MSA Dec

Changed Date:
from last
release Supplier Name: Sundram Fasteners Limited, Autolec Div.
Supplier Site Code: AGLXB
Supplier Contact Name: T.Sakthivel
Supplier Contact Phone#: 9445142662
Calculations - Hide this column
Expectation
Expectation &
Sub-element
Rating
Supplier must list evidence to support

each Expectation.
Expectation Element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

Green:
(0) RED sub-elements and (0) YELLOW sub-elements - All sub-
Yellow: (0) RED sub-elements and (1) or more YELLOW sub-elements

Red: (1) or more RED sub-elements
INC: (1) or more sub-elements not ranked RED, YELLOW or GREEN
Expectation Sub-element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

G: High Quality of Event / Meets the Expectation and the intent of the E
Y: Marginal Quality of Event / Marginally meets the Expectation and th
R: Unacceptable Quality of Event / Does not meet the Expectation an
I. Planning for Manufacturing Process Capability
INC I.1. Quality procedures ISO/TS16949 QOS

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
0 # Green (0) RED sub-elements and (0) YELLOW sub-elements - All sub
0 # Yellow Yellow: (0) RED sub-elements and (1) or more YELLOW sub-elements
0 # Red Red: (1) or more RED sub-elements
13 # Inc INC: (1) or more sub-elements not ranked RED, YELLOW or GREE
I.1.1
Supplier's quality system is third-party certified to
X
ISO/TS 16949 requirements.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.2
Supplier's environmental system is certified to ISO
14001 as specified in the Environmental Requirements
Web Guide available through
https://web.fsp.ford.com/gtc/docs/envguide.pdf.
I.1.2
Supplier's environmental system is certified to ISO
X
14001 as specified in the Environmental Requirements
Rate this Web Guide available through
sub- https://web.fsp.ford.com/gtc/docs/envguide.pdf.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.3
Supplier's quality manual contains processes for all
X
areas of the site assessment. The quality manual is
Rate this updated as needed to drive statistically valid continual
sub- improvements in the supplier's quality system.
element Supplier's Senior Management Team, including
by representatives from Manufacturing, Quality,
entering Engineering, and Human Resources perform these
r, y, or g reviews.
in cell
above
I.1.4
Nonconformances identified in internal audits are not
repeated.
I.1.4
Nonconformances identified in internal audits are not
X
repeated.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.5
Supplier has a documented process to identify and
X
regularly update customer expectations, objectives,
Rate this and requirements.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.6
Supplier has a documented process to identify and
X
regularly update internal expectations, objectives, and
Rate this requirements.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.7
Supplier has a documented process to translate
X
internal and external expectations, objectives, and
Rate this requirements into QOS measurables.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.8
Supplier has a documented process to assign targets
X
and objectives to each QOS measurable.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.9
Supplier has a documented process to assign chosen
X
measurables to appropriate management levels for
Rate this review, follow-up, and improvements.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.10
Supplier utilizes action plans to drive statistically valid
X
continual improvement of chosen metrics and are
Rate this tracked at QOS review meetings.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.11
Supplier's management team holds monthly QOS
X
performance review meetings with representatives from
Rate this Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering, and Human
sub- Resources. Improvement actions are taken by cross-
element functional teams that include all levels of the
by organization.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
above
I.1.12
QOS performance reviews include a review of all
applicable Ford Supplier Improvement Metrics (SIM)
key process metrics, and customer satisfaction metrics.
I.1.12
QOS performance reviews include a review of all
X
applicable Ford Supplier Improvement Metrics (SIM)
Rate this key process metrics, and customer satisfaction metrics.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.1.13
Metrics monitoring customer satisfaction that are
X
related to supplier manufacturing are understood and
Rate this tracked.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC I.2. FMEAs/Control Plans

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
I.2.1
All Ford parts have documented design and process
X
failure mode and effects analysis (DFMEA, PFMEA),
Rate this and Control Plans. There is a robust process in place
sub- for developing these documents.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.2
FMEAs are reviewed annually or as issues arise. A
Pareto is used to focus on 1) severity, 2) the product of
severity and occurrence, in order to prioritize actions to
drive improvements.
I.2.2
FMEAs are reviewed annually or as issues arise. A
X
Pareto is used to focus on 1) severity, 2) the product of
Rate this severity and occurrence, in order to prioritize actions to
sub- drive improvements.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.3
All error detection areas are reviewed and, where
X
feasible, plans exist to move to error prevention
Rate this devices (e.g., poke yoke).
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.4
Suppliers, in cooperation with its customers, have
X
identified Critical Characteristics (CCs), Significant
Rate this Characteristics (SCs) and High Impact Characteristics
sub- (HIs - where applicable) on their PFMEAs and Control
element Plans for every Ford part or family of Ford parts,
by including.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.5
Supplier works with Ford (e.g., Program Vehicle Teams
X
(PVT), Design and Release Engineer and Supplier
Rate this Technical Assistance (STA)) to establish final
sub- agreement of CCs, SCs and His on the Special
element Characteristics Communication and Agreement Form
by (SCCAF), regardless of the tier of manufacture of the
entering special characteristic.
r, y, or g
in cell
above
in cell
above
I.2.6
Supplier ensures that all print dimensions and call-out
notes on the engineering drawing are always met
through control plans, work instructions, job set-up
instructions, and receiving inspection, regardless of the
point of manufacture of the requirements, including
sub-tier suppliers.
I.2.6
Supplier ensures that all print dimensions and call-out
X
notes on the engineering drawing are always met
Rate this through control plans, work instructions, job set-up
sub- instructions, and receiving inspection, regardless of the
element point of manufacture of the requirements, including
by sub-tier suppliers.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.7
Where pass-through characteristics are specified by a
X
Ford Plant, the supplier implements controls which
Rate this prevent the shipment of non conforming product to
sub- Ford.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
Ford Plant, the supplier implements controls which
Rate this prevent the shipment of non conforming product to
sub- Ford.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.8
Control Plan is a result of appropriate quality planning
and includes clear linkage between DFMEA and
PFMEA.
I.2.8
Control Plan is a result of appropriate quality planning
X
and includes clear linkage between DFMEA and
Rate this PFMEA.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.2.9
Control Plans contain the following elements:
X
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
-- Operation number / name
-- Part Name / Part Number
-- Inspection Requirements
-- Specifications
-- Control Methods
-- SC, CC, HI (where applicable), and Engineering

Specifications (ES)
requirements are identified and appropriate
-- SC, CC, HI (where applicable), and ES Control
methods (in-process checks, process gauging, and part
gauging) are appropriate.
-- Error proofing methods

-- In-process control methods
-- Sample Size and frequency
-- Required tools, gauges, and other equipment
-- Reaction plans must clearly direct the operator on

how to act when a process begins to go out of control,
or a product fails an inspection or test.
INC I.3. Employee Readiness/Training Review
#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
I.3.1
Supplier is responsible for assessing the skills required
X
to perform all activities that affect product quality.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.3.2
Employees have a skills assessment, training plan, and
X
evidence of training.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.3.3
Supplier ensures that only trained and qualified
X
personnel are involved in all aspects of the
Rate this manufacturing of Ford Parts, including rework
sub- operations.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC I.4. Manufacturing Feasibility/APQP/Launch/PPAP/Run
#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
I.4.1 Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility
Supplier has an effective set of processes to support all
X
elements of Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility
Rate this Assessment required by Ford's GPDS launch process.
sub- Supplier can produce evidence that all processes are
element used on all Ford launch activities. Supplier
by demonstrates effectiveness meeting Ford's
entering requirements as reported in Schedule A, Phased PPAP,
r, y, or g WERS Alerts, and zero AIMS issues identified at
in cell launch.
above
Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility Elements:
Design Inputs
- Engineering Assumptions.
- DV/PV Timing can be met.
- DFMEA & SCCAF Provided.
- Supplier process knowledge to assess capability.
- DVA or Variation Simulation to assess design
tolerances.
- GD& T review/assessment complete.
- Compliance to Escalation Process.
Manufacturing Inputs
- Cost of capital, tooling, gauging including sub-
suppliers.
- Product can be manufactured as intended &
suitable packaging design available per Ford timing.
- Supplier has process knowledge for the intended
manufacturing process.
- Historical performance data is available.
- SCCAF assessed by the suppliers manufacturing
team and approved by Ford.
- Compliance to Escalation Process.
I.4.2
Supplier has an APQP tracking mechanism in place.
X
Supplier has a system to manage parts sourced by
Rate this Ford in support of new vehicle program launches.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
above
I.4.3
Supplier has a process in place to support Ford
X
prototype and pre-production build events in a timely
Rate this manner.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.4.4 Final Manufacturing Feasibility
Supplier has an effective set of processes to support all
X
elements of Final Manufacturing Feasibility Assessment
Rate this required by Ford's GPDS launch process. Supplier can
sub- produce evidence that all processes are used on all
element Ford launch activities. Supplier demonstrates
by effectiveness meeting Ford's requirements as reported
entering in Schedule A, Phased PPAP, WERS Alerts, and zero
r, y, or g AIMS issues identified at launch.
in cell
above Final Manufacturing Feasibility Elements:
- Plans for late design changes after VP are contained
by the planned production process in order to meet
dimensional & capability requirements at Phase 0.
- Supplier's manufacturing team conducts ongoing
reviews & status of the DVP&R, confirms PV
requirements will be met to support Phase 1 PPAP at
TT MRD.
- Lessons learned from the VP are incorporated prior
to Phase 0.
- Supplier regularly reviews & maintains PPAP timing
plan to support Phase 0.
- SCCAF concurred by cross functional team by
<PA>.
- FMEA assessments are complete & evidence of
linkage exists between DFMEA, PFMEA, SCCAF &
Control Plan (operations level document).
- Measurement System Analysis (MSA) for all
production level gages (variable & attribute) is complete
prior to Phase 0. This includes all aspects of MSA -
accuracy, linearity, stability etc.
- Supplier applies Machine Acceptance Standards
ensuring part compliance to specification (including
process capability).
- Machine Tools & Assembly Equipment maintenance
Plans are complete including spare parts & back up
tooling.
- Packaging design concept approved prior to Phase
0.
- Site STA approved (CAR) Planning Capacity
production level gages (variable & attribute) is complete
prior to Phase 0. This includes all aspects of MSA -
accuracy, linearity, stability etc.
- Supplier applies Machine Acceptance Standards
ensuring part compliance to specification (including
process capability).
- Machine Tools & Assembly Equipment maintenance
Plans are complete including spare parts & back up
tooling.
- Packaging design concept approved prior to Phase
0.
- Site STA approved (CAR) Planning Capacity
Analysis Report complete by <FDJ> & supports APW /
MPW requirements.
- Staffing/Training plans complete prior to Phase 0.
I.4.5
Launch Performance Process
X
Supplier has a process to continuously monitor and
Rate this improve launch performance.
sub-
element Part Approval Process
by All PPAP documentation must contain the information
entering per the PPAP manual published by the Automotive
r, y, or g Industry Action Group (AIAG) - this information must
in cell also be available for Ford review. Suppliers have a
above process in place to comply with Global Phased PPAP.
by All PPAP documentation must contain the information
entering per the PPAP manual published by the Automotive
r, y, or g Industry Action Group (AIAG) - this information must
in cell also be available for Ford review. Suppliers have a
above process in place to comply with Global Phased PPAP.
I.4.6
Suppliers require sub-tier suppliers to have a process
X
in place that effectively satisfies all PPAP requirements
Rate this regardless of sub-tier supplier business relationship
sub- with Ford.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.4.7
Run-at-Rate must be completed and supports the
X
stated program requirements (at full-volume production
Rate this levels) for all Ford parts.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.4.8
Capacity Verification must include the following
X
elements and be performed on the entire process or
Rate this the slowest operation (process bottleneck): machine
sub- available hours, shifts, days, machine downtime
element (planned and unplanned), machine change over,
by breaks, and quality or scrap.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.4.9
Supplier monitors capacity and has a process to ensure
X
on-going sufficient capacity on all Ford parts.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC I.5. Manage the Change

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
I.5.1
Supplier has a documented process to effectively
X
implement post - Job 1 design changes, process
Rate this changes, or volume changes.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.5.2
Supplier effectively reviews and updates its quality
X
supporting documentation for these changes.
Rate this Examples of documents that may require changes:
sub- Process Flow Diagrams, FMEAs, Control Plans,
element Operator Instructions, Visual Aids, and PPAP
by documentation.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
I.5.3
Where a supplier proposes to make a permanent
X
change to a previously approved part / process, the
Rate this supplier follows a documented process to ensure that
sub- proper Ford approvals are gained prior to implementing
element the supplier proposed changes.
by w Manufacturing process changes are approved using
entering the Supplier Request for Engineering Approval (SREA)
r, y, or g process (through the web based SREA tool
in cell (https://web.srea.ford.com/).
above w Supplier proposed changes to Ford design released
parts are approved using the Change Request/Concern
Report (CR/CR) process in Worldwide Engineering
Release System (WERS) .
w Supplier proposed changes to tier 1 or to Ford
directed tier 2 manufacturing or ship site locations are
approved through the Ford Resourcing process.
w All implemented changes require revised PPAP
documentation and PSW approval, per the PPAP
requirements and PPAP submission level of the part.
II. Demonstration of Manufacturing Process Capability
INC II.1. Sub-tier supplier Quality Management

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.1.1
Supplier has a defined process for managing its supply
X
base including identification of those with high impact to
Rate this quality.
sub-
element Sub-tier supplier Sourcing
by The supplier has a documented process for sourcing
entering new business or resourcing existing business to Sub-
r, y, or g tier suppliers
in cell
above
tier suppliers
in cell
above
II.1.2
Supplier requires sub-tier suppliers to have a quality
operating system that is similar to ISO/TS 16949, or
VDA. Supplier verifies sub-tier supplier compliance by
annual on-site assessment of high impact sub-tier
supplier facilities.
Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking

The supplier has a process to track sub-tier supplier
APQP readiness to meet Ford New Program/Capacity
Uplift/Resource/Engineering changes etc. are met
II.1.2
Supplier requires sub-tier suppliers to have a quality
X
operating system that is similar to ISO/TS 16949, or
Rate this VDA. Supplier verifies sub-tier supplier compliance by
sub- annual on-site assessment of high impact sub-tier
element supplier facilities.
by
entering Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking
r, y, or g The supplier has a process to track sub-tier supplier
in cell APQP readiness to meet Ford New Program/Capacity
above Uplift/Resource/Engineering changes etc. are met
x
II.1.3
Supplier has a process of PPAP for parts from sub-tier
suppliers (regardless of sub-tier supplier business
relationship with Ford). The process requires sub-tier
supplier compliance to PPAP prior to incorporation of
product in supplier manufacturing process (regardless
of sub-tier supplier business relationship with Ford).
II.1.3
Supplier has a process of PPAP for parts from sub-tier
X
suppliers (regardless of sub-tier supplier business
Rate this relationship with Ford). The process requires sub-tier
sub- supplier compliance to PPAP prior to incorporation of
element product in supplier manufacturing process (regardless
by of sub-tier supplier business relationship with Ford).
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
x
II.1.4
The supplier has a process to manage Ford or supplier
X
defined Engineering Specifications (ES), Special
Rate this Characteristics (CC, SC, HI, or OS), and Pass Through
sub- Characteristics (PTC) that are the responsibility of the
element sub-tier supplier.
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.1.5
The supplier has a process to periodically review
X
ongoing / launch performance with sub-tier suppliers to
Rate this drive continual improvements in the supply base.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.1.7
Supplier conducts systemic reviews with sub-tier
X
suppliers and assures implementation of corrective
Rate this actions across supplier facilities for all issues resulting
sub- in stop ships, field service actions or QRs
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
x II.1.8
The supplier has a process to assess sub-tier supplier
X
capacity to meet Ford's capacity requirements.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
x above
x
x
INC II.2. Control of Incoming Quality

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.2.1
Supplier has a strategy for receiving inspection.
X
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.2.2
Incoming quality requirements are part of a control
X
plan. If incoming quality inspections are made, there is
Rate this evidence of the specification and compliance to the
sub- specification. If no incoming inspections are made,
element there is a rationale for qualifying sub-tier suppliers.
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.2.3
Incoming Quality Operator follows a reaction plan if raw
material or purchased part is found to be out of
specification.
II.2.3
Incoming Quality Operator follows a reaction plan if raw
X
material or purchased part is found to be out of
Rate this specification.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.2.4
Supplier has appropriate resources to manage sub-tier
X
supplier quality including on-site assessment of high
Rate this impact sub-tier supplier facilities.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC II.3 Control Plans / Operator Instructions

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.3.1
Standardized operator instructions (including control
plans, work instructions, job aids, check sheets, job
set-up instructions, and illustrations) are developed and
available for operators.
II.3.1
Standardized operator instructions (including control
X
plans, work instructions, job aids, check sheets, job
Rate this set-up instructions, and illustrations) are developed and
sub- available for operators.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.3.2
Standardized operator instructions are legible, specific,
X
and controlled. The instructions are available in the
Rate this area where the work is being performed and are
sub- followed by operators as written.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
above
II.3.3
Reaction plans are clearly defined and protect Ford
X
from non-conforming materials.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.3.4
Control Plans are revised and updated when products
X
or processes differ from those in current production.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
INC II.4 Process Variability Monitoring/Reduction
#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.4.1
Supplier has determined appropriate statistical
X
techniques. A key aspect of defect prevention is
Rate this process variability reduction and the use of SPC or an
sub- equivalent process monitoring method to indicate when
element action is necessary, and conversely, when processes
by should be left alone.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.4.2
Operator-based SPC control charts are optimized for
statistically valid sample frequency, sample size, and
appropriate chart type. SPC checks are performed on
a timely basis and out-of-control conditions prompt
corrective action as appropriate.
II.4.2
Operator-based SPC control charts are optimized for
X
statistically valid sample frequency, sample size, and
Rate this appropriate chart type. SPC checks are performed on
sub- a timely basis and out-of-control conditions prompt
element corrective action as appropriate.
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.4.3
SPC data is maintained, monitored and used by the
X
equipment operators to drive process and product
Rate this improvements by reducing process variability.
sub- Evidence of process improvements include: reductions
element in scrap, reductions in rework/repair, and DPU;
by increases in first-time through capabilities, Rolled
entering Throughput Yield (YRT), Ppk, Process Sigma level,
r, y, or g records of error proofing mechanism implementation;
in cell and reductions in machine downtime.
above
II.4.4
Ppk is demonstrated to be greater than or equal to 1.67
X
(initial and final process capability - with Phase 3
Rate this PPAP) and 1.33 (for on-going production process
sub- capability), for all SCs and HIs (where applicable). For
element all special characteristics, Ppk trends are tracked over
by time, and action plans have been put in place to
entering increase these Ppk values by a process of continuously
r, y, or g reducing the causes of variability. These trends are part
in cell of the Supplier's regular Quality Operating System
above (QOS) performance review.
CCs require an appropriate control method (verified
with data) that prevents shipment of non-conforming
product to Ford.
These requirements also apply to Special
Characteristics where those characteristics are
manufactured at sub-tier suppliers, as appropriate.
II.4.5
Machine capability for SCs, CCs and HIs (where
applicable) must be demonstrated on all new
equipment and tooling.
II.4.5
Machine capability for SCs, CCs and HIs (where
X
applicable) must be demonstrated on all new
Rate this equipment and tooling.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC II.5. Measurement System Capability, Calibration and U
#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.5.1
Supplier ensures that all gauges are available for use
X
as identified in the control plan to support Ford
Rate this requirements. The gauge calibration and gauge
sub- maintenance program ensures that back-up gauges or
element a back-up gauging process is available to support
by inspections required by the control plan.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.5.2
Variable gauges are used for all SCs and CCs,
whenever possible. HI gauges are per the control plan.
All gauges (company and employee-owned) are
X
identified per the control plan.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.5.3
Gauge R & R is to conform with the guidelines in the
X
AIAG Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA) manual.
Rate this Whenever gauge R&R does not meet these guidelines,
sub- specific plans are in place which adheres to the
element guideline. Additionally, the supplier has the appropriate
by measurement capability for all stages of production.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.5.4
Supplier has a documented "dropped / damaged
X
gauge" policy that is followed by all employees. This
Rate this ensures that only functional, in-specification gauges are
sub- used.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.5.5
Gauge masters are traceable to a national or
X
international equivalent standard. Gauge calibration
Rate this and maintenance is performed on an appropriate
sub- schedule and per specification using gauge masters or
element standards traceable to national or international
by equivalent standards.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.5.6
Supplier conducts regular evaluation of error proofing
X
devices.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC II.6. Control of Parts/Part Identification/Packaging/Shi

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.6.1
Supplier has a documented process for positive part
identification and part control in all stages of
production, rework, repair, scrap, testing, laboratories,
storage areas, office areas, etc.
II.6.1
Supplier has a documented process for positive part
X
identification and part control in all stages of
Rate this production, rework, repair, scrap, testing, laboratories,
sub- storage areas, office areas, etc.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.6.2
Supplier has lot traceability of product shipped to Ford,
X
including reworked product.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.6.3
Supplier takes measures to ensure that production
processes control handling, storage, and packaging as
to prevent damage or deterioration, and preserve
product quality.
II.6.3
Supplier takes measures to ensure that production
X
processes control handling, storage, and packaging as
Rate this to prevent damage or deterioration, and preserve
sub- product quality.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.6.4
Supplier follows Ford packaging requirements see
X
https://comm.extsp.ford.com/sites/MPLB2B/Pages/MPL
Rate this default.aspx. At pack-out, the Ford packaging
sub- guidelines are available for use and followed as
element required.
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
INC II.7 Testing/Engineering Specifications

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.7.1
All inspections, measurements, and tests, including
Engineering Specifications (ES) and Material
Specifications (MS), are performed according to
documented control plans, instructions, and/or
procedures to ensure product requirements are met,
II.7.1
All inspections, measurements, and tests, including
X
Engineering Specifications (ES) and Material
Rate this Specifications (MS), are performed according to
sub- documented control plans, instructions, and/or
element procedures to ensure product requirements are met,
by including at sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.7.2
Appropriate reaction plans address what actions should
X
take place if there is a test or inspection failure, and
Rate this includes product containment and customer notification
sub- policy for all events.
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.7.3
Suppliers and sub-tier suppliers providing heat-treated
X
components are required to meet Ford Manufacturing
Rate this Standard W-HTX and meet the requirements of CQI-9
sub- Special Process: Heat Treat System Assessment. To
element reduce the risk of embrittlement, heat-treated steel
by components are required to conform with Ford material
entering specification WSS-M99A3-A.
r, y, or g The tier 1 supplier is responsible to ensure that all tiers
in cell of heat treat suppliers are annually assessed to CQI-9.
above Ford reserves the right to require Special
Manufacturing process Requirements at the tier 1
supplier and sub-tier suppliers
INC II.8 Preventive Maintenance (PM) / Housekeeping
#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.8.1
Supplier has instituted practices that include reactive,
X
preventive, and predictive maintenance. The
Rate this maintenance system supports process capability
sub- improvement.
element
by Supplier incorporates DFMEA / PFMEA / Special
entering Characteristics, Key Process Input Variables (KPIVs)
r, y, or g and Key Process Output Variables (KPOVs) when
in cell developing the maintenance plan program.
above
Management regularly reviews (at least quarterly) the
status of the PM completion to plan. Management
reviews corrective action plans to ensure any backlog
(past due) maintenance has a plan to become current
sub- improvement.
element
by Supplier incorporates DFMEA / PFMEA / Special
entering Characteristics, Key Process Input Variables (KPIVs)
r, y, or g and Key Process Output Variables (KPOVs) when
in cell developing the maintenance plan program.
above
Management regularly reviews (at least quarterly) the
status of the PM completion to plan. Management
reviews corrective action plans to ensure any backlog
(past due) maintenance has a plan to become current
to the PM schedule. Management undertakes an
evaluation to determine if there is a reduction of
machine/process downtime.
II.8.2
Supplier validates relevant product characteristics after
X
tool / mold / jig / machine / equipment or other
Rate this maintenance activity (planned or unplanned). Also, the
sub- supplier validates relevant product characteristics after
element special cause events (e.g., power outage, natural
by disaster, etc.) that affect tool / mold / jig / machine /
entering equipment
r, y, or g
in cell Supplier assesses and documents risk to product
above quality in case of any deviation from the established
maintenance plan program (e.g. rescheduling of
maintenance program due to capacity constraints,
personnel availability, etc.)
Supplier ensures that the maintenance plan program

frequency (e.g. inspection, clean, replace,
refurbishment, etc.) is based on statistical analysis of
historical performance or surrogate data of mean time
between failures (MTBF) or other standards. If relevant
data are unavailable, the data shall be collected as part
of the pre-launch control plan data acquisition.
II.8.3
Supplier ensures that only trained personnel have
X
access to change Programmable Control Systems
Rate this (PLC, CNC, Automation HMI, etc.) inputs.
sub-
element Supplier validates that any bypass installed by the
by machine builder for debugging purposes is removed
entering prior to production equipment homeline approval(s).
r, y, or g
in cell Supplier validates that old / obsolete Programmable
above Control Systems (PLC, CNC, Automation HMI, etc.)
software levels are removed from the system and
cannot be used in production.
II.8.4
The supplier has continuous improvement plans for
plant cleanliness, housekeeping, ergonomics, and
working conditions, and audits their facility at least
monthly. There is evidence that the supplier
management team is following continuous
improvement plans.
Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material,

chips, debris, contamination, excessive oil, etc. where
part quality can be negatively affected.
II.8.4
The supplier has continuous improvement plans for
X
plant cleanliness, housekeeping, ergonomics, and
Rate this working conditions, and audits their facility at least
sub- monthly. There is evidence that the supplier
element management team is following continuous
by improvement plans.
entering
r, y, or g Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material,
in cell chips, debris, contamination, excessive oil, etc. where
above part quality can be negatively affected.
INC II.9 Manufacturing Flow / Process Engineering / 6 Sig
#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.9.1
Supplier uses lean manufacturing and Six-Sigma
X
principles for current and new model parts
Rate this incorporating JIT (just in time production), waste
sub- elimination, and team based structured problem solving
element to drive continuous improvement for quality, process
by capability, and manufacturing efficiency.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.9.2
Supplier includes key manufacturing and Six-Sigma-
X
type measurables within its QOS. A minimum of two
Rate this lean- and one Six Sigma-type measurables show
sub- trends or history of improvement in the past six months.
element Lean and Six Sigma measurables include some of the
by following: First Time Through (FTT), Overall
entering Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), Dock to Dock (DTD),
r, y, or g Percent Value Add (PVA) and Ppk.
in cell
above
INC II.10 Problem Solving/Corrective Actions

#DIV/0! % Green
Green:
II.10.1
Supplier uses a structured problem solving method
X
(e.g., 8D) to address customer concerns and
Rate this complaints.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.10.1
Supplier uses a structured problem solving method
X
(e.g., 8D) to address customer concerns and
Rate this complaints.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.10.2
Methods are established to communicate quality
X
concerns to the supplier's production and support
Rate this personnel. Corrective actions are submitted to the
sub- supplier's management team for review. The corrective
element actions are communicated to, and replicated in all
by affected areas in the supplier's organization.
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.10.3
Supplier has a process in place to address customer
plant concerns in a timely and thorough manner.
II.10.3
Supplier has a process in place to address customer
X
plant concerns in a timely and thorough manner.
Rate this
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
II.10.4
Supplier reviews previous launches and incorporates
X
lessons learned in future launch plans to achieve
Rate this flawless launch.
sub-
element
by
entering
r, y, or g
in cell
above
Supplier Contact E-Mail: sakthivel.t@sfl.co.in
s Limited, Autolec Div. Plant II
If Supplier Self-Assessment, Approved By:
Name:
Supplier
Comments / STA Comments /
Evidence Evidence
All Expectations, regardless of Color Ford STA input for updated Expectation
Rating, shall have documented ratings or STA comments on supplier
evidence listed, including example part compliance to the Expectation
number(s) viewed
LOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN
ore YELLOW sub-elements
d RED, YELLOW or GREEN
ctation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / Item Complete

meets the Expectation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / Concurred and timed recovery plan in place / on schedu
not meet the Expectation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / No plan, Inadequate and/or untimed recovery plan in
949 QOS
LLOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN

more YELLOW sub-elements
ed RED, YELLOW or GREEN
SFL,Autolec Div.Plant II, is third party

certified to IATF 16949
Certification body - INTERTEK

Cert No - 2006-0042
Cert issue dt - 12 September 2018
Cert expiry dt - 11 September 2021
Scope - Design and Manufacture of Water
Pumps, Oil Pumps and Integrated Front
Cover and Manufacture of Fuel Pumps
certified to ISO 14001

Cert No - 027317-01
Cert issue dt - 16 May 2018
Cert expiry dt - 20 October 2020
Scope - Manufacture of Water Pumps, Oil
Pumps and Fuel Pumps for Automobile
industry

certified to OHSAS 18001

Cert No - 027317-01
Cert issue dt - 17 May 2018
Cert expiry dt - 20 October 2020
Scope - Manufacture of Water Pumps, Oil
Pumps and Fuel Pumps for Automobile
industry
Yes.Quality manual of SFL Autolec, Plant 2

is prepared as per requirements of IATF
16949 to drive statistacally and inculcate
continual improvement.
Reviews are at plant head level and
department head level and appropriate
frequencies. Department includes
Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering,
Purchase, HR
Internal audit NC summary is being
updated on monthly basis to monitor
repeat NCs if any. NC summary reviewed
and found no repeat NC in internal audit
for the current year and FY2017-18
Effectiveness of the actions taken were
evidenced with effective why why analysis
Yes.Supplier has a documented process to
update customer expectations such as
customer complaints,Delivery performance
PPM,Warranty etc.
Also Ford CSR manual is referenced to

prepare CSR matrix and ensured all Ford
CSR are being deployed in the QMS of the
SFL Autolec, Plant 2
Yes.Supplier has a documented process to

update internal expectations such as
Internal Rejections,PPk,Corrective action
etc.
Quality objectives are set and reviewed
periodically through process quantifiers
Yes. Customer expections monitored

through QOS. Internal expectation are
monitored through QOS - Customer
PPM,QR,Poke yoke monitoring,Process
Audit,FTT etc all the documents are
verified
Targets & objectives for each QOS has
been covered in Business Process
manual. Business process – BP/07 ,
Purchase process- BP/08 , Quality
process – BP/09 , Maintanence process –
BP/10 , Stores process – BP/12 ,
Calibration process – BP/14 are the
evidence.
Yes. Supplier has an documented process

. Management levels for review done
through MRM by once in six months and
customer complaint,ppm, internal
rejection,improvements, etc. reviewed and
followup of previous MRM also reviewed.
SFL, Autolec Plant 2 continual

improvement through Process quantifiers.
Actions taken for all quantifiers that do not
meet the target. Actions taken were
reviewed in Divisional isional Executive
Commitee review meetings.
Monthly review are conducted for QOS

parameters e.g. inhouse rejection, cost of
poor quality,customer complaint,
productivity & kaizen.
Supplier monitors customer complaints
monthwise, warranty PPM, customer line
rejection PPM,SIM score monitored
monthly
Included all the above in the MRM agenda
to ensure consistency in review
Yes.Supplier monitors field return pumps

detail and reports.
Yes.Supplier has documented process for

developing and continously improving
PFMEAs and control plans for all Ford
parts. Evidence New ford line poke yoke
are installed all Assy station based on
Previous Assy Experience
PFMEA are reviewed when there are
1) Customer complaint
2) annual review
Poka yokes are available at crical
operations.Also verified before start of
every shift. Water pump 853 Bearing bore
under size & Over size Poke yoke verified
& found ok, Poka yoke Monitoring Sheet
verified on 12.12.18
SC & HIC characteristics added in control
plan and PFMEA. WP 853 - Bearing bore
diameter,Mounting face flatness OP 926-
Rotor bore depth,Seal bore
diameter,Crank bore diameter,<SC>
mention on Control plan & FMEA
SC & HIC characteristics have been
identified in the PFMEA cross functional
team. Water pump 7S7G8501FA FMEA
All Print dimensions are addressed in
layout reports. WP 853 machining layout
reports are the evidenced
Control plans, SOPs and inspection
standards are available to ensure
appropriate print dimensions are met at
appropriate stages of production and
inspection
Pass through characteristics are identified
in process control documents such as
control plan & PFMEA., Example: Back
M6 Thread for OP 926 machining control
plan identified
in process control documents such as
control plan & PFMEA., Example: Back
M6 Thread for OP 926 machining control
plan identified
FMEA and Control plan have been verified
for proper linkage.
7S7G 8501 FA water pump assy FMEA &
Control plan are the evidence.
Yes,OP 1010 Oil pump machining gear

plate milling
Oil pump/98MM 6600 D9C
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes,
Yes
Yes,Available
Yes,Available on control plan
Yes,Presence on control plan
Yes,Available
Yes,Reaction plan clearly explained how to

react on a process
g Review

Yes.Supplier has a selection criteria

process to assign skilled operators
Skill assessment and training plan

available. Evidenced for all operators
stationed in ford line
Only trained & quality persons are
involved in all areas of Ford parts.
Skill matrix evidenced to ensure only
quality operators are stationed at
manufacturing lines
QP/Launch/PPAP/Run-at-Rate Review


No new products being developed now
APQP tracking mechanism in place,

No new products being developed now
Prototype parts are developed prior to
production. All parts are checked for
dimensions & tested for functional tests.
Prototype control plan is available for the
requirements.
Prototype parts for any new product
development in supported by PED team.
Yes, SFL, Autolec have conducted process
capability study,MSA study done for
gauges,Machine tooling & spare tools also
available,PFMA and Control plan have
verified found proper linkage in new
products developed earlier. Eg. Dragon
pump
All product process monitor through
SPC,check sheet & FSIR,OP 926 & WP
853 part document verified found ok, OP
Seal bore diameter Cp=2.54
CPk=2.10,Bearing bore diametere
Cp=1.93 CPk=1.87 month of nov'16
CPk=2.10,Bearing bore diametere
Cp=1.93 CPk=1.87 month of nov'16
Supplier has a defined process to
approve sub-suppliers PPAP. BP/16
Supplier monitoring available to define the
process of approving sub-supplier PPAP
Yes.supplier submits capacity verification
documentation to Ford.
Yes.supplier doing capacity verification as

per Capacity verification sheet (version 5)
Yes.Supplier monitors capacity closely for
Required quantity supply to ford correct
time and also ensure on-going sufficient
capacity, communicate Ford production
requirements to sub-suppliers.
Yes.Supplier has a documented

procedures to effectively manage the
changes related to product and process
Yes.Supplier effectively reviews and

updates quality supporting documentation
for these changes.
Approval is taken from customer for any
change in Process & Product.
Evidence available for New assy line for
sigma water pump
SREA # 20141024021
nagement

Supplier has a defined process based on

PFD,high impact to quality addresed on
documents
Yes,Supplier has documented on sub-tier

supplier sourcing business
Sub-tier Supplier having quality operating
system IATF 16949 (Evidence: M/S
TIDC),Sub-supplier compliance,high
impact are monitor by supplier through
sub-supplier Audit
Vendor Rating done at Sub supplier end
every three month.
Yes,Sub-tier Supplier APQP to met ford
requirement
Yes,Sub-tier supplier compliance to PPAP
prior to incorporation of product in supplier
manufacturing process
All Special characterstic responsibility for
sub-tier supplier,All characterstic are
covered in quality document,SC
parameters are controled through SPC
yes,Supplier has review the process
periodically through process audit based
on audit plan & Sub-tier supplier to drive
continual improvement through kaizen
Supplier ensure implementation of
corrective action using 7 step problem
solving technique
Systemic corrective actions are requested
from suppliers for increased ppm, supplier
ratings as defined in the business process
manual BP/16
Yes,Sub-tier supplier capacity to met on
ford requirement
BP/16 defines criteria for supplier
assessment
Special characteristics are identified in

control plan. OP 693 plunger control plan
are the evidence.
Yes. Incoming quality requirements are

part of a control plans.
Quality Problem Countermeasure Report
(QPCR) is generated for incoming non-
conformances. 'ACCEPTED'; 'REWORK';
'SCRAP' tags are in use.
Supplier has allocated seperate place for
holding 'non-conformance parts'.
Yes.Supplier has a process to review sub-

supplier quality systems on-time
assessment.
ructions


SOP having necessary details quality
acceptance criteria,Process and product
control parameters,Special characteristics
parameter & frequency of inspection and
method of inspection,Gauges and reaction
plan for non-conformance.
Yes.SOP are legible,specific &

controlled.SOP was displayed at
machineshop & assembly area and our
operators followed SOP instruction
Reaction plans are clearly defined on
SOP,Yellow paints identification indicate
for bad material,Red paints identification
indicate for bad work
Control plans are revised and maintained

upto dates.OP 926 and WP 853 assy
controlplan are the evidence.
g/Reduction

Supplier has followed SPC and PMC,SPC

for quality inspector,PMC for Operators.
Reaction plan defined in control plan
The operator based charts are being
utilized to change the process,sample size
and frequency clearly presence on
operator chart
X bar – R chart graphs are plotted based

on the SPC data and monitored on every
shift. Evidence of process improvements :
Error proofing mechanism (seal working ht
poka yoke & multigauging),CP & CPk
every month calculated based on SPC
data it's helping to improve the process
Yes.Supplier has a PPK tracking
mechanism is in place,PPK is every month
calculated and monitoring the process
Yes.Supplier adheres machine capability
for SCs and HIs to qualify the new tools
and equipment.
ility, Calibration and Use

Product related all gauges are present

near by the machine,all gauges are
calibrated,Critical gauges spares are
available
Yes. Variable gauges are used for all SCs
and CCs whenever possible.All gauges
are identified as per control plan.
Gauge R & R has been conducted as per
AIAG Guidelines.New software installed
for Gauge calibration.
Drop gauge policy DGP-14 A procedure
available and being followed.
Yes. Gauge masters are traceable to a
national equivalent standard.gauge
calibration and specification gauge master
standard traceableto equivalent national
standards.
NABL accredited sources were used for
external parties for calibration
Error proofing has monitored through

check sheet on regular basis before
starting the production through pokayoke
monitoring sheets
cation/Packaging/Shipping


Yes.
Business process available BP/12 stores,

which clearly defines the identification and
traceable requirements.
All the stages are having bins Red bin for
bad work,Yellow bin for bad material,
Supplier have Seperate places for
rejection review and identified as defined
in the business process.
For pump assy ,parts are able traced with
respect to batch coding. (As per procedure
BP/12 for Stores)
Packing standard prepared & packed as
per Customer requirement (Evidence :
Packing standard 1121),Packing Parts
stored easy retrival FIFO also followed at
part storage area. OP 926 oil pump
packing standards are the evidence. Also
for ford returnable dunnage is maintained
and cleaned .
MMOG certified by FORD SMRT team on
21.02.2014.


Yes.All inspections,measurements &
testing are performed according to
documented control plans including Sub-
tier supplier
Engineering specification procedure is

available.
CQI-9 special process audit followed by
supplier.
/ Housekeeping

Schedule Vs Actual for preventive

maintanance is available and followed
Supplier Management
reviewed Regularly PM Plan ,if backlog
found to take corrective action for the
same.
Why Why analysis done for repeated or

high severe breakdowns to ensure MTBF
improvement
Supplier Management
reviewed Regularly PM Plan ,if backlog
found to take corrective action for the
same.
Why Why analysis done for repeated or

high severe breakdowns to ensure MTBF
improvement
Yes,Supplier has validate relevant product
characteristics after completion of
PM,Tool,fixture etc
maintenance plan communicate to all
respective people to inspect & Evaluation
of the product,to clean the floor etc
Supplier always locked the program with
password authorised persons only allow to
modified the programme
Supplier has conducted 5s Audit every
month for continuous improvement plans
for plant cleanliness
Zone leaders allocated to ensure 5S at all
locations in the plant
s Engineering / 6 Sigma and Lean Manufacturing Metrics

Supplier followed one piece flow in Water

pump assy process and produces to
customer demand.
Supplier adopts TQM techniques to drive

continous improvements for quality.
Improvemants are made in First time
through,Overall Equipment Effectiveness
& process controls.
WIP inventory reduced by modifying the

material handling equipments (Ex : For
water pump machining - 80 nos and Water
pump assy - 30 nos stored)
e Actions

8 D format is used for ford and cause and

effect diagram is used for root cause
analysis.The linkages are properly
maintained with 8 D, FMEA and Control
plan,quality document also updated based
on corrective action
8 D format is used for ford and cause and
effect diagram is used for root cause
analysis.The linkages are properly
maintained with 8 D, FMEA and Control
plan,quality document also updated based
on corrective action
Yes.Customer complaints are
commuicated to operators.Also Quality
concern are commuicated to work station
via quality alert and get the signature to
ensure message have reached on all
level.
Yes.Supplier monitor on the timely manner
in reporting ICA & PCA.
Yes.Lessons learned updated.

