ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

POTENTIAL SUPPLIER ASSESSMENT (PSA)

COMPANY / SUPPLIER NAME:

COMPANY / SUPPLIER LOCATION:

DATE OF ASSESSMENT:

ASSESSED BY:

PHONE & EMAIL OF ASSESSOR

PSA Version 9 Page 1 of 21

 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
POTENTIAL SUPPLIER ASSESSMENT (PSA)

COMPANY / SUPPLIER NAME: 0

COMPANY / SUPPLIER LOCATION: 0

PEOPLE / HR
Position Name Phone Number Months in Position Years at Company E-mail Address

CEO / President

QA MANAGER

PLANT MANAGER

PROD. CONTROL

PROCESS ENGR

PRODUCT ENGR

SALES

SERVICE / SHIPPING

MATERIAL MGMT

OTHER

1 Number of engineers responsible to quality at the facility?

2 Number of engineers responsible to production at the facility?
3 Number of engineers responsible to R&D at the facility?
4 Number of individuals dedicated to Aftersales service at the facility?

Total Hourly Management Dedicated to the Product Line

5 Number of Employees at facility?

6 Average employee seniority (in years)?
7 Employee turnover rate (percentage)? % %
N
8 Union Representation? Yes If Yes, Expiration Date:
o
9 How many shifts does the plant normally work? Shifts
9a How many days does the plant normally work? Days
10 Is local manpower available in Indonesia? No Yes
FACILITIES
Total Production Warehouse Office

11

12 Current plant utilization (percentage)? %

13 How much can utilization be increased by adding manpower only (percentage)? %
14 Impact of quoted business on plant utilization (percentage)? %
N
15 Implementation plan available for increased production? Yes If Yes, explain:
16 Capacity utilization for next 5 years: o
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5

17 What is the standard lead time for product:

Lead Time for PPAP
Lead Time for Product Delivery

18 What is the supplier's/facility's current PPM (Parts per Million)? PPM

Note: PPM = [(return+scrapped+sorts+reworks) x 1,000,000]/total volume

N
19 Do you have standards for fire safety in your warehouses? Yes
N Y o
20 Does the supplier/facility build their own tools? If Yes, what percentage: %
o
N es
Y
21 Does the supplier/facility refurbish tools in-house?
o N es
22 Does the supplier/facility have the capacity to build? Yes
o
N
23 Does the supplier/facility have TS/IATF 16949 Certificate? Yes
o
N
24 If no TS/IATF 16949 certificate, status of TS / IATF planned? Yes When?_______________________Certification? Yes / No
o
COMMERCIAL

PSA Version 9
 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
POTENTIAL SUPPLIER ASSESSMENT (PSA)

25 How long has the supplier been in the business that they are quoting? Years
26 What type of products does the supplier/facility manufacture?
27 Specify other manufacturing location available for type of product:
28 Is there any pending litigation (Legal actions) against the supplier/facility?

N Y If Yes, explain:
o es

29 Has the supplier/facility had a judgment against them in the past 2 years?

N Ye If Yes, explain:
o s

30 Has the supplier/facility been cited and/or fined for failure to comply with any state/federal regulations and/or statutes in the past 2 years?

N Y
If Yes, explain:
o es
31 Is the company anticipating a change in ownership in the next 3 years?

N Y If Yes, explain:
o es
32 What is the % of Business supplying to OE and Aftersales? OE %: Aftersales %:

LOGISTICS
N Ye
33 Does the supplier/facility currently export product?
o s
34 Specify countries where supplier/facility is delivering orders:
35 How does the supplier/facility currently deliver product?
Oth
Rail Truck Ship Air
er Ye
36 Is the supplier currently sequencing product for an assembly plant? N ✘
o s
37 How often do you have to make premium shipments?
N Y
38 Capable of electronic data transfer (EDI)? If yes, list software and explain:
o es
39 How many days of finished product inventory is on hand? Average Target
40 What is the supplier/facility current inventory management system, describe:
41 Is there more than one or two shifts of in process material in the plant?
N Ye
o s
Spare Part Operations
42 Does the supplier have capability to ship direct to the dealer?
N Ye
43 What type of packaging & labeling are currently utilized? o s
(shrink wrap, unitized box, bulk, etc.)
44 Does the facility currently have the ability to pick, pack and ship products to N Ye
customers? o s
45 Does the facility have the ability to produce service part labels on site? N Ye
46 Are finished goods warehoused at this facility?
o
N s
Ye
If no, where are finished goods warehoused? Explain o s
N Ye
o s
Additional
47 Does the supplier has relevant patents/licenses in their name?
N Ye
o s
If yes, how many, and what are they?

