With the increased uptake of IPC by stakeholders adopting different food security classification systems, decision makers and users have called for a mechanism to identify which stakeholders fully apply the IPC standards and therefore generate products that can be fully labeled 'IPC'.

In response, the IPC Global Steering Committee (IPC GSC) has endorsed an IPC Compliance Review Policy and Process which outlines  compliance criteria together with a mechanism to review these food security classification systems, defining their compliance with IPC. According to the IPC compliance policy, the products generated by those systems should follow a set of minimum criteria in order to guarantee the integrity and implementation of the key IPC functions. This minimum set of criteria has been defined through the IPC country application and strives to create some flexibility in the use of IPC standards for those countries that face particular circumstances, while ensuring that the core IPC principles are not lost.

The IPC Technical Manual Version 2.0 defines two types of IPC products: IPC Products and IPC Compatible Products. An "IPC Product" is  generated following all the four core functions of the IPC: 1) Building Technical Consensus, 2) Classifying Severity and Causes, 3) Communicating for Action, 4) Quality Assurance. An "IPC Compatible Product", on the other hand, is generated following the IPC functions from 2 to 4, thus excluding function 1 (Building technical consensus). The implementation of functions from 2 to 4 allows for inter-operability of core results and comparability with IPC analysis outcomes.

However, since the consensus building is at the core of the IPC enabling transparency, confidence, quality of the analysis and best impact possible on decision making, governments and agencies using IPC harmonized food security classification systems are encouraged to create IPC compliant products whenever possible. Indeed, the production of IPC compatible analyses should be an exception dictated by special circumstances which should justify the reason why a consensual process is not sought.