STA Site Engineer name: Mr.Aswin kumar, Thiyagarajan
STA Site Engineer E-Mail: taswinku@ford.com
STA Site Engineer Phone#: 8754496905
Commodities: Pump Water (P920), Pump Oil (P900)
Expectatio
n
Action Plan
Completion Date
Guidelines
Responsibility
Due Date
(Action Plan,
Responsibility and Due Note: The Expectation
Date Required for all Guidelines listed below
yellow and red rated are not to be considered
Expectations) all-inclusive. Refer to the
AIAG Manuals to ensure
compliance. The AIAG
website is:
http://www.aiag.org/
very plan in place / on schedule

nd/or untimed recovery plan in place / Behind schedule
w Supplier is third party
certified to ISO/TS 16949,
including Ford customer
specific requirements.
Include the name of the
Certification Body and the
date of certification and/or
re-certification.
w Certification has not

expired.
w SOFTWARE SITE
ASSESSMENT
CAPABILITY AND
CERTIFICATION
The software supplier is
audited by an official SEI
(Software Engineering
Institute) auditing firm and
attained, at a minimum,
Capability Maturity Model
Level 2 certification.
Software developers for this
product use the
development process for the
level at which they are
certified. If assessed at
Level 2, the software
supplier has a plan to
become certified Capability
Maturity Model Level 3
within twelve (12) months.
w Supplier is third party
certified to ISO 14001.
Include the name of the
registrar organization and
the date of certification
and/or re-certification.
w Certification has not

expired.
w Supplier reviews on an
annual basis the policies,
procedures, and work
instructions to ensure they
are up to date, including
Voice of the Customer
(VOC) specific
requirements. This may be
included in the annual
review of internal audits.
Action plans are in place for
statistically significant
continuous improvements.
w There are records of

revisions (change control) to
procedures, guidelines and
work instructions that
demonstrate that supplier's
quality system is being
continuously improved.
w Supplier has an internal
quality audit tracking
mechanism in place.
w Supplier's "quality manual"

includes a procedure for
internal audits and
corrective action
implementation process
w Supplier has an internal

audit schedule and audits
are being performed
according to schedule
w Does supplier use a "fresh
eyes" concept?
NOTE: "Fresh Eyes" review
typically involves product
review by personnel not
directly associated with the
design or manufacture of
the product.
w Supplier has records of 3

previous audits, including a
list of all non-
conformances.
w For all non-conformances,
action plans are in place to
address the root cause that
led to the issue.
w Supplier implements
corrective actions in related
activities to prevent
recurrence of similar non-
conformances.
w Supplier links issues and

corrective actions to
customer satisfaction
(Supplier uses customer
feedback "Voice of the
Customer" to drive the
identification of issue root
cause and implementation
of permanent corrective
action)
w External Critical to
Quality (CTQ) customer
expectations are obtained
from all affected customer
activities (e.g., Purchasing,
STA, PD, Manufacturing
Plants, Finance, MP&L);
expectations may include
metrics such as, Process
Sigma Level, CPU, R/1000,
TGW, PPM, warranty,
project timing, PSW timing,
response time on customer
complaints, delivery
performance, etc.
w Supplier uses Industry

Commodity PPM available
from Supplier Improvement
Metrics (SIM) as basis for
the PPM target, as
applicable
w Supplier identifies
internal CTQ metrics that
are not covered by external
metrics.
w Internal metrics may
include internal scrap rates,
OEE, down-time, change-
over time, Ppk, DPU, RTY,
etc.
w Supplier's CTQ
measurables relate to Key
Process Output Variables
(KPOV) that predict internal
and external customer
satisfaction.
w Continuous
improvements are
developed and tracked
through internal and
external expectations.
w Senior management has
a process to identify
responsible individuals and
to establish timing to meet
the assigned targets and
objectives.
w The QOS process

includes quantifiable
improvements.
w A management
champion and team is
identified for each CTQ
measurable, which is then
tracked and reviewed to
ensure improvements are
being made.
w Performance of these
measurable are
communicated regularly.
w Action items are being

closed on time and show
statistically valid
improvements.
w These improvements are
permanent in nature.
w STA invited to supplier's
QOS review meetings
w Supplier has evidence of

the monthly QOS
performance review
meetings, including what
metrics are being tracked
and managed.
w Supplier has a strategy

implementation process with
defined roles and
responsibilities, and on-
going actions with timing.
w Cross-functional teams
have been formed and
working meetings are being
conducted.
w There is evidence of
cross-functional team
meeting minutes, metrics,
and action items for monthly
QOS performance to target
review meetings and daily
production meetings with
senior plant management.
w Supplier is tracking trends

to drive continuous
improvement.
w Corporate strategy and
objectives are linked to
assure continuous
improvement of metrics.
w Supplier's continuous
improvement projects utilize
statistical quality tools,
including what impact these
quality tools have on internal
and external CTQ metrics.
w Supplier can demonstrate

that an effective daily
management review
process is in place with
cross-functional
representation reviewing
and reacting to daily
production metrics. The
review process includes
meeting minutes and/or an
action log.
w Supplier can identify what

quality tools are being used
and that improving trends
are being tracked.
w Supplier monitors
customer plant(s) QR trend
and 3MIS warranty R/1000
and CPU performance, and
develops action plans to
identify and address any
negative trends.
w Customer concerns in SIM

and quality rejects show
improving trends or are at
zero level.
w Supplier includes
achievement of Q1 in its
metrics, as applicable.
w Supplier can access SIM
and review QR details on a
daily basis.
w Supplier is tracking all
Ford SIM metrics.
w Supplier's internal metrics
include scrap, downtime,
rework, and premium
freight, etc.
that goals have been set for
the Ford SIM metrics with
action plans in place to drive
improvement.
w Supplier tracks warranty

and has an evaluation
process to determine what
drives improvement in
warranty costs and
customer satisfaction.
w Supplier assesses how

much the TGW, CPU, and
R/1000 are related to
supplier manufacturing and
action plans are developed
based on those findings.
w Supplier has a tracking
mechanism for short-term
and long-term warranty
Things-Gone-Wrong (TGW).
Note:
Ford's Product Development
can provide TGW
information
Note:
Short-term is defined as <
12 months; Long-term is
defined as > 12 months
mechanism for long-term
and short-term warranty
Cost-Per-Unit (CPU).
mechanism for short-term
and long-term warranty
R/1000.
w As part of its field return
parts analysis, the supplier
includes the number of parts
and root cause analysis,
where possible
w Supplier has a procedure

for short-term and long-term
customer satisfaction and is
compliant.
Note:
Customer satisfaction
information can be obtained
through JD Power or OEM
w Supplier understands and

utilizes the High Mileage
Reliability process in
developing products for
Ford.
w Supplier analyzes low-

and high-time in service as
part of its continuous
improvement project
selection process.
w Supplier has documented
process for developing and
continuously improving
DFMEAs, PFMEAs, and
control plans for all Ford
parts. The development
and improvement process
ensures that the
complies with Critical to
Quality process
requirements as specified in
the Supplier Manufacturing
Health Charts located at
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/
Supplier_Manufacturing_He
alth_Charts.html.
w Supplier obtains and

reviews system and design
FMEA or Design Verification
Plan & Report (DVP&R)
from a System and/or
Design & Release Engineer
to ensure that "effective and
credible" PFMEA/Control
Plan/work instructions can
be developed and
implemented, including
sub-tier suppliers as
appropriate.
w Supplier uses a process

flow diagram or surrogate
control plan when
developing a PFMEA /
DFMEA.
w Supplier incorporates all
permanent corrective
actions from 8Ds into the
FMEAs and Control Plans.
w Supplier reviews DFMEAs

/ PFMEAs, identifies
"potential cause of failure,"
and implements error-
proofing, where applicable.
Note: Refer to the Ford

FMEA Handbook to ensure
that all requirements are
met, available on FSP,
Library Services
(https://portal.covisint.com/w
ps/public/fsp/)
Note:
If the supplier-led APQP
team does not have
system/design FMEA and/or
DVP&R, then the element in
the APQP tracking
document "MUST" be
identified as "RED" and all
related documents, such as
PFMEA/Control plan, should
be identified as "Yellow".
w Supplier understands how
to develop a robust FMEA
(i.e., understands the
process function, failure
mode at that function, its
effects and causal factors,
and detection methods).
All failure modes that have
led to rework operations are
included in FMEAs,
including actions to
eliminate the failure modes
and therefore to eliminate
the need for future rework.
w Supplier develops
recommended actions to
eliminate potential failure
modes based on the
following priority:
1) highest severity items

2) highest criticality
( Severity x Occurrence )
Actions are recorded and

when completed, the
Revised Severity,
Occurrence and Detection
columns are completed,
even if the values did not
change.
w Supplier reviews
performance data to validate
the ratings.
w Supplier understands what
quality tools, such as,
cause & effect (C&E)
diagrams (based on process
dominance such as "set up",
"machine", "fixture/pallet",
"tooling", etc.), P-diagram,
DOE, Value chain mapping
etc., were used and how
analytical data was
developed and used to
develop DFMEA (for Design
Responsible Supplier) and
PFMEA.
w Supplier has a process to
track FMEA revisions.
Revision levels are included
on FMEAs.
w Supplier uses the Ford
FMEA Handbook available
through FSP Library
Services.
Note: Per the Ford FMEA
Handbook,
>Severity: Rankings of "9"
or "10" are restricted to
safety or government
regulated.
>Occurrence:
The criterion for ranking
Occurrence "1" is the
probability of failure is
remote: failure is unlikely.
>Detection: The criterion
for ranking "1" is that
detection is almost certain.

move from detection to
prevention. Action plans
exist showing responsibility
and timing.
w Supplier understands
where there are
opportunities for poke-yoke.
w Supplier shows evidence

that the error-proofing
methods used are effective.
w Supplier understands how

to correlate prevention to
CCs, SCs and HIs (where
applicable) to determine
effectiveness of the method
(i.e., can address the causal
factor (failure mode)).
w Supplier can directly relate
the detection method to the
cause of failure.
Note:
Poke-yoke helps in
detection and should be
derived from FMEA. Poke
Yoke is the practice of
making defects
impossible to create, so it
is a prevention method,
not a detection method.
Poke-Yokes should be
physically tested on the
shop floor to ensure they
work. Detection methods
are measurement systems
and should be included in
the control plan and have
regularly scheduled gauge
R&Rs performed.
w The YCs and YSs

(Potential Critical and
Significant Characteristics)
are defined on the DFMEA
and recorded on the Special
Characteristics
Communication and
Agreement Form (SCCAF),
including potential special
characteristics
manufactured at sub-tier
suppliers as appropriate.
Note:
CCs, SCs and HIs are not
necessarily restricted to part
characteristics. Process
parameters are equally
critical to the parts
characteristics. The process
parameters must also be
identified as CCs, SCs and
HIs and must be monitored
and managed through the
control plan.
Note:
Critical Characteristics "CC"
or inverted delta can be
identified by suppliers or by
Ford, but can only be
approved by Ford's Design
and Release activity and
must be identified on the
Ford drawing and/or
engineering specification.
w Supplier determines
potential CCs, SCs and HIs
(where applicable) from the
system/design FMEA with
additional characteristics
identified by the PFMEA
cross-functional team,
including sub-tier suppliers
as appropriate.
Notes:
1 For SCs and HIs (where
applicable), severity
rankings are between 5-8,
with Occurrence rankings
between 4-10.The
product/process
characteristics identified as
SC, HI and CC in the
PFMEA must also be
identified in the control
plan/work instructions.
Additionally, rankings for CC
(inverted delta) and OS
(operator safety) are
severity = 9 or 10, with
Occurrence rankings
between 1-10.
2 Where the part does not
have any Ford-designated
special characteristics (CC,
SC, or HI – see the Ford
FMEA Handbook), the
organization shall select part
characteristics for which
process capability is to be
demonstrated, and include
the selected characteristics
in the Control Plan. The
selection of these tier 1
supplier designated part
characteristics is to be
included in the special
characteristics approval
w All other dimensions not
specified in the control plan
have a frequency of
inspection identified in the
layout report and in the
quality procedure manual.
w Ensure that all product

specifications (e.g.
dimensions, GD&T
tolerances, performance),
including those dimensions
manufactured by sub-tier
suppliers, are met by use of
strategies which include the
Control Plan.
w Ensure that control

methods and frequencies
specified are appropriate for
each characteristic and its
w All process or product

characteristics being used to
manage the manufacturing
process are identified on the
control plan, including sub-
tier suppliers as appropriate.
w Ongoing (post launch) PV
(Production Validation)
testing as specified in Ford
Engineering Specifications
is included in the Control
Plan, including identification
of any required PD approval
of on-going Ford Product
Development approval of
test results, including at sub-
tier suppliers where
applicable
w There is evidence that full
dimensional validation
(layout) is completed
annually on at least 5 parts,
including the Ford specified
dimensions manufactured at
sub-tier suppliers. For more
detail, see Ford specific
requirements to ISO/TS
16949.
Where tooling has multiple
cavities, tools or centers,
parts are measured for the
annual layout representing
every cavity, tool or center.
Note 1: a minimum total
number of 5 parts are to be
measured with parts from
each cavity, tool or center
included (e.g. for 16
cavities, the minimum
number of parts measured
is 16 - one per cavity).
Note 2: a suggested
approach to ensure
coverage of all cavities,
tools or/and centers could
be to measure the
characteristic at the point of
manufacture where
subsequent operations do
not change the dimension.
Note:
w There Actual measurement
is operator-based,
statistical process control
evidence that supports
sample frequency for all
print dimensions whether or
not they are identified on the
control plan.
w Process parameters that

affect the Critical to Quality
characteristics of a part are
identified and controlled,
as appropriate.
w Process Parameters
critical to quality should be
identified on the control plan
with their upper and lower
control limits.
w Supplier is compliant to
Vehicle Parts Branding
Directive E-108 for any new
tooled parts after 8/1/2002.
The assembly or component
part number requires
branding on serviceable
parts, regardless of
assembly level.
All components of Service
Kits shall be identified with
Ford part numbers except
where a Branding
Exemption has been
approved.
Source: Ford internal
procedure FAP03-145
Production Part
Identification
Note:
E-108 Parts Branding
Directive can be found on
the Ford Supplier Portal
(FSP) at:
https://web.purinfo.ford.com
w Supplier has specific

controls in place that are
robust in preventing and
containing non-
conformances.
w Where required, pass-
through characteristics have
been identified for all new
parts and existing parts.
Where required, these pass-
through characteristics are
identified on the PFMEA and
control plan. (The intent is
to implement robust controls
within the process control
plans / work instructions to
manage pass-through
characteristics to prevent
the shipment of non
conforming Pass Through
Characteristics to the Ford
plant.) See
https://web.lean.ford.com/cq
dc/supplier_training.asp for
more details on Pass
Through Characteristics
w Where required, supplier

has a process for identifying
and managing pass-through
characteristics with sub-tier
suppliers. Where required,
this process includes
obtaining data from sub-tier
suppliers to ensure that
pass-through characteristics
are monitored and
compliant.
w Where required, pass-
through characteristics are
evaluated jointly between
Ford's manufacturing
engineering, product
engineer, STA, and the
supplier during the
development of
PFMEA/Control Plan. (The
intent of this process is to
identify those characteristics
that could have significant
impact on customer
satisfaction and warranty
and may not have been
identified as SCs, CCs.)
w Where required, supplier

reviews error-proofing
methods for all pass-through
characteristics. Action plans
are in place to implement
error-proofing methods,
where required.
Note:
Pass-Through
Characteristics (PTC) are
defined as: Product
Characteristics that are
supplied to receiving Ford
Plants by an outside
supplier or by an internal
(Ford) supplier that are not
controlled by subsequent
processing of the using
plant. Defective PTCs may
affect Vehicle Operations or
the buying public. Use of
pass through characteristics
is typically required by
Powertrain.
linkage between DFMEA,
PFMEA, Control Plan, Work
Instructions, set up
instructions, etc. on the
APQP/PPAP Evidence
Workbook
CAD Standards FECDS C-3
and E-2 provide guidance
how to tag characteristics to
assist to ensure traceability.
FECDS standards are
available through
https://team.extsp.ford.com/
sites/C3PNGMethods/C3PN
GMethods.html .
w Control Plans / Work

Instructions are readily
available.
Note:
Additional information on
Control Plans can be found
in the AIAG Advanced
Product Quality Planning
and Control Plan Reference
manual at
Annex A in ISO/TS 16949
also provides requirements
for Control Plan elements
w Control plans identify the

latest part level (suffix)
w Product and process CTQ

specifications are included
in the control plan
w Control methods are
specified in the
PFMEA/control plan/work
instructions and are
appropriate for the type of
process.
w Work instructions clearly

define quality acceptance
criteria
Note:
Operations may be
controlled by, but not limited
to, Statistical Process
Control, inspection, attribute
data, error-proofing
(automated or non-
automated), sampling plans,
visual aids, operator
instructions, SPC charting,
gauging, auto-
compensators, etc.
w A cross-functional team is
formed (including customer)
to identify SCs, CCs, HIs
(where applicable), and ES
w SC, CC, HI (where

applicable) and ES control
methods are agreed on the
Special Characteristics
Communication and
Agreement Form (SCCAF)
including where control
methods are implemented at
sub-tier suppliers
w All CCs, SCs, and HIs

(where applicable) from the
PFMEA have been identified
on control plans, including
appropriate.
w Engineering Specifications
(ES) are identified by ES
No. on control plans,
as appropriate.
w Variable data is being
collected by the equipment
operators, where
appropriate.
w Listed process parameters
and part characteristics are
being controlled using the
method identified in the
control plan/work
instructions, including sub-
w Gauging method is
appropriate for the task and
was specified during the
APQP process.
w Error proofing methods
that are in place cannot be
circumvented by the
operator and that poke yoke
is on the plant's certification
program.
w Operator understands the

reason for the error proofing
method.
w Error-proofing methods
are tested for effectiveness
and, as appropriate, exist in
all areas of operation from
warehousing, part
processing, testing, and for
service parts, through part
packaging.
w Process maps, Kaizan

documents, include (1) Load
Balancing, (2) Poke Yoke,
(3) Pull/Flow Systems, (4)
Small Batch Sizes, (5) Event
Minutes, (6) Kaizan Process
Documents, (7) Kaizan
Schedules, (8) Kaizan
Resources.
w Control methods (i.e., in-
process gauging, poke
yoke, visual inspection, etc.)
are identified on the control
plan as specified in the
PFMEA and included in the
operator's standard of work.
Control methods are
modified as required.
w Sampling plans are

statistically valid (based on
quantity and variation) and
justify probability of
occurrence for a given
cause or failure mode.
w Required tools, gauges,

and other equipment are
identified for sub-tier
suppliers.
w Reaction strategies (i.e.
part containment, supervisor
notification, line shut-down,
etc.) are specified for out of
control conditions.
w Operator(s) understand
the conditions for an "Out of
Control" state.
w Reaction plans are

adhered to (i.e. can provide
when, why and what was
done when an operation
went down thru downtime
sheets, end of line metrics,
etc.)
w Roles and responsibilities

for all production and
production support
personnel are in place to
support direct labor
personnel, and have specific
responsibilities and approval
requirements if reacting to
out-of-standard conditions.
w Supplier has a selection
criteria process to assign
skilled operators to a given
function.
w There is evidence of skills

management procedure.
w Supplier manages its

training to compensate for
turnover rate.
w There is a process to
manage absenteeism,
especially for a given critical
(which is based on severity
and occurrence).
w Supplier identifies
operator skill set and
training requirements.
w As part of the APQP
process, employee staffing,
skill requirements, and
training are identified, and
support program timing.
w Supplier has a training

program and can
demonstrate compliance to
training plans.
w Training is part of the
supplier corporate
objectives
determine training needs.
"On the Job" training
recorded
and managed
w There is a planned training

program for each employee
(hourly and salary).
w There is a process in
place to address a high
turnover rate condition
w Operator
qualifications/training
records are readily available
to the production
supervisor
w Training records of key

salaried personnel (i.e., QC
manager, Incoming
Receiving
managers, etc.) are
reviewed regularly for
compliance.
w Supplier conducts training

on appropriate labor
conditions including health
and safety for all employees
on a regular basis.
w Operators understand the

application of the
component they are
producing.
w Operators understand
what is critical in the
component and what could
happen
(consequence of failure
mode) if it does not meet
specification
w Operators are/were part of

work instruction
development process
w Operators are/were
trained prior to performing
the job
w There is a defined process
where operators have the
opportunity to provide
feedback (related to the
process and/or job) to their
supervisor/manager.
Design Inputs:
identify customer design
inputs (ESOW & PMT).
w Supplier has Inputs:
Manufacturing process to
w Supplier develops a
detailed timing plan to
support Ford's program
timing deliverables &
reviews with Ford STA/PD
w Supplier management
reviews, at a minimum, the
Ford APQP manufacturing
elements to ensure proper
tracking, documentation,
and action plans.
w All new Ford programs are

being tracked according to
the Ford APQP
Requirements.
w Action plans are
developed to improve any
yellow or red APQP
elements.
Note: Refer to the APQP
documentation to ensure
met:
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/APQP.html
w Supplier's Program
Management Team is
separate from the Product
Development team, and
both are accountable to
senior management.
w Supplier's Program
Management Team has
dedicated resources to
support the program,
including key sub-tier
suppliers.
w Program Management
Team includes personnel
from the supplier's
manufacturing plant.
w Supplier's new programs
are tracked and monitored
based off of Ford's PD
milestones.
w Supplier has the required
CAD/CAM systems to
interface with Ford, and that
capability is at the supplier's
manufacturing site, where
possible. If not possible,
supplier can demonstrate
that its system utilizes
ongoing product
development activities that
impact the manufacturing
site's tooling and
processing, and that
documentation is
maintained at the
appropriate customer levels.
w Supplier's PD system is a
formalized process that
prevents verbal-only design
direction.
w Supplier uses established
Ford/Supplier links to
communicate most current
program status or potential
issues impacting its ability to
meet program expectations.
The links include, but are
not limited to, Program
Module Team (PMT)
Meetings, APQP Status
Reports, Schedule A
submissions and regular
communication with the
customer.
w Suppliers track and report
sub-tier supplier component
readiness using APQP, in
support of each applicable
deliverable and expectation
in Ford’s APQP/PPAP
Readiness Assessment
(Schedule A). For a part or
assembly identified by
FCSD (Ford Customer
Service Division) to be
serviceable, the supplier
reports any APQP
deliverable exceptions to
FCSD STA.
w Supplier is active on the

PMTs and participates in all
program reviews involving
the supplier.
w Milestone reviews are

scheduled and conducted to
communicate launch status,
open issues, and issue
closure status to supplier's
senior management.
w There is a defined plan to

communicate program
status to supplier's
manufacturing plant.
w Supplier understands its
design-responsible supplier
deliverables and has a
system in place to execute
them.
w Supplier has the

capability for design,
manufacture, adjustment
and maintenance of
dies/molds, jigs, tooling and
fixtures that are used in all
phases of production. If
these activities are
outsourced, the supplier
has the appropriate level of
control and resource for
managing toolmakers
(quality, timing etc.).
w Supplier uses Robust

Design Principles and
customer-approved
Design/Testing Lab.
w Supplier tracks and
assesses its sub-tier
suppliers for APQP
readiness.
w Supplier develops pre-
production and prototype
parts that simulate its
production process.
w Supplier verifies that all
prototype parts meet
engineering, dimensional,
and functional requirements,
including prototype parts
manufactured by sub-tier
suppliers.
w Supplier requires and

utilizes Prototype Control
Plans.
w Supplier has dedicated
resources to support all
prototype builds on site at
Ford, and an agreed
structure for managing
issues.
w Supplier understands the

RED Border Process and is
operating within the
guidelines
w Supplier supports all
vehicle walk-around, AIMS,
shortage, and change
control meetings.
w Supplier has dedicated
Ford Assembly Plant and
Vehicle Engineering
resources available to
support launch.
w Supplier launch support

personnel are technically
capable to work on any
launch issue.
w Supplier on-site launch

support personnel provide
timely responses to all
launch-related issues or
requirements.
w Supplier launch
representatives are
empowered to take
immediate action on issues
requiring fast turn-around by
the launch team.
w Supplier launch
representatives are
available for around-the-
clock access.
w Supplier addresses launch
readiness issues with Ford
by defining an owner and
action within 24 hours, and
drives closure of the issues
in an agreed-upon timely
manner.

implement any post VP
design change(s), including
revised timing/compression
timing/ costs as appropriate
supporting Phase 0

ensure cross functional
approval of the SCCAF by
<PA>
w Supplier has a cadence to
review DVP&R cross
functionally supporting
Phase 0 at TT MRD.

incorporate PV test
requirements in Phase 0
timing supporting Phase 1
PPAP at TT MRD.
w Supplier has a regular

cadence to review PPAP
timing supporting Phase 0 &
Phase 1 promise date(s).
ensure linkage between
DFMEA, PFMEA, SCCAF &
Control Plan prior to Phase
0.
w Supplier has a method to

complete & approve
Measurement System
Analysis (MSA) prior to
Phase 0.
w Supplier has a process for

Machine Acceptance
demonstrating part
compliance to specification
(including process capability
Ppk > 1.67) prior to Phase
0.
w Supplier has included

packaging approval in their
APQP work plan.
w Supplier re-assesses
capacity assumptions &
confirms APW, MPW, OEE,
Scrap, Cycle Time etc. prior
to Phase 0.
w Supplier ensures they

have training & staffing
plans that support Phase 0
& capacity ramp up.
Launch performance
guidance
w Supplier has a system that
tracks performance to meet
PSW dates.
w Supplier manages sub-tier
suppliers to assure PSW
timing is met.
notify its customers,
including buyers, of any
slips to PSW timing and
reports PPAP planning
dates in Vehicle Parts
Progress (VPP) for parts to
vehicle assembly plants or
Manufacturing Parts
Progress (MPP) for parts to
Powertrain plants.
w Supplier has a system in

place that responds to all
Ford Consumer Product
Audit (FCPA) issues, where
applicable.

contain and resolve all
FCPA issues prior to the
next build.
w Supplier validates all
FCPA fixes with the
customer prior closing any
AIMS issue.
w Supplier has a formal
system to conduct operator-
based Quality Stand Downs
on all new product or
process launches.
w Supplier drives the

operator-based Quality
Stand Down process to its
supply base.
w Supplier incorporates
Quality Stand Down
information into the
PFMEAS and Control Plans.
w Supplier has a process

to conduct Fresh Eye
Reviews on all new
products, gauges,
processes, and equipment,
and utilizes its personnel
from sister plants, divisional
and corporate staff, and/or
customers.
w Fresh Eye Review findings
are documented by the
supplier, and action plans
are developed for all areas
requiring improvement.
w Supplier has extraordinary

launch plans in place to
ensure a safe launch of its
new product.
w Supplier utilizes inspection

data to validate
extraordinary launch plans.

move out of extraordinary
containment plans only
when it has met specific
quality expectations
required by the Ford
Program Launch Team (e.g.,
3000 consecutive parts with
ZERO defects found at the
supplier's manufacturing site
or ZERO QRs at the Ford
Assembly Plant for the first
45 days post-Job#1.
Part approval guidance

PPAP (AIAG) procedures
Note: Refer to the PPAP
reference manual to ensure
met:
w PPAP documentation
must be no more than one
year old at the time of initial
PSW submission. Ford
Powertrain plants require a
copy of the PSW when parts
are shipped.
w All PPAP submissions on
record are to the latest Ford
current design released
print. (Design responsible
suppliers submit their
designs to Ford for Ford
release.)

managing Interim PPAP
submissions [with WERS
Alert] to closure of the non
conformance prior to Alert
expiration.
If an Alert is required,
supplier must:
w Select the "No" radio
button next to "These
results meet all design
requirements" under
"Submission Results".
w List the exceptions to
released Design Record full
compliance in the
"Declaration --
EXPLANATION/COMMENT
S." field.
w Include the Alert number
and description of the Alert
on the PSW under "Interim
Status".
w On PSWs with "Alerts",

the supplier has submitted a
PPAP for these parts prior to
expiration of the Alert.
Note:
If the supplier has not
received an approved PSW
for parts after Alert
expiration, the supplier is
not authorized to ship parts
to the Ford plant, and the
buyer, product engineer and
STA site engineer must be
notified.
w Substance use restrictions
conform to the latest release
of the Ford Restricted
Substance Management
Standard (RSMS) WSS-
M99P9999-A1 (includes
IMDS materials reporting
evidence, e.g., IMDS
Module ID for acceptance,
in the PPAP submission)
Note:
Refer to FSP
(https://fsp.portal.covisint.co
m/web/portal/), for the
WSS-M99P9999-A1
Standard (RSMS), and
review supplier evidence of
IMDS material reporting.
Rust inhibitors and other
chemicals that may be put
on the component for part
protection and/or for
manufacturing may require
approval from Ford
Toxicology department.
Review if approvals were
required and obtained for
any of the parts produced.
w Supplier has a production

part approval process for its
sub-tier suppliers.
w When the component is

identified by FCSD as being
serviceable, supplier
ensures that all serviceable
components from sub-tier
suppliers meet PPAP
requirements, including Ford
PPAP customer specifics,
available through
Phased_PPAP.html.
w This procedure requires
the supplier to conduct fit
and functional approval on
their sub-tier suppliers prior
to PPAP submission to Ford
w Supplier submits capacity

verification documentation
and is in compliance to all
newly launched or added
capacity parts.
Note:
Confirm APW and MPW
with buyer, if unknown
w Supplier complies with

Ford's documented capacity
verification procedure,
referenced in FSP. (Run-at-
Rate and capacity
verification are part of
Phased PPAP available on
Phased_PPAP.html)
w Supplier verifies capacity
as described in the Phased
PPAP Handbook (Phase 3
requirements) available
through the web link above.
The supplier reports
Purchased Part Capacity
(PPC) in GCP for vehicle, or
in MCPV for Powertrain, as
documented on the CAR
(Capacity Analysis Report)
and the PSW.
Note 1: Capacity
requirements from Ford
include service capacity
requirements.
Note 2: GCP and MCPV
require the input by the
supplier of APPC (Average
Purchased Part Capacity)
and MPPC (Maximum
Purchased Part Capacity).
Note 3: Supplier personnel
completing Ford's Capacity
Analysis Report for
w Supplier's supporting
documents demonstrate
compliance to Ford's
capacity requirements.
Note: Capacity requirements
may be communicated to
suppliers as part of launch
information for new parts or
via Capacity Studies either
during launch or during
mass production.
w Supplier provides timing

on all newly launched or
increased capacity parts
(e.g., Gantt charts)
w Supplier utilizes overtime

in accordance with local law.
Ford's product releases.
w Staffing support for
capacity requirements takes
into account turnover rate
and absenteeism.

communicate Ford
production requirements to
sub-tier suppliers, and
monitors and measures its
ongoing effectiveness to
ensure 100% delivery of
sub-tier supplier
components to meet
supplier/Ford demand.
w Supplier has a plan to

support capacity
requirements in case of
production interruptions due
to equipment failure and/or
sub-tier supplier
performance issues.
w Supplier has a
documented manage the
change procedure (e.g.
similar to the SREA -
Supplier Request for
Engineering Approval for
process changes).
w Supplier can validate the

procedure with a current
example of a change.

implement internal and
external suppliers' (tier 2 or
tier 3, etc.) proposed
changes, which may or may
not involve Ford.
w Supplier identifies new

CTQ metrics associated
with the change and
implements valid
measurement system(s) to
track key measurables
associated with the process
change.

effective communication to
Ford of a change using the
SREA process.
w Supplier can validate the

process using the most
recent change, either
initiated internally or by sub-
tier suppliers.
Ford usage of parts from
temporarily changed
supplier manufacturing
processes or temporary
part changes are managed
through the WERS Alert
process with an Interim
PPAP submission.
Notes:
Refer to the customer
notification section in the
PPAP manual
SREA procedure is available
on
https://web.qpr.ford.com/SR
EA.html
Note:
Ford plant functional trial
requirements are described
in the Phased PPAP
Handbook.
w Supplier has a defined

process for managing its
supply base, including
resources
to work with sub-tier
suppliers.
w Supplier has a process of

identifying sub-suppliers
with a high impact on quality
w Supplier has a means of
communication to notify high
impact sub-suppliers of their
status (i.e., e-mail, letter,
meeting minutes, database
systems, etc.).
w The Tier 1 supplier is

responsible for the quality of
the parts produced by all its
sub-tier suppliers, including
those sub-tier suppliers
directed by Ford but without
a Multi-Party Agreement.
w Where a Multi-Party
Agreement exists between
Ford, the tier 1 supplier and
the sub-tier supplier, the
responsibilities of all parties
(Ford, Tier 1 and Sub-Tier)
are all understood and
implemented by each
responsible party.
w Supplier has a plan in

place to develop value
stream maps of their tier 1
and 2 suppliers
Note:
Communication includes
FMEAs, control plans, pass-
through characteristics
(where required), and
PPAPs.
Sub-tier supplier sourcing

guidance
w The sourcing process
assesses and selects sub-
tier suppliers based on
defined assessment criteria.
E.g..:
- internal and external
quality indicators,
- System certifications
(Quality, EMS, Logistics,
etc.),
- Compliance to applicable
Customer Specific
requirements
- Compliance to applicable
AIAG released CQI
standards & Ford Special
Process Requirements
Ford_GTS.html
- Previous / Current launch
performance,
- Delivery performance
- Feasibility commitment to
meet quality, timing and
capacity for the sourcing

includes managing sub-tier
suppliers directed by Ford
with or without multi-party
agreement. Where a multi-
party agreement exists
between Ford, the tier 1
supplier and the sub-tier
supplier, the responsibilities
of all parties (Ford, Tier 1
and Sub tier) are all
understood and
implemented by each
responsible party
requires timely
communication of
appropriate sourcing
information to the sub-tier
suppliers like CAD, Volume,
Timing, Logistics,
Technical/Technology
Requirements, Processing
requirement /Special
process requirements,
Material requirements,
Special characteristics/ES
requirements etc.

requires review & planning
(as appropriate) for Tier 1
resources to manage the
new sourcing. Resource
could include but not limited
manpower, space,
equipment etc.
w Sub-tier supplier
compliance to ISO/TS
16949 is demonstrated
through tier 1 second party
assessment or third party
registration of the sub-tier
supplier. ISO/TS 16949 sub
supplier development
requirements may be
satisfied by tier 1 second
party assessment.
Suppliers are encouraged to
apply the principles outlined
in “CQI-19 AIAG
Sub-tier Supplier
Management Process
Guideline” to manage all
their sub-tier suppliers.
Additionally, Ford reserves
the right to require the
suppliers to apply the
principles outlined in “CQI-
19 AIAG Sub-tier Supplier
Management Process
Guideline” to address issues
identified by Ford in the
supplier's sub-tier supplier
development and
management process. Ford
will communicate the
requirement to apply CQI-
19 to the specifically
selected supplier based on
sub-tier supplier
w Supplier visits sub-tier
suppliers on a
predetermined frequency
and conducts on-site
assessments.

evidence of these
assessments
w Supplier communicates
working conditions
expectations to sub-tier
suppliers and requires
compliance to local labor
law as specified in the
Supplier Social
Responsibility Web Guide
https://web.fsp.ford.com/gtc/
docs/hrandwc.pdf .
Sub-tier supplier APQP

tracking
w The supplier uses the
Ford specified Sub-tier
supplier APQP tracking
matrix or equivalent to track
& report progress at each
GPDS Milestones per the
following link
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Sub_Tier_APQP.h
w Wherever sub-tier supplier

APQP progress is not
meeting Ford GPDS
requirements, extra ordinary
action plans are developed
& tracked regularly to meet
Ford requirements. These
are documented in the
External supplier
APQP/PPAP readiness
assessment - Schedule A
and/or in the supplier APQP
launch QOS.
w The supplier provides

appropriate design inputs
(DFMEA, YS/YC), Ford /
Tier 1 TGWs / TGRs / BSAQ
/ Standards (Design or
Manufacturing as
applicable) to sub-tier
supplier as an input to their
FMEA process
w The systemic actions in

the link below are referred to
and appropriately addressed
in the sub-tier supplier
APQP as part of failure
mode avoidance
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/TGW_summary_fo
w Supplier ensures that all
sub-tier supplier PPAP
requirements are met,
including fit and part
functional approval of parts /
materials / assemblies by
the tier 1 prior to getting
PPAP approval from Ford at
each step of Phased PPAP,
consistent with Global
Phased PPAP
(https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta
/Phased_PPAP.html).
w The sub-tier supplier

compliance to PPAP
requirements is documented
by the supplier in their tier 1
PPAP submission to Ford,
or is available for review
upon Ford request. When
the component is identified
by FCSD as being
serviceable, the supplier
ensures that the Ford
service part number is
included in sub-tier PPAP
documents.
w Supplier updates PPAP for

any change in production
part or process.
w When a PPAP is
submitted to Ford, all sub-
tier supplier PPAPs are
updated if the original PPAP
documentation is more than
one year old.
w The supplier has a

process to manage sub-tier
supplier requests for change
or deviations from the
approved PPAP. The
process is consistent with
the requirements of the Ford
SREA process (see the
following link).
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/SREA.html
w The supplier has a

documented agreement with
their sub-tier suppliers to
identify Special
Characteristics (CC, SC, HI,
or OS), Pass Through
Characteristics (PTC) and
their control methods. This
agreement cascades, at a
minimum, the sub-tier
supplier responsible
characteristics in Ford's
Special Characteristics
Communication and
Agreement Form (SCCAF)
or equivalent.
w The supplier ensures

controls methods and
sampling strategies are
statistically valid and
appropriate, refer to the
AIAG published SPC
manual, available through
w The supplier has

documented records of sub-
tier supplier compliance to
Engineering Specifications,
Special Characteristics and
PTC, as applicable
w Where pass-through
characteristics are required,
supplier has a process to
identify and manage sub-tier
supplier pass-through
characteristics, utilizing
error-proofing methods.
w The PTC control process
requires identification of the
PTC in sub-tier supplier's
PFMEA and control
plan/work instructions, and
evidence exists that the
supplier has validated the
sub-tier supplier's PFMEA
and control plan to ensure
the following:
- All part characteristics are
considered against the
definition below.
- All pass-through
characteristics are to
customer specifications,
regardless of the tier level of
manufacture
- Controls used are
appropriate regarding
method and frequency.
- Sub-tier supplier has
utilized error proofing
methods wherever possible
Note: A "Pass Through

Characteristic" is one that is
NOT subsequently checked
beyond the sub-tier supplier
or tier 1 supplier that
generated it
w The supplier assesses

sub-tier supplier
performance based on
defined criteria. E.g. QRs,
PPM, Warranty, Response
time to customer
complaints, Delivery
performance , CPU, R/1000
w Supplier verifies sub-tier
supplier compliance by
annual on-site assessments
of high impact sub-tier
supplier facilities to Quality
System, Product
Requirements and Ford
customer specific
requirements

evidence of these
assessments and upon
request is made available
for Ford STA review
w There is evidence of
annual dimensional
validation (layout) of all
parts from sub-tier suppliers
(regardless of sub-tier
supplier business
relationship with Ford).

in place that defines how to
manage sub-suppliers
generated defects (e.g., 8D
review process), including
permanent corrective action
verification process
w Sub-suppliers have a
documented problem
solving methodology.
in place to conduct random
incoming quality audits to
verify effectiveness of the
corrective actions
implemented by a sub-
supplier.
w Supplier ensures sub-
suppliers' 8D or equivalent
corrective action review
process includes notification
to FCSD (Ford Customer
Service Division) STA for
any required containment
action for FCSD identified
serviceable components.
w The supplier's capacity

process defines the
methodology for capacity
assessments and timing
milestones for completing
the sub-tier supplier
capacity assessments. For
method guidance, refer to
the Ford Motor Company
Capacity Analysis Report
User Guide through the link
below.
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Phased_PPAP.htm
w The supplier demonstrates

the effectiveness of its
documented sub-tier
capacity assurance process
using an example of sub-tier
supplier capacity
assessment meeting Ford's
capacity requirements (APW
and MPW) at appropriate
GPDS deliverables (25 -
Capacity Planning, 19
Phase 0 PPAP, 30, Phase 3
PPAP) or for a post-launch
capacity change.
w The supplier ensures the
sub-tier suppliers have
contingency plans to
support Ford's capacity
requirements without any
interruption, e.g. in the case
of key equipment failure.
w Supplier's special
characteristics are identified
for incoming inspection,
as appropriate.
w The frequency of
inspection is greater on high
risk sub-tier suppliers
w Incoming quality is defined

on control plans
w If incoming inspections
are made, supplier shows
compliance to the
specifications
w Supplier has supporting
rationale if no incoming
inspections are made.
w Supplier has an operator-

based SPC control plan in
place
w Supplier has a
containment policy for
incoming quality (i.e.,
tagging, identifying type of
defect, log of defects, 8D
review process).
w Supplier has a resolution

process for incoming
inspection rejects, including
notification to FCSD (Ford
Customer Service Division)
STA for rejects associated
with any FCSD identified
serviceable components.
w Supplier assigns
responsibility for resolution,
progress is being tracked,
and sufficient time is
allocated to implement
permanent corrective action.

review sub-tier supplier
quality systems.
w When non-conformities
are present, supplier and
sub-tier supplier have
specific reaction plans
w Work instructions have
all of the necessary details,
including quality acceptance
criteria, process and product
control parameters,
reference to product
drawing release level and
date, specific/special
gauges and tools required,
reaction plan for process
and product non-
compliance, point of contact,
etc.

to identify those
changes which require an
initial production quality
check, e.g. changes or
adjustment of tooling, tool
refurbishment, restart of a
machine after a shut-down,
rotational of personnel with
operator dependent
processes, etc. The
supplier should also record
the results of the initial
production quality check.

operator compliance to the
work instructions.

that operators are
adequately trained and
supervised in correctly
carrying out their process
function in line with the
available documented
instructions, including the
correct disposition of set-up
and scrap parts.
w Wherever possible, visual
aids are employed at the
work station to define and
focus on compliance/non-
compliance.
w If there is a multi-lingual
workforce, supplier can
demonstrate work
instructions are understood.
w Operators understand the

consequences of non-
compliant parts and
subsequent failure reaching
the customer (i.e.,
downstream operation or to
the end customer).
w Supplier has a process of

notifying customers if non-
conforming product has left
the supplier's facility.
w Supplier has a
containment process if non-
compliant parts reach the
customer.
w Work instructions specify
a reaction plan if suspect or
non-compliant parts get
through the system.
w This procedure and/or

reaction plan instructs the
operator or quality activity
on what to do next.
w Control plans are accurate

and up to date with latest
product/drawing and
process revisions.
For more information, refer
to the AIAG Production Part
Approval Process (PPAP)
manual or the Statistical
Process Control Manual
(SPC) .
w Supplier has an operator-

based statistical process
control or process
monitoring method in place
(e.g., histogram, control
charts, records of process
conformance with rotation of
personnel or after
unplanned shutdowns, etc.).
w These methods of control

are appropriate for the given
process or product
characteristics (i.e., X bar -
R chart, Individual Moving
Range chart, np charts,
median charts, etc. -- SPC
toolbox).
w The process is equipped

with process controls, in-line
gauging, etc.
w Supplier reviews data and

makes appropriate
improvements to the
process.
w The operator-based charts
are being utilized to drive
changes within the process
w The operator-based charts

capture what changes have
been made to the process to
enable verification that
adjustment is statistically
beneficial (e.g., passes 2-
proportion or 2 Sample T
test) to the process (tooling
changes, machine down
time, die change, etc.)
w Evidence of process
improvements include:
reductions in scrap,
reductions in rework/repair,
and DPU; increases in first-
time through capabilities,
Rolled Throughput Yield
(YRT), Ppk, Process Sigma
level, records of error
proofing mechanism
implementation; and
reductions in machine
downtime.
w Operator-based SPC
charts capture when a
change has been made and
that the process has been
effectively improved by
statistically different before
and after data.
w The equipment operator

uses the charts to monitor
for out of control conditions.
w The cause for an out of
control condition is identified
and recorded by the
equipment operator,
including any action to
remedy condition.
w The charts are reviewed

by the equipment operator
for recurring patterns and
corresponding reaction
plans are sufficient
w If a new cause has been

identified, the equipment
operator has a method to
communicate issues,
through the appropriate
channels, to the process
owner to ensure that
FMEAs/Control plan/work
instructions, etc. are
updated.
w Supplier has a Ppk

tracking mechanism in
place.
w Where the supplier has
reduced the frequency of
SPC charting, there is
statistical evidence to
support this reduction and/or
some other method of
control is in place. (i.e., they
become part of a preventive
maintenance program, tool
management program, die
maintenance / replacement
program, equipment
vibration analysis program,
etc.).
w Appropriate control
methods using Key Process
Input Variables for CCs are
to be reviewed and
approved by the STA
engineer or a Ford Technical
/ Process Specialist
Possible control methods
include:
w Poke yoke
w Statistical sampling of
product characteristics in
conjunction with continuous
monitoring and control of
Key Process Input Variables
as appropriate for the
specific process
w 100% inspection
integrated into the
manufacturing process with
automatic lockout
w Supplier has a method of

analyzing and managing
statistically generated data
(SPC charts) on the
manufacturing process(es)
that produce Ford part(s),
e.g., Six Sigma.
w Ppk data is used to drive

process enhancements that
have an impact on product
characteristics (e.g., moving
upstream to manage KPIV
[Key Process Input Variable]
characteristics, such as, tool
feed rate and speed, coolant
temperature, bearing failure
rate, tool management
strategy, etc.), including
appropriate.
w If supplier is not
statistically monitoring
process/product, how is
capability ensured?
w For all Ford identified
special characteristics (e.g.,
SCs), Ppk is > 1.67 (initial
and final process capability)
and 1.33 (for on-going
production process
capability), including sub-
Note 1: Final Process

Capability is demonstrated
at Phase 3 PPAP.
Note 2: On-going production
process capability is
demonstrated using the
same sample size and
calculation methods as
those used for initial process
capability (Ppk calculated
using 25 subgroups of 5
parts), but using
measurements collected as
part of the Control Plan
sampling strategy defined in
the Control Plan for each
SC and HI.
w If variable data is used on

HIs (where applicable), then
Ppk levels for the HI
Characteristic are greater
than 1.67 (initial process
capability) and 1.33 (for on-
going production process
capability).
w If SCs or HIs (where
applicable) are not capable,
then per PPAP, integrated
100% inspection or poke
yoke controls are
incorporated into the
manufacturing process and
Control Pans are in place to
ensure that product is
validated prior to shipment,
and robust corrective action
plans are in place to
improve the process
capability.
w Ppk values are only

calculated for processes
that are stable, in control
and of known statistical
distribution.
Note:
CRITICAL
CHARACTERISTICS (CC):
Critical characteristics are
designated with the inverted
delta symbol (s) and are
those product requirements
(dimensions, performance
tests, etc.) or process
parameters (rates,
temperatures, pressures,
etc.) that can affect
compliance with government
regulations, or safe
vehicle/product function,
and which require specific
producer, assembly,
shipping or monitoring
action and the inclusion on
the Control Plan.
SIGNIFICANT
CHARACTERISTICS (SC):
Significant Characteristics
are those product, process,
and test requirements that
are important for customer
satisfaction and for which
Quality Planning actions
must be addressed in a
Control Plan.
HIGH IMPACT
CHARACTERISTIC (HI):
High Impact Characteristics
are related to parameters
w Supplier has procedures
in place to qualify new
equipment, specifically for
SCs, HIs and CCs
For more information, refer

to the AIAG Measurement
Systems Analysis (MSA)
manual (hyperlink below):
w Supplier can validate

gauge availability on-site per
the control plan.
w Gauges are available on-

site with the appropriate
capability (e.g., appropriate
gauge, measurement
method and datum point) to
meet the measurement
requirements of the control
plan.
In exceptional
circumstances, if
measurement capability is
not available on-site, the
supplier has a defined
strategy for using a third
party for this item, including
timing and availability.
w Where poke yokes are
used, the poke yoke
equipment is included in the
calibration schedule and is
validated regularly (e.g. at
the beginning and end of
each shift) using a test
"rabbit".
w Test "rabbits" used to
verify poke yoke
functionality are included in
the supplier's calibration and
maintenance schedule.
w Supplier has evidence that

a published schedule is
followed and on-track for the
calibration and maintenance
of inspection, measuring
and test equipment
(including test software).
w Gauging procedures with

visual aids are posted at the
work station
w Supplier has a gauge R

& R tracking mechanism in
place.
w Both company and
personal gauges are
evaluated and tracked.
w There is a process in
place to drive compliance.
w Is the tracking system

automated or manual?
w If variable gauges are
not being used, supplier can
provide solid justification as
to why not.
w Gauge R&R studies may

also completed with attribute
gauges (see PPAP
customer specifics,
Ford_Specifics_for_PPAP.p
df).
w Gauge R&R studies are
to be completed for all
gauges used to check Ford
product regardless of type
or measurement system.
w Method and frequency of

gauge R&R is specified for
every measurement system,
including attribute gauge
R&R.
w Supplier has evidence

that any employee who uses
a gauge follows the same
measurement processes for
the gauge as the employees
who participated in the
original gauge R&R study
w Where AIAG MSA

guidelines are not met, an
improvement plan is
available.
Note:
It is recommended that
gauge error be held within
an acceptable level. gauges
with an error greater than
10% must be reviewed
against the tolerance and
associated risks are
evaluated.
While Gauge R&R
requirements are typically
percent of study, to
determine the ability of the
gauging to discriminate
between parts, where a
process is highly capable, it
may be appropriate to use
percent of tolerance to
demonstrate that the
gauging can identify part
compliance to specification.
See customer specifics
Ford_Specifics_for_PPAP.p
df
Note:
Efforts must be made to
conduct measurement
correlation studies (i.e., a
method of inspection
between the supplier and
the receiving plant). Some
of the gauges may require
isolators to reduce the
impact of the manufacturing
equipment vibration on the
measurement.
w Operators know and

understand the procedure
w Records of
dropped/damaged gauges
are in compliance
w Supplier has a gauge
maintenance program.
w Records show
compliance. If supplier is
using gauge blocks to
qualify micrometers and
calipers, then they are
certified to National Institute
of Standards & Technology
(NIST) or international
equivalent.
w Evidence is recorded that

error proofing devices are
tested for all failure modes
on the shop floor at a
regular frequency (e.g., daily
or at the start of each shift)
to ensure they work.
w The frequency of checks

should be set to correspond
to the divisions between
homogeneous lots of
production.
w Supplier has controls and
processes in place for
handling rework, repair, and
scrap, which include
documentation, evaluation,
segregation, quarantine,
disposition and recording.
w Work instructions for

management of rework,
repair, scrap, etc., have all
of the necessary details,
including quality acceptance
criteria, process and product
control parameters,
reference to product
drawing release level and
date, specific/special
gauges and tools required.
w Applicable service
processes should be
followed regarding the re-
use of parts if an assembly
is disassembled and re-
assembled for any reason
(e.g., rework).
w Supplier ensures that

rework operation does not
by-pass any quality
operation performed in the
original process and
assures that part conforms
to customer requirements.

to evaluate if further
traceability is required for
reworked components.
w Individual parts are

identified for traceability,
when and where feasible,
including segregation of
reworked product.
to ensure that the part is not
reworked more than once
for the same issue.
w The supplier must have

evidence that the process
for marking of parts with
their part numbers (direct
marking and labelling) is
evaluated in the PFMEA and
appropriate actions taken as
necessary
w Supplier’s procedures
require verification that part
branding is in compliant to
Vehicle Parts Branding
Directive E-108 for any new
tooled parts after 8/1/2002
and is evaluated using Part
Trademark Compliance
Check Sheet. Branding
verification include sub-tier
supplier components for all
part or assembly identified
to be serviceable by FCSD
(Ford Customer Service
Division) .
w Automated ID scanning
systems must be subject to
a Measurement System
Analysis to check for
capability.
w Processes at suppliers
and sub suppliers to be risk
assessed for :-
- Potential for different parts
to be mixed together.
- Potential for a part to be
dispatched incomplete.
- Potential for assemblies to
have wrong components
fitted (mis-builds).
- Potential for a part to be
dispatched under the wrong
identity.
The whole production route
(including all processing
operations,
rework/rectification, storage
and dispatch areas) is to be
reviewed as part of the risk
assessment.
Note:
A good system should
identify "where the part has
been and where it is going."
Everything has its place
identified and it must be in
its place. (All parts outside
of a production area (i.e.,
offices, labs, testing etc.)
must have identification
tag).
w Where supplier has a lot

traceability system in
operation, system is capable
communicating information
to Ford, as required.
w All aspects of part
handling throughout the
production process should
be monitored for the
occurrence of handling or
storage damage. There
should be documented
analysis and corrective
action plans to eliminate the
cause of functional defects.

involvement in package
design and testing, and
improvements are being
made to ensure product
quality
w Should supplier have

responsibility for maintaining
returnable dunnage, there is
a process for reviewing
internal and external
transportation bins for
structural damage and
holes. (Potential for Hi-Lo
forks causing product
damage.)
w Supplier should define

the disposition of parts that
are dropped in the course of
production
w Where stacking
standards exist, the supplier
should define the
acceptance standard for any
stacking of components.

reviewing storage areas all
environmental and adverse
conditions are considered in
the entire design of
packaging and facilities.
w Returnable Ford dunnage
is appropriately maintained
and cleaned, if supplier
responsible. Measures are
taken to repair or replace
worn or broken dunnage.
w Supplier dunnage is Ford

approved and documented.