PSA Version 9
 Potential Supplier Assessment
Manufacturing
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Manufacturing Process Flow 1 What best describes in process 0 - Well organized, structured, 5 5
material handling?
properly identified
5 - Organized, but opportunity for
10 - Not structured, parts area
improvement
not properly identified
2 Which kind of production line is 3 3
0 - Automatic production line
employed?
3 - Semi-automatic production
line
5 - Manual production line

50 -- Available
Available but
& appropriate
Standardized Work 3 Do the Standard Operation Sheets 10 5
contain appropriate and complete some instructions are
information?
missing, or no visual aids
10 - No instructions available
4 Are Standard Operation Sheets 10 5
easily accessible to the team 05--Easy to Access
Not easy (at the
to access (atoperation)
the
members?
10 - Instructions
office or line head)inaccessible / Operator
doesn't know where
6 Are Standard Operation Sheets 0 - Regular audit is conducted, audit result 10 5
being followed by team members
& audited by team leaders? and
5 actionis plans
- Audit documented
conducted
infrequently
10 - No Audit is conducted
5 What best describes operator 0 -Documented training including 10 5
training? 5 - Documented
follow up training, no
follow up
10 - No formal process
Capacity & 7 Is capacity determined 0 - Appropriately utilizing 10 5
capability appropriately? 5 - Appropriately,
actual factors but factors are
based more on
10 -Capacity estimates
calculation
method unacceptable
8 How will additional / new business 0 - Additional Manpower 15 10
be addressed?
required
10 - Additional Equipment
15 - New plant installation /
required
expansion required
9 Are resources available for 0 - Resources available within 3 15
functional / durability testing?
3 -hours
Resources available within
7 hours
8 - Resources available within
24 -Resources
15 hours available over
24 hours
10 Are resources available for 0 - Resources available within 3 10
calibration?
3 -hours
Resources available within
7 hours
8 - Resources available within
10
24 -Resources
hours available over
Workplace 11 Is sufficient lights & air circulation
24- hours
0 LUX level and controlled air 5 3
Organization available?
pressure maintained
3 - Available but not controlled
5 - Needs improvement
12 Is shop floor organized to provide 0 - Work conditions suited to control 5 5
fatigue free operating conditions?
ergonomic
5 risk factors in safety,
- Need improvement
ergonomics & social comfort
13 Is the work place properly 10 5
organized? 0 - 5S practice followed
5 - Partial implementation of
5S
10 - No 5S activity /
cleanliness
14 Are parts, tools & equipment 0 - Proper identification & 10 5
arranged in fixed location?
location
5 - Proper identification & location
but-not
10 No followed
proper identification
or location
Safety 15 Is personal safety equipment 0 - Operators are provided with 10 5
provided?
5 - Safety
safety equipment is not always
equipment
available to operator 4 of 21 11/19/2021
558010538.xlsx GM CONFIDENTIAL
 Potential Supplier Assessment
Quality
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
Management Supply chain 1 What best represents the suppliers 5 3
process process? 0 - Simple, sequential, easy to follow Process Flow
3 - Relatively good flow, but opportunities for improvement
5 - Process flow difficult to understand and
follow

2 Formal process is identified to protect 0 - Supplier has demonstrated Supply Chain Protection 5 5
pipeline supply chain (MRP, KAN BAN, system.
3 - Supplier has supply chain protection system, but needs minor
etc.) and provide safety inventory.
enhancements.
5 - Supplier has supply chain protection system, but needs major
enhancements.
10 - Supplier has no supply chain protection plan in place.
3 Supplier demonstrates understanding of 0 - Supplier has demonstrated understanding of Process 20 10
Process Validation. Validation.
10 - Supplier has some Process Validation skills, but needs major
enhancements.
20 - Supplier has no Process Validation tasks in place.
4 Supplier has Material Identification 0 - Supplier has demonstrated Material 10 5
Traceability System supported with Identification/Traceability System.Identification/Traceability System; needs
current data.
3 - Supplier has generic Material
minor
5 enhancements.
- Supplier has generic Material Identification/Traceability System; needs
major
10 enhancements.
- Supplier has no Material Identification/Traceability
System.
5 Supplier has plan on how Tier 1-2-3-4 0 - Supplier has strong Tier 2-3-4 management system and 20 15
suppliers will be managed. documentation.
10 - Supplier has generic Tier 2-3-4 management system, but needs
enhancements.
15 - Supplier has generic Tier 2-3-4 management system, but needs
major enhancements.
20 - Supplier has no Tier 2-3-4 management system or
experience.
6 Supplier has capability on Change 0 - Supplier has demonstrated capability on Change Management 15 10
Management enforcement for entire enforcement.
5 - Supplier has capability on Change Management enforcement, but
supply chain. needs improvement.
10 - Supplier has minimal capability on Change Management
enforcement.
15 - Supplier has no capability on Change Management enforcement,

Quality System 7 Supplier utilizes formal layered audit 0 -Documented formal audits conducted by management with immediate 10 5
process on their quality/manufacturing corrective
3 actionsformal audits conducted and reviewed with
- Documented
systems.
management
5 - Documented - needs minor
formal improvement
audits - not properly supported or conducted
frequently enough - improvements required
10 - No evidence a process exists or is not supported properly

8 Supplier utilizes formal audits focused on
quality/manufacturing systems of their
suppliers.
9 Supplier demonstrates process for Non-
Conforming Material isolation, removal
from pipeline and plant floor.
10 Incoming Material Handling System is
present (proper tagging, material testing,
documentation).
0 - Documented formal audits conducted by "supplier quality", 15 10
reviewed with their management with immediate corrective actions.
5 - Documented formal audits conducted and reviewed with management -
needs minor improvement
10 - Documented formal audits - not properly supported or conducted
frequently enough - improvements required
15 - No evidence a process exists or is not supported
properly
0 - Supplier has extensive Non-Conforming Material Handling system 10 5
in -place.
3 Supplier has Non-Conforming Material Handling system in place; needs
minor improvements.
5 - Supplier has Non-Conforming Material Handling system in place; needs
major improvements.
10 - Supplier has no Non-Conforming Material Handling
system in place.
0 - Supplier has extensive Incoming Material Handling 5 3
system
2 in place.
- Supplier has Incoming Material Handling system in place; needs
minor improvements. PSA Version 9
Quality
Category Sub-Category Item Incoming Material Risk
Handling System is 0 - Supplier has extensive Incoming Material
Risk Rating Handling
Guideline Score 3
Threshold Comments
present (proper tagging, material testing, system
2 in place.
- Supplier has Incoming Material Handling system in place; needs
documentation). minor improvements.
3 - Supplier has Incoming Material Handling system in place; needs
major
5 improvements.
- Supplier has no Incoming Material Handling system in
place.

PSA Version 9
Quality
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
11 Review material identification method 0 - Supplier has extensive Material ID/Traceability system in 5 3
used for materials in process (tagging, place
labeling, and traceability method). 2 - Supplier has Material ID/Traceability system in place; needs minor
improvements
3 - Supplier has Material ID/Traceability system in place; needs major
improvements
5- Supplier has no Material ID/Traceability system in place

12 Supplier demonstrates effective use of 15 5

PFMEA: quantifies risk, identifies special
characteristics for use in Control Plan,
takes action to reduce RPNs; uses
AIAG/QSB criteria to calculate RPNs
0 - PFMEAs document full expectations are met; process is
well-deployed
5 - PFMEAs show significant compliance with expectations;
minor issues
10 - PFMEAs show significant non-compliance with
expectations; major issues
15 - No or very poor PFMEAs in evidence

13 Supplier demonstrates adherence to 0 - Supplier has evidence of strong Control Plan Adherence 20 15
control plan. in place.
5 - Supplier has Control Plan adherence in place; needs minor
improvements.
15 - Supplier has Control Plan Adherence in place; needs major
improvements.
20 - Supplier has no evidence of Control Plan adherence with current
business.
14 There is linkage between the design 10 5
record, PFMEA, Control Plan and 0 - Linkage is evidenced and meet expectation
Operator Instructions, e.g. special 3 - Linkage shows significant compliance with expectations;
characteristics are identified by supplier, minor issues
effective and understandable controls are
specified for affected operators use 5 - Linkage shows significant non-compliance with expectations; major issues

10- No or very poor linkage in evidence

15 Supplier has capability of retrieving 5 5

current drawing revision for usage on 0 - Supplier has capability of retrieving current drawing
floor inspections and specification revision.
verification.
5 - Supplier has no capability of retrieving current drawing revision.

16 Supplier demonstrates understanding of 0 - Supplier has demonstrated excellent levels of quality 10 5

quality inspection and sampling plan inspection.
requirements. 3 - Supplier has generic quality inspection plan; needs minor
improvements.
5 - Supplier has generic quality inspection plan; needs major
improvements.
10 - Supplier has no quality inspection process.
17 Supplier complies with acceptable 10 5
measurement system analysis and 0 - Supplier has extensive measurement/calibration system in place.
calibration techniques. 3 - Supplier has major measurement/calibration system in place, but needs
minor improvements.
5 - Supplier has minor measurement/calibration system in place, but needs
major improvements.
10 - Supplier has no measurement/calibration system in
place.
18 ANDON system and its application. 5 5
0 - Supplier has ANDON system in place.
2 - Supplier has ANDON system in place, but needs minor
improvements.
3 - Supplier has ANDON system in place, but needs major
improvements.
5 - Supplier has no ANDON system in place.
PSA Version 9
 ANDON system and its application. 5

Quality
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
5 - Supplier has no ANDON system in place.
19 Usage of statistical methods in process 10 5
control systems. 0 - Supplier has excellent Process Control systems in place.
3 - Supplier has major Process Control systems in place, but needs
minor improvements.
5 - Supplier has minor Process Control systems in place, but needs
major improvements.
10 - Supplier has no Process Control systems in place.

20 Supplier experience in major OEM 10 0

manufacturing. 0 - Supplier has experience with OEM manufacturing.
10 - Supplier has no major OEM manufacturing experience.

21 Supplier is familiar with automotive core 10 0

tools AIAG manufacturing standards (e.g. 0 - Supplier has experience with AIAG requirements.
MSA, SPC, APQP, FMEA, PPAP) 10 - Supplier has no exposure to AIAG requirements.

22 Does the supplier currently export 10 5

product 0 - Yes
5 - No

Employee 23 Are employees encouraged to get
Involvement involved in problem solving workshops
24 Supplier has an effective employee
suggestion program; metrics include no.
suggestions/employee/year, percent
suggestions implemented by year,
improvement in rate of employee
suggestions submitted per year,
improvement in rate of suggestions
implemented per year
0 - Teams formed to solve plant issues, teams are active 10 5
5 - Teams formed, however management follow-up
is missing
10 - Employees are not involved in problem
solving
5 5
0 - Program is evidenced and meets expectation
3 - Program significantly complies with expectation; minor issues
5 - Program shows significant non-compliance with expectations;
major issues

25 Are employees recognized for their 5 5

achievements 0 - Yes
5 - No
26 Are team meeting areas available, and 10 5
are performance charts displayed in the 0 - Yes, discussions held regularly
area 5 - Discussions held, however monitoring evidence not
available
10 - Procedure not followed

ISO Certification 27 Is supplier ISO 9001, 14001 and 45001 5 5

certified? 0 - Yes

● 5 - No, but has plan to get it within 2 years

10 - No.
Total Points 270 154
X Possible Risk Points 278

PSA Version 9
 Potential Supplier Assessment
Technology
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Engineering Engineering Support 1 Engineering in sourcing region. 0 - Engineering located in sourcing region 7 7

5 - Engineering not in sourcing region, but has plan to locate in region

7 - Engineering located locally, not in sourcing region
2 Location of engineering different 3 3
0 - Engineering and Manufacturing site located in same region.
than manufacturing? 3 - Engineering and Manufacturing site located in different
region.

3 Can supplier provide integrated 5 0

engineer to be onsite to OEM 0 - Yes

5 - No

Design 4 Onsite CAD/CAE resources? 10 5

Capability/Control 0 - Supplier has design resources on site.
2 - Supplier uses experienced outsourced resources.
5 - Supplier has plan to develop and obtain CAD/CAM resources
10 - Supplier has no plans of obtaining resources
5 Supplier demonstrates 0 - Supplier has demonstrated understanding of Design 10 10
understanding of Design Validation.
Validation. 5 - Supplier has some Design Validation skills, but needs major
enhancements.
10 - Supplier has no Design Validation tasks in place.

6 Does supplier have UG capability? 10 10

0 - Supplier has UG and shows evidence of proficiency.
5 - Supplier has UG, no experience, but has training plans.
10 - Supplier does not have UG capability.

7 Does supplier have design 10 7

Not applicable. Supplier is not design responsible.
evaluation tools, ie. FEA,
HALT…? 0 - Supplier shows evidence of past usage of design tools.
3 - Supplier uses outside design service for these tools.

7 - No evidence of prior use, but has plan to obtain training.

10 - No evidence of use and no plan for
training.
8 Prior use and knowledge of 0 - Supplier shows evidence of past usage of DFMEA. 10 5
DFMEA.
5 - Limited experience using DFMEA, and has training plan.
10 - No experience using DFMEA.

9 Benchmarking used to develop 10 10

new designs? Not applicable. Supplier is not design responsible.
0 - Fully documented system exists and has benchmarking
records on file.
PSA Version 9
Technology Benchmarking used to develop
new designs?
10
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
0 - Fully documented system exists and has benchmarking
records on file.
03 -- Engineering located in sourcing
Proactively participates region business-wide best practices.
in benchmarking
10 - Does not have evidence of benchmarking.

PSA Version 9
Technology
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

10 Are there records of formal 0 - Engineering located in sourcing region 5 0

documented design reviews by 0 - Supplier has conducted and documented design reviews.
the appropriate internal functions
conducted at appropriate stages 5 - No evidence of design reviews.
of design per the design plan?

11 Evidence of regular design and 0 - Supplier shows evidence of external 10 5

development reviews with reviews.
customers. 5 - Supplier conducts reviews but does not have supporting
document.
10 - Supplier does not conduct external design reviews.

12 Are design documents and data
reviewed and approved by
authorized personnel prior to
issue?
0 - Supplier has formal document and data 10 5
process.
5 - Supplier shows evidence of plan to develop procedure.
10 - No procedure and plan in place.

13 Is there a master list (or 0 - Evidence of revision document that is 5 3

equivalent) identifying document current.
revision status readily available? 3 - Has revision document, but is not current.
5 - No evidence of revision document.

14 Does supplier have technology Not required. 10 10

partner?
0 - Supplier has partner >1 year.
2 - Supplier has partner < 1 year.
10 - Joint venture partner required, but no partnership
established.
15 Does supplier have technology Not required. 10 10
partner?
0 - Supplier has partner >1 year.
2 - Supplier has partner < 1 year.
●
10 - Joint venture partner required, but no partnership
established.
16 Supplier is capable of supporting a Eighteen month development schedule not 10 5
18 month or less development required.
schedule. 0 - Prior experience of 18 month development cycle.
5 - Proposal to meet 18 months with exceptions.
10 - Cannot meet 18 month development
cycle.
Electronic Data 17 Electronic data transfer and 5 3
Transfer and Design design software is compatible or 0 - Supplier has latest software.
Software System exceeds customer requirements, 1 - Supplier has earlier software version, but has plan for latest
utilizing the latest improvements in version.
design modeling technology 3 - Supplier has plan to obtain required
software.
5 - Supplier does not have latest software and has no plan to
obtain.

18 What type of internet connection? 0 - Broadband, T1 or equivalent. 5 5

3 - DSL or ADSL.
5 - Dial up or no onsite connection.
PSA Version 9
Technology What type of internet connection? 5

Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
5 - Dial up or no onsite connection.
0 - Engineering located in sourcing region

PSA Version 9
Technology
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Validation and 19 Does supplier have past 0 - Engineering located in sourcing region 10 0
methods for knowledge and use of validation 0 - Supplier has evidence of successful validation plans.
identifying and plans and forms?
updating issues. 10 - Supplier has no prior experience with validation.

20 Is the performance testing (that 10 5

considers and includes as
appropriate life, durability,
reliability) tracked for timely
completion and conformance?
0 - Evidence of a comprehensive test plan that tracks testing.
5 - Test plan is available but not up to date.
10 - No evidence of test plan being tracked to completion.

Additional Lessons Learned 21 Does supplier have documented 0 - Evidence of lessons learned database or 10 10
criteria evidence of lessons learned? records.
5 - Supplier shows evidence of process but no implementation.
10 - No process in place for lessons learned.

Technology transfer 22 Is the supplier open to transfer 10 0

their technology? 0 - Yes

10 - No
Charging system 23 Does supplier have charging 10 0
experience system technology or partnership? 0 - Yes
Suppliers?
10 - No
Battery 24 (Optional) Do they have any 10 0
0 - Yes
technology (own or partner) battery
ownership? technology/ manufacturing?
10 - No
Total Points 205 118

Possible Risk Points 205

PSA Version 9
 Potential Supplier Assessment
Service
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Management Plant Utilization 1 How long has the supplier been in 5 5

0 - 6 Years or Greater
the business that they are quoting?
3 - 3 to 5 Years
5 - 0 to 2 Years

2 Does supplier/facility currently 5 3

provide OEM automotive parts?
0 - Tier 1
3 - Tier 2
5 - Tier 3 or higher

3 Does supplier track PPM level with 10 10

their current customers? 0 - Documented evidence available
10 - Difficulty providing documented evidence
20 - No evidence

4 Voice of the Customer (VOC): How 10 5

do you communicate customer 0 - Documented proactive process with evidence
concerns to your organization?
5 - Reactive instead of proactive
10 - No process

5 How are VOC concerns escalated 10 5

0 - Documented communication process in place
through the organization to ensure
efficient resolution with minimal and active
impact to your customer? 5 - Communication but no process in place

10 - No process/ineffective process

6 Does supplier/facility have a feed 10 5

back method from management to 0 - Written and verbal
employee?
5 - Verbal
10 - None

7 Does the supplier/facility have a 5 3

documented procedure in place to
regulate the specification controls
and/or changes for OEM/Service
product?
0 - Documented process in place and visually verified
3 - Documented process in place and not controlled in production
5 - Little to no evidence of a procedure to control changes

8 Does the supplier have a formalized 0 - At Central Office with resources dedicated at manufacturing 10 7
program management plant
team/process? 3 - At central office only
7 - Not well defined
10 - None

PSA Version 9
Service
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Logistics Inventory Control 9 Does supplier/facility possess 5 3

(LIFO / FIFO), packaging capabilities in house? 0 - All capabilities in house
Handling,
Storage, 3 - A percentage of the packaging is third party
Packaging,
Shipping, 5 - The majority or all packaging is third party
Experience With
Sequencing

People Hiring, Training, 10 Average employee seniority? 5 3

Turnover, 0 - Good cross-section of low and high seniority
Represented, 3- No extreme percentages of seniority
Absenteeism
5 - Majority of staff has very high or low seniority

11 Employee turnover rate? 10 5

0 - Less than 10%
5 - 10% to 15%
10 - Greater than 15%

12 Is there a comprehensive employee 0 - Well documented, verification of effectiveness, mentoring 10 5

training program? process
5 - No follow-up, little evidence, minimal documentation
10 - No written training manual, no follow-up

13 How does the supplier/facility deal 10 5

with internal/external language 0 - Dual written literature, on site translators
barriers? 5 - Little literature available
10 - Nothing available

Delivery 14 Do you make premium shipments? 10 0

0 - Minimum or no premium shipments
10 - Excessive premium shipments

15 Do you have a process in place to 5 5

handle premium shipping requests? 0 - Yes
5 - No

16 What is the suppliers current on 20 15

time delivery percentage for service 0 - 85 - 100%
parts? 10 - 75 - 84%
15 - 65 - 74%
20 - 0 - 64%

17 What is the internal supplier/facility 10 10

current PPM? 0 - 25 or less
5 - 26 to 50
10 - Greater than 50

PSA Version 9
Service
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Material 18 What corrosion protection do you 0 - Evidence of adequate corrosion protection in use or if not 10 5
provide for the parts? applicable
5 - inconsistent use of corrosion protection
10 - Little to no evidence of corrosion protection

Prototype 19 Prototype fabrication capability in 5 3

Fabrication house or outsourced. 0 - Capable of prototype design and fabrication in-house.
Capability 3 - Capable of some basic design prototyping in house.
5 - All prototype requirements are outsourced.

20 Does supplier have SLA/SLS 10 10

capability? Outsourced? 0 - Capable of in house SLA/SLS prototyping.

3 - Outsourced SLA/SLS with capable supplier.

10 - No ability for quick turn prototypes.

Misc Questions 21 Is there any pending litigation 0 - No 0 0

Misc Questions against the supplier/facility?
10 - Yes

22 Has the supplier/facility been cited 0 0

0 - No
and or fined for failure to comply
with any state/federal regulations 10 - Yes
and or statures in the past 2 years?

23 Does supplier have a 5 5

quality/network of vendors that 0 - Yes
partner can leverage?

● 5 - No
X Total Points 180 117

X Possible Risk Points 210

PSA Version 9
 Potential Supplier Assessment
Price
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments

Company Company Profile 1 Is the company privately held? 0 - No 5 5

Ownership
5 - Yes

2 Are there relevant business 7 5

arrangements with other
suppliers? (JV, Alliance Partners,
Co-Development, Shared Patents,
etc)?
0 - None
1 - No, Division of Global Mega Supplier
5 - Yes, Shared Patents an/or Co-Development Agreement

7 - Yes, Joint Venture directly impacts business under consideration

3 Is the company unionized? 1 1
0 - No
1 - Yes, Contract Current
5 - Yes, Contract Expiring Prior to Launch
4 What is the financial status of the 10 3
company? 1 - Financial Indicators are Good

3 - Company is stable with low financial stress score

7 - Company is stable with high financial stress score

10 - Financially troubled supplier

Product Tiered Supplier 5 What are your payment terms and 5 3

Management Management conditions for tier 2 suppliers? 0 - MNS2
3- > 60 day payments
5- < 60 day payments

6 Does top management regularly 10 5

review supplier performance? 0 - Yes, Supplier Performance Reviews are held at least quarterly
5 - Yes, Supplier Performance Reviews are held as needed
10 - No, top management is not involved in Supplier Reviews

7 What is supplier's turn around time 0 - Formal Change communication and quote within 2 days of requested 10 5
for quoting engineering changes? change.
5 - Formal communication/quoting of engineering changes >3 days to respond
to customer
10 - No documented process for handling change requests.

8 Does supplier's capacity planning 10 5

comprehend the maximum
capacities of all tiered suppliers?
1 - All suppliers capacities are known and used for capacity planning/quoting
purposes.
5 - Some suppliers capacities are known and used for capacity
planning/quoting purposes.
10 - Supplier capacities are not known

9 What are your agreements with 10 4

your suppliers with regard to
providing service parts? At
production pricing? How long will
parts be available?
1 - Service part agreements are included in original contracts with suppliers.
4 - Service part agreements are negotiated with suppliers after award of
business.
PSA Version 9
Price
What are your agreements with 4
Category Sub-Category Item your suppliers with
Riskregard to Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
providing service parts? At 4 - Service part agreements are negotiated with suppliers after award of
production pricing? How long will 0 -- Service
No
business.
parts be available? 7 part agreements are negotiated with suppliers just prior to End of
Production.
10 - Service part agreements are not negotiated with suppliers.

PSA Version 9
Price
Category Sub-Category Item Risk
Systems Legal 10 Is supplier familiar with Contract
Terms & Conditions?
11 Does the supplier have a process
in place to ensure compliance with
the global Sullivan principles?
12 Does the supplier have a process
in place to ensure compliance with
Secure Data Management to
ensure confidential treatment of
Client information and
documentation?
Cost Control 13 Does supplier have change
management process that
addresses cost management of
engineering changes (VA/VE,
Management and Manufacturing
Review)?
14 Does supplier work to realize
production efficiencies in order to
share savings with customer?
Finance Books 15 Are finances properly tracked to
ensure a continuous flow of raw
material?
16 Are accounts payable and
receivable properly monitored to
ensure a stable business
environment?
Ratios 17 What is the Debt/Equity ratio?
18 What is the inventory turn?
Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
1 8
10 -- Yes.
No
3 - Yes. A copy was provided and under review.
8 - Yes. The PSA supplier takes exception to GM Terms and Conditions.
10 - No.
0 10
0 - Yes. Management Sign-off in Place.
5 - Yes. Global Sullivan Principles compliance in process. Plan available.
10 - No. PSA Supplier is not familiar with the Global Sullivan Principles.
X 0 X 10
0 - Yes
5 - Procedure exists but needs improvement/ need to show more evidence of
compliance
10 - No process in place or any evidence of securing data
10 5
1 - Yes. Process Supports GM Requirements
5 - Yes. Process takes longer than client requirement ( >3 days)
10 - No. No formal process exists.
5 3
0 - Yes.
3 - Yes. Supplier can demonstrate efficiencies, but does not share the savings
with customers.
5 - No. Supplier does not gain production efficiencies over time.
10 5
0 - ERP system is properly implemented and monitored
5 - Raw materials are purchased and paid for on an as needed basis
10 - No system is in place to monitor material costs
10 5
0 - ERP system is properly implemented and monitored
5 - Clerks or controllers have been assigned to pay outstanding invoices
10 - No system exists to monitor accounting activities
0 - Comfortable ratio in conjunction with company scale 5 0
5 - Lopsided ratio in conjunction with company scale
0 - High turn frequency 5 5
5 - Low turn frequency
PSA Version 9
Price
Category Sub-Category Item Risk Risk Rating Guideline Score Threshold Comments
5 - Low turn frequency
● 0 - No
19 What is the trend of CAGR 0 - Consistent growth YOY 5 0
(Compounded Annual Growth
Rate)? 5 - Stagnancy reflecting in the trend

20 What is the health of Operating 0 - Comfortable enough to support the organization functioning 5 0
Cash Flow?
5 - Organization struggling at times for want of working capital

Total Points 124 87

Possible Risk Points 157

PSA Version 9
 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
POTENTIAL SUPPLIER ASSESSMENT (PSA)

COMPANY / SUPPLIER NAME: 0

SUPPLIER LOCATION: 0

DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 0

ASSESSED BY: 0

PHONE AND EMAIL OF ASSESSOR 0

Top summary
85.5% Manufacturing Risk < 25% Risk is Green, >=25% to 60% is Yellow and >=60% is Red

97.1% Quality Risk < 25% Risk is Green, >=25% to 58% is Yellow and >=58% is Red

85.7% Service Risk < 25% Risk is Green, >=25% to 55% is Yellow and >=55% is Red

100.0% Technology Risk < 25% Risk is Green, >=25% to 46% is Yellow and >=46% is Red

79.0% Price Risk < 25% Risk is Green, >=25% to 52% is Yellow and >=52% is Red

Middle summary: SPO Service Parts, Accessories & IAM Safety components - Low Volume
85.5% Manufacturing Risk < 30% Risk is Green, >=30% to 65% is Yellow and >=65% is Red

97.1% Quality Risk < 30% Risk is Green, >=30% to 63% is Yellow and >=63% is Red

85.7% Service Risk < 30% Risk is Green, >=30% to 60% is Yellow and >=60% is Red

100.0% Technology Risk < 25% Risk is Green, >=25% to 46% is Yellow and >=46% is Red

79.0% Price Risk < 30% Risk is Green, >=30% to 57% is Yellow and >=57% is Red

Bottom summary: SPO Service Parts, Accessories & IAM Non Safety components - Low Volume
85.5% Manufacturing Risk < 38% Risk is Green, >=38% to 70% is Yellow and >=70% is Red

97.1% Quality Risk < 38% Risk is Green, >=38% to 70% is Yellow and >=70% is Red

85.7% Service Risk < 30% Risk is Green, >=30% to 70% is Yellow and >=70% is Red

100.0% Technology Risk < 40% Risk is Green, >=40% to 70% is Yellow and >=70% is Red

79.0% Price Risk < 38% Risk is Green, >=38% to 70% is Yellow and >=70% is Red
TAKE-AWAYS / KEY FINDINGS / COMMENTS:

RECOMMENDED TOOLS FOR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT:

Audits Workshops

PFMEA Workshop

Error Proofing Workshop

Label Error Proofing Workshop

5S & Visual Workplace Workshop

Problem Solving Workshop

Event Driven Audits Applying SPC Tools Workshop

Quality System Basics Workshop

Escalation

Value Stream Mapping

21 of 21 11/19/2021
558010538.xlsx GM CONFIDENTIAL