John Deere Process Verification Audit - Instructions

Background
This on-site audit is intended for parts with a high level of criticality to determine the effectiveness and
conformance of process controls when performing work for John Deere. The work performed can include
manufacturing operations at a John Deere or supplier' facility, or operations sub-contracted (sub-tier). This
audit may also be performed on similar parts when the work has not yet been sourced, or when preparing for
full production. It is intended to be conducted by John Deere personnel familiar with the requirements of the
JDS-G223 Supplier Quality Manual, the requirements of the selected parts, and processes used in
manufacturing the selected parts.

This audit is not intended to cover the supplier's or John Deere's entire quality system. To conduct a thorough
review of the supplier's quality system, an audit must be conducted an using the JDS-G223 Supplier Quality
System Audit Questionnaire and led by a qualified Lead Auditor. A review of John Deere's quality system is
conducted with internal audits by trained auditors or consultants.

The lead auditor and team members must be qualified to conduct a Process Verification Audit.

Instructions
Prior to the on-site audit, review the most recent part specifications (drawing) and Control Plan on file for
relevance, design level, and date. Also, review any other pertinent data or documents, such as key
characteristics, Gage R&R studies, capability study information, Materials Engineering report / material
certification, inspection data, FMEAs, internal and external failure data, and/or the supplier's internal
procedures.

Schedule the on-site audit with the part manufacturer at a time when the identified parts are being produced
with the processes to be audited, and when manufacturing personnel are available to help guide the audit. The
on-site audit is led by a qualified John Deere auditor trained in the Process Verification Audit process, and who
is familiar with quality processes and tools. The audit team should have representatives who are familiar with
the processes and parts being audited. The audit sequence should follow the order of the steps of the process.

Score each question on the checklist with a whole number from 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest possible score.
If the question is not applicable, select NA in the scoring field. NA questions are excluded from the final score
Total Point and Percentage calculations. Scoring definitions are on the checklist. Up to five part numbers or
families may be audited per worksheet.

When all the questions are scored, a total score and percentage is automatically calculated. To display scores
to the supplier, you may want to group the data by selecting "1" in the top left corner of the spreadsheet. This
will hide the comment fields. Select "2" to display the comments. Non-conformances (all questions scored as
1) require corrective action. List the corrective action request description and other follow-up actions in the
Audit Summary and Corrective Action section. Enter corrective action requests into NCCA. Document the
NCCA number on the audit report.

Data Storage
After completing the audit report, please send it to your division quality audit system coordinator to file in the
Supplier Qualification System (SQS) located in JD Supply Network. Delete the audit instructions and change
history prior to filing the audit.

Completed audits can be viewed in the Supplier Qualification System (SQS).

 John Deere Process Verification Audit - Checklist
Supplier Name: Survey Date(s):
Supplier Number: Supplier Contact(s):
Supplier Address:

Supplier Phone Number:

Supplier E-Mail: Supplier Fax Number:
Audit Team Leader: Audit Team Members:
Reason for Audit:

Date of Last John Deere Assessment or Survey (if any):

Process(es) / Product(s) Audited:

Note: Secure copy of certification(s) if not provided in advance

Quality System Certification, Registrar, and Date of Certificate Expiration (ISO, ISO/TS, etc.):

Environmental System Certification, Registrar & Date of Expiration (ISO 14001):

Health & Safety System Certification, Registrar & Date of Expiration (ISO 18001):

Audit Summary and Corrective Action

Total Audit Points: 0 Total Possible Points: 0 Percent: NOT SCORED
Audit Summary:

Corrective Action Required (if any): NCCA #(s):

GENERAL SCORING CRITERIA

Rating Score ** Ability to meet requirement in question: Corrective Action
Does Not Apply NA Requirement is not applicable. No action required
1 Requirement is not met or partially met. There is no Requires Corrective Action
evidence of implementation or documentation, or major Request (CAR), Document
Does Not Comply inconsistencies in implementation or documentation (major in NCCA
non-conformance).

2 Requirement is met but there are minor inconsistencies in Opportunity for

implementation or documentation, or is in the early phases Improvement.
Needs Improvement and only preliminary evidence of implementation Recommend CAR,
effectiveness exists. but not required
3 Requirement is met, effectively implemented, and fully No action required
Complies
documented.
** A supplier must have a score of 2 or greater on each of the questions to be acceptable.

498416278.xls Page 2 of 6 Print Date: 11/09/2020

 John Deere Process Verification Audit - Checklist
Supplier Name: Survey Date(s):
Score each question using a 1 to 3 point scale, where 3 is the best possible score. Input NA for non-applicable questions.
Process Verification Audit Checklist
Part Number(s) or Families:
A. Document Control
# n Question Score
1 Is the part print to the current Revision Level?
Comments:

2 Are the Control Plan documents being used up-to-date?

Comments:

3 If the Control Plan at the supplier is not the same version as the one at John Deere,
was the change process followed per JDS-G223?
Comments:

4 a Do the process control documents adequately address all process parameters and
product characteristics?
b Are the Product and Process Key Characteristics known, visible, and is there a
documented control plan in place to continuously monitor the process control and
capability?
c If the part has Key Characteristics, have a Gage R&R and capability study been
performed?
d If the key characteristic has a Cpk < 1.33, does the Control Plan follow the requirements
of the Continuous Process Monitoring Matrix?
e Are cleanliness requirements documented on the Control Plan?
Comments:

5 Are the Process flow diagrams, PFMEAs, Capability Studies, and Gage R&Rs
controlled and up-to-date?
Comments:

6 Are other pertinent process control documents up-to-date? (Examples: process sheets,
inspection and test instructions, standard operating procedures, preventive
maintenance instructions)
Comments:

7 Are Suppliers' (sub-tier) documentation of the above (questions 1-6) for key
characteristics controlled and up-to-date?
Comments:

8 Are computer programs used in the manufacturing process secure, controlled and
backed up? (Examples: CNC & PLC programs).
Comments:

B. Material and Process Control

9 a Is the Control Plan applied at each operation and being followed, from incoming
material to shipping?
b Is the frequency of inspection being performed as described in the Control Plan?
c Are the inspection method and equipment being used as described in the Control Plan?

d Do the operator instructions reflect the requirements of the Control Plan?

Comments:

10 Do the sample size, frequency and sampling method take into account the sources of
variation? (Examples: multiple machines or fixtures for same characteristic, multi-cavity
molds for the same part, and changes over time, like tool wear and environment)

Comments:

498416278.xls Page 3 of 6 Print Date: 11/09/2020

 John Deere Process Verification Audit - Checklist
Supplier Name: Survey Date(s):
11 Are other pertinent process control documents in place and being followed? (Examples:
process sheets, inspection & test instructions, standard operating procedures,
preventive maintenance instructions)
Comments:

12 Is inspection data retained and stored appropriately?

Comments:

13 Are instructions included for packaging to protect the parts (both in-process & final) from
damage & contamination, & are they followed?
Comments:

14 Are operators properly trained to perform their operations? Are appropriate personnel
properly trained for performing work involving key product and process characteristics
(especially for special processes)?
Comments:

C. Tools/Gages
15 Is there an understanding of which tools/gages are needed for each operation, and are
the needed tools/gages at the work station?
Comments:

16 Are any tools/gages being used or needed but not called out?
Comments:

17 Does the operator understand the proper use of the tools/gages and is he/she using
them properly?
Comments:

18 Is equipment, including tooling, properly maintained?

Comments:

19 Are all the gages calibrated and records retained?

Comments:

20 Do Gage R&R studies have acceptable results?

Comments:

D. Corrective Action
21 Is the Reaction Plan listed on the Control Plan effective & being followed?
Comments:

22 Is there an adequate process for isolation & control of non-conforming material (inc.
Customer Notification) & is it being followed?
Comments:

23 Is an effective closed-loop corrective action process, including identification of root

causes, fully implemented? Does the supplier use NCCA, as appropriate?
Comments:

E. Change Control
24 What is the change control process, and is it effective? (All part and process
documentation, including Control Plans, must be updated.)
Comments:

25 Are Change Control Procedures followed in accordance with JDS-G223 (Supplier

Change Request)? Does this include applicable sub-tier suppliers?
Comments:

498416278.xls Page 4 of 6 Print Date: 11/09/2020

 John Deere Process Verification Audit - Checklist
Supplier Name: Survey Date(s):

F. Scoring Summary
Total Points 96 Maximum Points Possible 0 0 0 0 0
Percent of Total Points Available (NA questions are excluded.) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

498416278.xls Page 5 of 6 Print Date: 11/09/2020

 John Deere Process Verification Audit - Change History
Date Division Who Made Changes Reason for Change
6-May-06 Ag Mark Pershing Proposed Form
28-Aug-07 Ag, C&F, Mark Pershing, Marilyn Adopted by Enterprise Team
C&CE, Dumolien, Daryl Fortin,
JDPS Gary Watson, Dan
Falkenstein, Todd
Herzog, Theodore
Tyler

28-Apr-16 Enterprise Wendell Hunt Changed references to Supplier Evaluation Tracking (SET) to Supplier
Qualification System (SQS).

498416278.xls Page 6 of 6 Print Date: 11/09/2020