MMOG/LE requirement.
Results are available.
FCSD (Ford Customer
Service division) packaging
requirements for all Ford
service shipments as
defined in the global
Packaging Website through
Ford Supplier Portal FCSD
page
https://web.purinfo.ford.com/
on Covisint. Evidence of
compliance is included in
PPAP documents and
supported by packaging
visual aids.
w "Ford Plant Specific"

packaging instructions are
posted, when required.
w Supplier has a
documented process in
place to ensure that the
latest Engineering
Specifications (ES) are
accessible (ED, SDS, MS,
etc.), including for sub-tier
w Supplier complies with all

blueprint and/or engineering
specification requirements
(ES, SDS, MS, etc.)
including at sub-tier
- Supplier complies with
Critical to Quality process
requirements as specified in
the Supplier Manufacturing
Health Charts, including at
appropriate. Results are
available. See
Supplier_Manufacturing_He
alth_Charts.html on Ford
Supplier Portal for the
requirements.
w Supplier has an
engineering specification
(ES) failure procedure
including at sub-tier
w Reaction plans include

directions on who is to act, if
production is to stop, what
shipments are to stop or to
be recalled, and what
actions are deemed
necessary to protect and
notify Ford, including Ford
Customer Service Division
(FCSD) for affected FCSD
identified serviceable parts.
w Supplier can verify that a
valid heat treat system
assessment exists, for all
heat treated components
and all requirements are
met. W-HTX is the Ford
manufacturing standard to
control heat-treating
processes and auxiliary
equipment. This includes:
Process Monitoring Test
Frequencies, Laboratory
Control Test Frequencies,
In-process Test
Frequencies, and the
minimum requirements for
each heat treat process type
defined within W-HTX
w The tier 1 supplier is

responsible to ensure that
all tiers of suppliers are
assessed to the applicable
Ford manufacturing process
standards.
Refer to
Ford_GTS.html on Ford
Supplier Portal for all these
standards except CQI-xx ,
which are available through
AIAG.
w The CQI-9 Special
Process: Heat Treat System
Assessment is to be used to
assess all heat treat
processes annually,
regardless of tier level, and
each item in the assessment
is to be rated one of the
following:
w "Satisfactory", if the
requirements are met,
w "Not Satisfactory" if the
requirements are not met or
w "Needs Immediate
Action" if a non conforming
product is suspected or
found.
If there are any "Not
Satisfactory" or "Needs
Immediate Action" findings,
corrective action plans are
to be developed and
implemented within 90 days.
"Needs Immediate Action"
requires containment.
See
Ford_GTS.html on Ford
Supplier Portal for the
requirements.
w Supplier has a process in

place to improve the
management, maintenance,
and life-cycle of equipment
and tooling.
w Supplier's maintenance
program includes a process
for reviewing manufacturing
equipment and material
handling systems (e.g.,
guards, conveyor belts, etc.)
w The supplier ensures that

PM is conducted according
to the schedule for all
processes that impact all
part characteristics,
especially SCs and CCs,
as appropriate.
department tracks
unscheduled downtime
versus scheduled downtime,
and develops improvement
actions to eliminate causes
of unscheduled downtime
program incorporates
product Special
Characteristics in PM
process
w Lessons from events due

to unscheduled downtime
are incorporated into the
scheduled maintenance
program to improve OEE.
w The maintenance
schedule has specific
responsibilities assigned.
w Supplier's predictive
maintenance is based on
valid statistical methods.
w There are minutes of
management meetings
related to the PM program.
w Supplier has adequate
spare parts on hand based
on historical equipment
maintenance records and
equipment vendor
recommendations
w Trend/performance charts
demonstrate effectiveness
of PM program (i.e., up-time
trend)
w New failure modes and

causes identified from the
PM program that affect part
quality (scheduled or
unscheduled) have been
looped back to the product's
PFMEA, control plans, and
work instructions.
w Supplier has a detailed

process to verify part quality
from planned or unplanned
downtime
w Machine acceptance after
maintenance downtime may
include first piece approval,
material testing, dimensional
and / or process capability
w For catastrophic events,

repeat the initial machine
acceptance process as
appropriate to the severity of
the event
plan also includes risk
assessment for any PM
deviation.
Deviation from the PM plan
requires management
approval.
w Supplier's PM process
utilizes Six Sigma, Lean
Manufacturing tools or
surrogate data when
historical data are not
available
w Baseline maintenance
plan may be based on
manufacturer's
recommendations and pre-
launch control plan

which defines authorized
personnel to gain access to
update any Programmable
Control Systems (PLC,
CNC, Automation HMI, etc.)
w Supplier's authorized
personnel list is cascaded to
the production and
maintenance team(s)
w Supplier's machine
acceptance process
includes a step to remove
any bypass needed for
machine debugging

identify and delete old /
obsolete Programmable
Control Systems (PLC,
CNC, Automation HMI, etc.)
software
review manufacturing /
repair / rework processing
and shipping areas for "any"
potential to contaminate or
damage finished parts,
including the dunnage prior
to shipping to customer
plant(s) (e.g., finished
machined parts, bearings,
seals/gaskets, brakes, fuel
and power steering lines,
hoses, etc. cannot accept
"any" contamination.
Contamination in the raw
materials for injection
molded and powdered metal
components can impact
product quality and
performance.).
w Where supplier identifies

areas of concerns, actions
plans are developed to
implement improvements,
and closure of issues is
documented.
w There is a documented
procedure for plant
cleanliness, housekeeping,
and labor conditions as
mandated by local law and
customer expectations.
w There is adequate lighting

for inspection, measuring,
and test equipment
w Supplier's QOS
performance review has
safety as one of the metrics
w Supplier's QOS
performance review tracks
injuries related to ergonomic
issues
w Supplier has a process in
place to assess physical
and chemical risk to workers
as well as appropriate
health and safety measures
in place to mitigate risk.
w Emergency systems are in

place and well
communicated to
employees.
Supplier is driving
continuous improvement
utilizing JIT production
principles listed below:
w Continuous flow
processing, one piece flow
or controlled batch size.
w Supplier only produces to

customer demand (Takt).
w Supplier produces to
replenishment Pull signal.
w Supplier controls batch

size by lowering changeover
time (SMED).
w Lean principles and Six

Sigma are integrated into
corporate objectives.
Supplier is driving
continuous improvement by
utilizing automation
w A system that stops the
process when defects are
detected.
w Rapid supervisor alert, a
signal that a defect has
been detected.
w High intensity use of error-
proofing (poke yoke).
w Supplier is driving
continuous improvement by
utilizing flexible labor
process and system
w Flexible machine/cell
design. Machines that
provide maximum efficiency
and flexibility.
w Cell combination: Multiple
product cell maximizing
labor efficiency.
w Supplier drives continuous

improvement by utilizing
planned and structured
workstation and cell Kaizan
w Line side, metrics based

problem resolution with
team leaders. Operators
and team leaders improve
effectiveness of work cell.
w Structured workstation-
level improvement activity:
Operators and team leaders
improve effectiveness of
work cell.
w Structured cell-level
improvement activity: A
system that encourages
metrics based continuous
improvement actions and
recognizes employee
contributions.
w Employee recognition
program: A system that
encourages continuous
improvement actions and
recognizes employee
contributions.
w Supplier understands and

uses lean and Six Sigma
metrics
w Supplier uses lean
manufacturing and Six
Sigma principles to
eliminate waste and to
manage its production, and
is comparable to Ford's
specified lean and Six
Sigma metrics.
w Lean and Six Sigma

metrics are used to drive
improvement and process
variability reduction.
Note:
For more information and/or
training, refer to the Global
STA Training and Education
web-site on Ford Supplier
Portal:
https://www.lean.ford.com/
w Supplier has a
documented problem
solving methodology.
w Supplier has clearly
described systemic root
cause and corrective
actions, which can be found
in the actual process, work
instructions, control plans,
or procedures implemented
in similar processes in all
similar facilities of the
supplier, to prevent
recurrence.
w There is a linkage to
FMEAs and control plans
incorporating lessons
learned.
w Supplier uses Six Sigma
and 8D principles and all of
the appropriate statistical
quality tools to identify root
cause.
w Supplier shows evidence

that Six Sigma metrics and
8Ds are driving to systemic
resolutions preventing
recurrence of the identified
failure modes, and tracked
and closed with Ford
assembly plants on a timely
basis.
w Work force is trained in

problem-solving
methodologies (e.g., 8D, Six
Sigma Green Belt/Black
Belt)
w Supplier tracks internal

quality issues, utilizing 6
Sigma DMAIC or 8D
problem-solving
methodology.
w Supplier reviews pareto
charts (or other analysis
tool) of recent problems and
implements 6 Sigma project
based error-proofing, where
applicable.
Note:
Prioritization should be
based on importance to the
customer as defined by
CTQ.

to communicate corrective
actions and process
improvements resulting from
problem solving efforts
within its organization and to
similar areas.
w CTQ Customer complaints

are communicated to
operators.
w Supplier includes
appropriate production
operators as part of the
problem solving team
capture lessons learned
w Lessons learned are built
back into the work
instructions and procedures
w Lessons learned are

incorporated in the current
and new programs
w Supplier takes lessons

learned and incorporates
them into all similar
processes.
w If supplier's Q1
endorsement has been
rescinded by a Ford
customer plant based on the
supplier demonstrated QR
trend or 3MIS warranty
R/1000 and CPU
performance, the supplier
has submitted a CAP
(corrective action plan) to
STA within 30 days
addressing the underlying
root cause.
Note:
Failure to do so may
represent a 'violation of
trust' and trigger a Q1
recommend revoke signal in
SIM.
w Supplier reviews its

previous launches with Ford
PD, VO, and STA, utilizing
an 8-D process to address
issues.
w PD lessons learned are

formalized within the
supplier's design
development system.
w Supplier has a system in
place to capture and archive
lessons learned,
systemically implementing
the corrective actions to
prevent recurrence of the
failure modes identified.
w Supplier develops and

implements agreed-upon
work plans to assure
successful launches going
forward.

MSA Dec

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

MSA Dec

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Changed Date:

Calculations - Hide this column

Supplier must list evidence to support

Expectation Element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

Yellow: (0) RED sub-elements and (1) or more YELLOW sub-elements

Expectation Sub-element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

I. Planning for Manufacturing Process Capability

INC I.1. Quality procedures ISO/TS16949 QOS

INC I.2. FMEAs/Control Plans

-- Operation number / name

-- Part Name / Part Number

-- SC, CC, HI (where applicable), and Engineering

-- Error proofing methods

-- Sample Size and frequency

-- Required tools, gauges, and other equipment

-- Reaction plans must clearly direct the operator on

INC I.5. Manage the Change

II. Demonstration of Manufacturing Process Capability

INC II.1. Sub-tier supplier Quality Management

Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking

INC II.2. Control of Incoming Quality

INC II.3 Control Plans / Operator Instructions

INC II.5. Measurement System Capability, Calibration and U

INC II.6. Control of Parts/Part Identification/Packaging/Shi

INC II.7 Testing/Engineering Specifications

Supplier ensures that the maintenance plan program

Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material,

INC II.10 Problem Solving/Corrective Actions

LOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN

ore YELLOW sub-elements

d RED, YELLOW or GREEN

ctation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / Item Complete

LLOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN

SFL,Autolec Div.Plant II, is third party

Certification body - INTERTEK

Certification body - INTERTEK

SFL,Autolec Div.Plant II, is third party

Certification body - INTERTEK

Yes.Quality manual of SFL Autolec, Plant 2

Also Ford CSR manual is referenced to

Yes.Supplier has a documented process to

Yes. Customer expections monitored

Yes. Supplier has an documented process

SFL, Autolec Plant 2 continual

Monthly review are conducted for QOS

Yes.Supplier monitors field return pumps

ed RED, YELLOW or GREEN

Yes.Supplier has documented process for

Yes,OP 1010 Oil pump machining gear

Oil pump/98MM 6600 D9C

Yes,Presence on control plan

Yes,Reaction plan clearly explained how to

LLOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN

ed RED, YELLOW or GREEN

Yes.Supplier has a selection criteria

Skill assessment and training plan

LLOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN

ed RED, YELLOW or GREEN

APQP tracking mechanism in place,

Yes.supplier doing capacity verification as

ed RED, YELLOW or GREEN

Yes.Supplier has a documented

Yes.Supplier effectively reviews and

LLOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN