Supplier Name: Vendor Code: Part Number(s) or Family Description: Date of audit: Suplier Participant(s): Basis of audit visit

: Buyer QMPP Sign-Off Verification KB/Bendix Auditor(s):

AUDIT RESULTS =

0.00%

Audit Outputs:

Score: > 90% 51% - 89% ≤ 50% ACTIONS REQUIRED! SUBMIT CORRECTIVE ACTION TO ACHIEVE 'GREEN' SCORE.

Satisfactory processes resulting in no repeat issue. Discovery of potential problems that may result in poor quality product to Bendix. NEEDS IMPROVEMENT – High possibility of recurring issues! Overall process failure!!!

NO.

Analysis ITEMS

Score 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Start Date

COMMENTS/OBSERVATIONS

1 Was the Control Plan prepared using the APQP process? (PFMEA, APQP checklist, team approach, etc) 2 Is the Control Plan adequately tied together with the Flow Diagram and Process FMEA? 3 Bendix concerns (Q2's) are reflected in the Control Plan, FMEA, Work Instructions etc. 4 Does the supplier utilize a First & Last piece approval process? (must be in control plan & results recorded) 5 Are the Supplier's AQL sampling techniques adequate? C=0 expected… 6 Are there records of operator/inspector qualification to perform required tasks? 7 8 Are there records of control plan inspection results? Is part identification maintained throughout the process?

9 What controls are in place to ensure that parts are correctly packed and shipped to Bendix? 10 Are corrective actions (8D's) initiated when there are Quality and Logistics concerns reported by Bendix (or other customers)? TOTAL SCORE NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Summary of Actions Required

Responsible Person

Completion Date

Complete

Process Numbers and Names are the same from one document to another) Are PFMEA and Process Flow Diagram for a particular part available? Does the revision level match the control plan revision level? Do all documents have proper "header" information filled out accurately and completely? For the operations with high RPN number in PFMEA. are there enough process controls specified in control plan? If there was a recent Quality concern. team approach. 3. FMEA. etc) Purpose: To check if Control plan aid in manufacturing of quality PURPOSE product according to Bendix Standard. 2. Process Flow Diagram 0 and Work Instructions are reflecting corrective action submitted for PURPOSE Q2's (Do what you document and document what you do) Documented Process exists. Is appropriate process documentation available reflecting the changes? ( For Example: Operator training should be reflected in training matrix. do all process documents reflect that concern and related changes? Provide evidence of process. (ie. Was the Control Plan prepared using the APQP process? 0 (PFMEA. should be reviewed for all parts. Purpose: Verify that the Control Plan. PFMEA. – Across the Board . Work Instructions etc. Control plan must be updated for all improved measurement systems and Control methods.Quality Disruption Exposure Analysis 1. Is the Control Plan adequately tied together with the Flow Diagram and Process FMEA? 0 Purpose: Verify that all 3 major process control documents are inline PURPOSE with each other (Do what youall of these and document what are do) Look for evidence that these document process documents you linked to Control Plan. “control plan does not replace the information contained document? Revised for any and all changes? Is control plan a living by Operator Instruction” Rev changed? A single control plan may apply to group or family of part #s but these part #s must be defined in the Part Number section of Control Plan. Bendix concerns (Q2's) are reflected in the Control Plan. Are customer concerns documented and communicated throughout the organization? Provide evidence.) Has PFMEA occurrence number changed based on rejection? Is there a reaction plan in place? Notifications issued on Labeling (wrong Parts/ Corrective actions for Q2 wrong label) and Shipping process. Does the copy of the control plan specify correct stage of development? Prototype/ Pre-Launched/ Production As per AIAG APQP manual. APQP checklist.

