). |
| Accreditation certificate number | Supports traceable lookup and scope review. |
| Scope / method reference | Confirms the reported test falls within the lab’s accredited scope. |
| Report number or unique ID | Enables audit trails and reduces risk of recycled documents. |
| Sample / batch identification | Must align with vial labels, invoice, and packing list. |
| Sample receipt date | Should precede the analysis date on the report. |
| Date of analysis | Should fall within the accreditation validity period. |
| Test method description | Should list technique (HPLC, LC-MS), column, gradient, and detection mode where applicable. |
| Substance name and sequence | Supports identity review, especially for modified or long peptides. |
| Theoretical molecular weight | Allows comparison with LC-MS observed mass including common adducts. |
| HPLC purity result | Reports main-peak area percentage when integration is valid. |
| LC-MS identity result | Confirms observed mass against expected molecular weight. |
| Reference standards cited | Documents what was used for calibration or identity comparison. |
| Chromatogram or spectrum image | Supports review beyond a single numeric purity value. |
| Analyst / approver signature | Indicates review and release of the report. |
Red flags
These patterns do not prove fraud by themselves, but they are common reasons buyers pause release or request independent retesting.
- Legal name on the report cannot be found in any official accreditation directory
- Accreditation was expired on the date of analysis
- Reported method is absent from the current scope document
- Batch or lot number differs between vial, invoice, and COA
- Analysis date precedes sample receipt date
- Identical PDF or chromatogram reused across unrelated batches
- Purity reported as a round number (for example exactly 99.00%) with no method detail
- Long or modified peptides documented with HPLC only and no identity data
- Laboratory cannot explain basic method parameters when asked
- Report uses generic letterhead without traceable report number
- Accreditation logos appear without a matching directory entry
- Supplier refuses retain-sample or independent retest discussion for high-value programs
Printable verification checklist
Use this worksheet during desktop review. Save completed copies in your approved vendor or batch qualification file.
Opens your browser print dialog for a paper or PDF copy.
Laboratory Verification Checklist
Educational worksheet for reviewing third-party peptide test reports. Peptide From China does not certify laboratories or COAs.
- Supplier / batch
- Review date
- Laboratory name
- Reviewer
Notes / follow-up
For laboratory research and analytical use only. Not for human consumption. Not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.