Complete the pepperoni capacity expansion project in Nebraska
Not delivered by the deadline
AI-confirmed · human review in progress Independent AI checks agreed on primary SEC or regulator evidence. Records are now being reviewed by hand, starting with those our customers order.
- Announced
- 2 Sep 2021
- Due
- 31 Oct 2021
- Checked
- 18 Oct 2026
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“Large projects include a pepperoni capacity expansion in Nebraska and numerous other projects to support growth of branded products.”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
The company explicitly stated in a December 2021 filing that the pepperoni capacity expansion project was a large project for fiscal 2022, indicating it was not completed by the fiscal 2021 deadline.
-
A Hormel Foods 8-K filed 2021-12-09
“Large projects in fiscal 2022 include the completion of the pepperoni capacity expansion project” ✓ confirmed on the page
Market reaction: the shares moved +11.1% against the S&P 500 over the three sessions around the disclosure (8 Dec 2021 to 13 Dec 2021). What this measures
Checked 18 Oct 2026.
Commitment lineage
Every time the company restated this commitment. The original is never changed, and the outcome is always measured against version 1.
- Deadline drift +365 days
- 2 versions
-
Version 1 · original · stated 2 Sep 2021
Deadline 31 Oct 2021 (“fiscal 2021”)
-
Version 2 · stated 9 Dec 2021
Deadline 31 Oct 2022 (“in fiscal 2022”)
“Large projects in fiscal 2022 include the completion of the pepperoni capacity expansion project”
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Capacity change
- Indicative materiality
- Medium rules
- Action
- Complete
- Deliverable
- pepperoni capacity expansion
- Where
- Nebraska
- In the company’s control
- High
- Specificity
- Medium
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: agreesA different AI model, Claude (Anthropic), re-read the evidence without being told the outcome and reached the same answer.
- Third check on a negative finding: agreesBecause a negative finding could harm a company if wrong, a stronger model re-read the evidence fully blind and reached the same answer.
Confirmed. This outcome counts towards the company's Kept Score. How verification works
Are you Hormel Foods? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2021-HRL-014138 · Corrections policy