CPK analysis. Does the supplier utilize a First & Last piece approval process? (must be in control plan & results recorded) 0 Purpose: Verify that processes are running as perform available at the PURPOSE Is there an approved (controlled) First/Last piece defined baseline. and/or Out-Going Inspection for product(s) being produced sufficient for the intended application? (ie. 7. Are there records of operator/inspector qualification to 0 perform required tasks? Purpose: Verify that Operator/ inspector that are producing/ inspecting PURPOSE Bendix product are qualified to do the job RIGHT! Does the operator have all the necessary tools available to perform the required tasks? Does the operator know what to do with defective / Suspect product? Is there a training matrix available that defines qualified backup personnel? Is there records for generic training (One available? on Individual Is training material the operator training Fits All) or product/ line/ family? Documented. and easy to understand. In-Process. what is required?) Are appropriate Sampling Tables being provided for the analysis required? Are inspection instructions available as what is to be checked and how it is to be checked? Does documentation exist to confirm inspections conducted by operators/inspectors? Do operators/inspectors know what to do when out-of-control conditions (non-conforming products) are encountered? 6. appearance etc? information on the 1st/Last piece form verified and signed by Is all supervisor? Any Baseline Parameters (master process) being form for through run? Are and all deviations are recorded on 1st Piece verified current FPA/LPA or any other way before production start-up and after production run? 5. visible at workstation. production Cell? Does First/Last piece approval process includes checks on areas such as functional. (from initial 8D request on Q2) 4. Are the Sampling Techniques used at Receiving. Is AQL. dimensional. Are there records of control plan inspection results? 0 . Date code where applicable. Are the Supplier's AQL sampling techniques adequate? C=0 expected… 0 PURPOSE Purpose: To identify proper levels of confidence associated with the supplier's sampling of both variable and attribute data.Have 8D's been started for all Q2's and is the current status/information acceptable for the time frame identified. LTPD.

skid size. What controls are in place to ensure that parts are correctly packed and shipped to Bendix? 0 Purpose: To provide for final verification of product.Purpose: Are product characteristics being inspected and are results PURPOSE being recorded as identified on the control plan? Does the control plan specify inspection frequency and quantity inspected? What method was used to establish inspection frequency and quantity inspected? Are the recorded results of both variable and attribute data being recorded? documented reaction plan when inspection results are found Is there a out of specification? (Review control plan. and banding/shrink wrap instructions to keep products properly protected during shipment? Is there a "Dock Audit" procedure in place? What items are being reviewed during the Dock Audit? Are the Dock Audit "results" recorded? Is this audit being performed after the corrective actions (8D's) initiated when there are 10. Do packaging of instructions define placement. Are product has been packaged for shipment? Quality and Logistics concerns reported by Bendix (or other customers)? Purpose: Is the corrective action process effective? 0 PURPOSE . quantities. size of applicable. maximums per box and per skid? Are weigh scales calibrated on a routine basis? Are packaging instructions written that define materials to be used in the the packagingBendix products? Including dunnage ifbarcode labels. and PURPOSE packagingdocumented procedure for the determination of part quantity Is there a delivered. Is part identification maintained throughout the process? Purpose: Verify that the part identification is maintained throughout PURPOSE production process How is material and its status identified throughout the entire manufacturing process? Are there areas identified to hold suspect and non-conforming material? Is there a process that ensures timely disposition of non-conforming material? Is there a process that identifies controls needed to support rework or re-inspection of non conforming material? Can the Bendix component be traced back to the raw material test data from any point in the manufacturing process? 9.Ask an Inspector/Operator for their action in such scenario) Are inspection results being stored according to your "written" record retention policy? 0 8.

NEEDS IMPROVEMENT – items in RED on recurring issues! Overall ≤ 50% process failure!!! . Specify actionHigh possibility ofPPM form comment section. Discovery of potential problems that may result in poor quality product 51% .Is there a written C/A (8D) procedure defined within the organization? Is the C/A being updated in a timely fashion and validated with "DATA" for closure? Provide evidence of status tracking. PFMEA's. Is there a procedure to ensure C/A's are fed back into the Flow Diagram. Are customer/internal nonconformites communicated to the floor? Provide evidence. and Control Plans? Scoring/ Audit Outputs Rating: YES = 2 Partial = 1 NO = 0 Audit Outputs: Score: > 90% Satisfactory improvement resulting in no repeat issue.70% to Bendix. Is there a procedure to drive C/A back to the supplier? Provide evidence.

URPOSE URPOSE URPOSE .

URPOSE URPOSE URPOSE .

URPOSE URPOSE URPOSE URPOSE .

.

Advanced Product Quality Planning & Control Plan (Second Edition) PPAP .com) QR0010 Policy (Bendix Classified Characteristics) APQP forms diskette (Bendix can supply for usage on Bendix parts) Part Identification Module .aiag. Stars.Production Part Approval Process (Fourth Edition) FMEA .Worst Performing Supplier List Safety Parts (C/C's only) Classified characteristic part .bendix. etc.Statistical Process Control (Second Edition) MSA .(C/C's.new process/technology Historical Performance RESOURCES: AIAG MANUALS: (contact AIAG) APQP .Selection Criteria for Quality Disruption Exposure Analysis High PPM Large Lot Quantities received. High impact by number of parts received per lot. S/C's.Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (Fourth Edition) SPC . Shields. WPS . Diamonds.Measurement Systems Analysis (Third Edition) www.org Bendix PPAP Guidelines Manual (www.) Current supplier .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful