Beyond My Materials For Student

External Supplier New Part Approval Process (APQP / PPAP)
Improvements - FAQ's
1. Question: I listened very carefully to the presentation on the 28th and do not recall hearing
anything about PSW (Part Submission Warrant) do remember hearing discussion at length
about Schedule A.
Answer: Successful completion of Schedule A results in a successful PSW and is part of

the entire PSW process. As stated in the training, the requirements for Phased PPPAP do
not change. However, we have re-worded the training to be “Improvements to the External
Supplier New Part Approval Process (APQP / PPAP) – Training” for clarity.
2. Question: Will we get a copy of this presentation after the training?
Answer: Yes. We had to obtain approval prior to distribution. Also, the presentation will be
available in the web.
3. Question: When we switch to the new Schedule A would we not need a

documented/approved official conformance plan by next milestone? (as in current
LQOS/GPDS process sheet) REF Slide 16.
Answer: The rating approach to Schedule B including conformance plan is under

discussion. We will communicate when finalized.
4. Question: Will the SOBA process cover 100% of NTEI for all programs (including PTO)? If
not, how will the remaining suppliers be covered?
Answer: Supplier On Board Agreement (SOBA) is issued to all NTEIs that have an
Engineering on Board Date prior to <FDJ> for both Vehicle and Powertrain programs. For
parts that do not get a SOBA, purchasing will identify a preliminary site.
5. Question: Do the suppliers need to assess all expectations?
Answer: No. Suppliers need to rate the deliverables based on meeting the expectations.
The supplier will need to confirm that they have read and are fully compliant with all the
expectations before sending the file to Ford.
6. Question: Can we get a link to this presentation?
Answer: Yes, the link will be available and distributed.
7. Question: Should we align Phase 3 Capacity Verification with the new Final Capability
assessment (-1 MBJ1) when we have all shifts and have a better look at the actual
production stream (Quality and Capacity)
Answer: Yes, we are in the process of updating the Phase 3 Capacity Verification to
include Final Process Capability.
8. Question: Will it be possible to get this training for Mexico STA Engineers? Many of the
site STA engineers are traveling today and just a few are online right now.
3/8/2012 Page 1
Answer: Yes.
9. Question: Do we get training credit for attending this WebEx/audio Schedule A?
Answer: Yes for Ford employees, if you logged into the webex you will get credit. If you
were not able to log into the webex and were on the audio, send in your CDSID to Cherry
Green (cgreen@ford.com) to get credit for the training.
10. Question: Why have to manually enter summary plan, rather than have link to deliverable
plan fill in the summary automatically?
Answer: We understand that the automation of the summary plan is desirable, but
limitations within the Excel based document prohibits this approach. We intend to address
automation of summary plan in the eAPQP.
11. Question: Does the system identify who has responsibility to populate information?
Answer: Supplier has lead responsibility to populate information in the Schedule A.
12. Question: If Action plans change how/where do you enter data?
Answer: You can enter the data into the pop-up box or going directly to the Action Plan cell
for the particular deliverable.
13. Question: Are action plans downloaded automatically to form…Y/R actions to bottom of the
page?
Answer: No. See answer to Question 10. Therefore, the supplier should manually
document their deliverable conformance plan in the bottom of the Schedule A.
14. Question: How critical is the Q1 score on the header?
Answer: Q1 score is not used to run the macros. We will look at eliminating the Q1 score
from the Schedule A.
15. Question: Will suppliers be notified of the upcoming eAPQP system?
Answer: Yes, eAPQP training will be offered.
16. Question: For ILVS suppliers when blend number not released for build how should R@R
be conducted?
Answer: For ILVS suppliers, Run-at-rate will be dealt on a case by case basis. Supplier
needs to contact their STA Program manager/engineer or Site STA for further directions.
17. Question: Do the program milestone deliverable due dates auto fill after selecting the
vehicle PMT?
3/8/2012 Page 2
Answer: Yes, as long as the Program Milestone dates have been filled in the Header
Section.
18. Question: Similar to how we have it on Schedule B (in Col C), should we have a “lead Ford
Function” or responsible function/primary contact for supplier, identified for each Deliverable
on the new ver 6 schedule A? (we get into these EPMT/CPMT discussions where people
go “we didn’t know it was our lead, thought it was STA, or ME”..eg. Show as: CPMT leader
or just CPMT leader or just CPMT or PD, or MP&L Pkg Engineer, etc.
Answer: Although the supplier has the lead to complete the Schedule A, the expectations
provide guidance on the Ford support functions for a particular deliverable.
19. Question: Is it mandatory to select Plant and ME reps for “Select” PT Priority parts? REF
Slide 41.
Answer: PTO Plant and ME reps for on-site evaluations will be identified by PTO ME based
on a review of the PTO Priority list. Site STA or supplier will not be required to select a rep.
20. Question: What is the filter for “Select” identification? (anything additional to current GPDS
filter?) REF Slide 41.
Answer: PTO ME will select based on their experience from past launches and will be a
sub-set of the original Priority list.
21. Question: New Schedule A may need additional cells to capture them as functional
attendees in rows 439-443? REF Slide 41
Answer: This will be included in the eAPQP.
22. Question: May be ok showing 48 deliverables if referring to current ver 5 Schedule A vs 30

in ver 6? REF Slide 5
Answer: Pre-2015 MY programs will continue to use the Schedule As with the 48
deliverables. Revised Schedule A will be implemented on 2015+ programs.
23. Question: I think "visit 2" is a bit too late to address Special Characteristics", especially for
gage designs?
Answer: For Powertrain programs Special Characteristics are reviewed at "On-Site

Evaluation #1" and not “On-Site Evaluation #2”. See Note in Slide #55 of presentation.
24. Question: Last year a new form (APQP PPAP evidence work book) was rolled out to
capture YC, YS, CC, OS, SC, & HI. This replaced the Supplement K. Both documents
3/8/2012 Page 3
require identification of PTC. Will the document you are covering today be an additional
document or are there additional changes coming to this document?
Answer: The APQP/PPAP Evidence Workbook is in addition to the Pass-Through

Characteristic list. Both documents are distinct in content and use. No additional changes
are coming to the APQP/PPAP Evidence Workbook.
25. Question: Does the revised Schedule A have the “Import” function to import data from the v
5.0 Schedule A?
Answer: The revised Schedule A v. 6.0 does not allow the supplier to import data from v.
5.0, as there are fewer deliverable and no requirement for rating expectations in v. 6.0. If
supplier is using v. 5.0 for a 2015 MY program, then the supplier must re-enter data into v.
6.0 upon receiving request to migrate.
26. Question: Will existing programs migrate to Schedule A v. 6.0?
Answer: No. Current programs will continue to use the Schedule A v. 5.0.
3/8/2012 Page 4
Improvements to the External Supplier New
Part Approval Process (APQP / PPAP) -
Training
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Slide #s
– Background 3 to 6
– Planned Improvements 7 to 15
– External Supplier New Part Readiness Assessment - Schedule A 16 to 51
– Impact of the Improved APQP/PPAP Process to the GPDS Supplier 52 to 72

Engagement Process
– “Go Further” with The Web Based Application – eAPQP 73 to 75
– Appendix 76 to 85
Ford Confidential 2
Background - Why are we here?
In 2011 a Ford cross-functional team (PD / NML / Purchasing) utilized the Quality
& Productivity Improvement Plan (QPIP) 8-Step Process to systematically
analyze and improve the current External Supplier New Part Approval Process
(APQP / PPAP)
The team obtained approvals to implement the improvements from Ford Senior
Leadership
Train Ford and the External Suppliers on the improvements made to the current
APQP / PPAP process and to begin implementation of the process on programs
beginning with the 2015 Model Year
To Train Ford And The External Suppliers On The Improvements And To

Begin Process Implementation
Ford Confidential 3
Background - External Supplier New Part Approval Process Map
PTC/ PA FDJ
PSC VP LR MP1 OKTB
M1DJ
Program Sourcing
Priority Supplier Selection
Kick-off
Monthly Assessment of 48 Deliverables through 2015 MY

& 30 Deliverable post 2015 MY (NEW)
Cross-Functional Supplier Engagement (4 Team Evaluations)
Roll-up of Data / Report Out Linked to the Quality Panel
Quality / Capacity Verification
The Present Process Was Launched In 2006

Ford Confidential 4
Background - What will remain the same?
1. Maintain the foundations of GPDS Supplier Engagement Process –

- Early Involvement: Work with suppliers more consistently, earlier in the product
development process
- Teams: Utilize cross-functional Ford Teams to work together with suppliers at their
facilities
- Standardization: Adopt a single, global, disciplined process to minimize rework and
redundancy
- Governance/Reporting: Use common, clear deliverables and a structured
management review cadence
2. Continue to use the External Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Assessment (Schedule A) as

the tool by which external suppliers perform Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP).
3. Maintain the fundamentals of Global Phased PPAP and with the Ford Customer Specific
PPAP requirements.
4. Continue to use the present reporting tools such as Schedules B, C and D to summarize
the supplier status
5. Maintain the authorization to ship to Ford plants through either an approved PSW or a
WERS Alert
Foundations Of The GPDS Supplier Engagement Process And Part
Approval Remains The Same
Ford Confidential 5
Background - Why have we changed the process?
Current I. Continuous II. Improve Revised

Improvement Launches
Key GPDS Updates / Recommendations from

Clarifications Other Ford Quality
Improvements Projects
Current 48 APQP/PPAP and Lessons Learned Right
Deliverables helped to Plan Deliverables
improve launches over the Measured at
last 5 years. the Right
+ Time
Foundational Principles of
GPDS Supplier Engagement Mazda
Process remains Unchanged Do Benchmarking
Adjust
Check
We Have Changed The Process To Accelerate Development Of New Products

And To Work Together More Efficiently As One Team
Ford Confidential 6
Planned Improvements
1. Link the PD / STA Matched Pair evaluations to the

External Supplier New Part Approval Process
2. Incorporate GPDS updates and overall timing

improvements
3. Enable teams to focus on critical issues to improve

launch quality
4. Go Improve the part risk assessment and rating methodology

Stop
We Have Improved The Effectiveness And Efficiency Of The External

Supplier New Part Approval Process
Ford Confidential 7
Link the PD / STA Matched Pair evaluations to the
External Supplier New Part Approval Process
PTC/ PA FDJ
PSC VP LR MP1 OKTB
M1DJ
Linked
LinkedPD PD//STA
STAMatched
MatchedPair
Pairevaluations
evaluationsto
tofocus
focuson:
on:
•• Site Capability (Ppk)
Site Capability (Ppk)
•• Special
SpecialCharacteristics
Characteristics
•• Dimensional
DimensionalVariation
VariationAnalysis
Analysis(DVA)
(DVA)confirmation
confirmation//
Sourcing feedback
feedback
Team Team
Team Team
On-Site On-Site
On-Site On-Site
Evaluation Evaluation
Evaluation #2 Evaluation #3
#1 #4
• Failure Mode • Testing & • Testing & Validation • Manufacturing

Avoidance Validation • Tooling Verification Launch
• Mfg./Capacity Planning • Prototype • Manufacturing Launch • Quality /
• Testing & Validation Builds • Quality / Capacity Capacity
Planning • Tooling Verification Verification
In The 4th Quarter 2010, The Process Was Strengthened By Adding

Supplier Site Capability Verification
Ford Confidential 8
Incorporate GPDS updates and overall
timing improvements
1. Adjusted the External Supplier New Part Approval Process timing to

align with two month GPDS timing reduction on a Scale 6 program (from
35 to 33 months).
2. Added a deliverable to track Hard Tool status for the Part Coordination
Fixture (PCF) builds and the Trim Coordination Builds (TCB).
Powertrain suppliers will track their Hard Tool status to <Unit TT> build
requirements.
3. Added the requirements for Part Coordination Fixture (<PCF1> / 8.5

MBJ1) and Trim Coordination Build (<TCB1> / 11 MBJ1) processes to
enable better assessment of part Fit and Function.
4. Added the requirements for Pass Through Characteristics (PTCs), for

Powertrain program suppliers.
We Aligned The External Supplier New Part Approval Process

With GPDS Improvements
Ford Confidential 9
Enable teams to focus on critical issues to
improve launch quality
1. Optimized the present 48 Deliverables to 30:
– 4 Deliverables Added to strengthen process
– 20 Deliverables Modified for Process Efficiency
– 2 Deliverables Redefined as Output (Quality and Capacity Verification)
– Provided clear directions for rating deliverables
– Created standard forms/templates as evidence for deliverable completion
2. Optimized the present 217 Expectations to 114:

– Reworded to capture the data from the SUPPLIER’s perspective
– Eliminated redundancies with industry and company established
processes and standards (e.g. AIAG SPC, Phased PPAP Manual, etc).
– Eliminated requirement for rating expectations
– Captured the new GPDS requirements
3. Improves launch quality by allowing teams to focus on critical issues sooner

and dedicate more time to resolution – reduces Deliverables / Expectations the
teams must manage annually by 50% (12 Million versus 6 Million data points)
We Optimized The Number Of Deliverables And Expectations To Improve

Launch Quality
Ford Confidential 10
Enable teams to focus on critical issues to
improve launch quality – Deliverables Added
Timing Rationale
1 Hard Tool completed and supports the PCF / <PEC> Aligns with the PCF /
TCB builds, as required 8 MBJ1 TCB builds
2 Final confirmation of Design / Manufacturing <PEC> Assesses supplier

Feasibility completed 8 MBJ1 feasibility post VP build
3 Production Run at Cycle Time to <PP> Provides an early

demonstrate Quality and Capacity Capability 3 MBJ1 assessment of Quality
on All Additional Production Streams and Capacity Capability
4 Final Process Capability established <MP2> Assesses Mass

(in addition to the initial process capability -1 MBJ1 Production Variability
assessment at <TT>)
Note: For Powertrain Programs, these deliverables are aligned to their respective Unit
milestones (see Slide for “Quality and Capacity Verification Deliverables – Powertrain”)
We Strengthened The Process To Improve Launch Quality

Quality and Capacity Verification Deliverables - Vehicle
No Quality Verification Deliverables (23 Total) Lead Due No Quality Verification Deliverables (contd.) Lead Due
1 Supplier Site identified C-Purch <PTC> 17 Facilities / Hard tools / Production Process / STA <TT>
Equipment and Gauges are installed at the final
2 Engineering Statement of Work (ESOW) received PD <PTC> production location - Home Line (Including Sub-
3 Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA) PD <PA> Suppliers)
reviewed & Potential Critical / Significant 18 Gauge Repeatability & Reproducibility (R&R) STA <TT>
Characteristics (YC / YS’s) completed / cascaded results meet Ford Customer Specifics
4 Preliminary Design / Manufacturing feasibility PD / STA <PA> 19 Parts produced from Run at Rate at Cycle Time STA <TT>
completed including supplier confirmation of tolerances off of One Production Stream
from Dimensional Variation Analysis (DVA) studies
20 Parts achieve 100% of print specifications STA <TT>
5 Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI) agreed to and PD <FDJ> (Minimum 5 piece layout)
received
21 Initial Process Capability Study completed and STA / <TT>
6 Production Drawings available PD <FDJ> Dimensional Variation Analysis (DVA) validated PD
7 Plan for Hard Tool Parts for the PCF, TCB builds PD <FDJ> 22 Production Validation (PV) Testing completed PD <TT>
completed, as required
23 Appearance Approval Report (AAR) completed PD <TT>
8 Production Tool Order and/or Purchase Order received C-Purch <FDJ>
9 Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA) STA / PD <VP> No Capacity Verification Deliverables (7 Total) Lead Due
completed
24 Capacity Requirements for Average Production C-Purch <PA>
10 Production Part Approval Timing Plan completed STA / PD <VP> Weekly / Maximum Production Weekly (APW /
(including sub-suppliers) MPW) received
11 Prototype Build Control Plan completed PD <VP> 25 Capacity Planning completed STA <FDJ>
12 Parts are 100% measured, dimensionally known per PD <VP> 26 Packaging approval submitted MP&L <TT>
Prototype Build Control Plan and signed off by Eng.
27 Production Run at Cycle Time to demonstrate STA <PP>
13 Hard Tools completed & supports the PCF / TCB PD <PEC> Quality and Capacity Capability on All Additional
builds, as required Production Streams
14 Final confirmation of Design and Manufacturing STA / PD <PEC> 28 Production Control Plan completed STA <MP1>
Feasibility completed
29 Final Process Capability established STA <MP2>
15 Pre-Launch Control Plan completed STA <PEC>
30 Capacity Verified - Supplier Demonstration of STA <MP2>
16 Design Verification (DV) Testing completed PD <PEC> Daily Production Volume (APW / MPW)
Quality And Capacity Verification Deliverables Are Rated Separately

Quality and Capacity Verification Deliverables - Powertrain
No Quality Verification Deliverables (23 Total) Lead Due No Quality Verification Deliverables (contd.) Lead Due
1 Supplier Site identified C-Purch <uPTC> 17 Facilities / Hard tools / Production Process / STA <uTT>
Equipment and Gauges are installed at the final
2 Engineering Statement of Work (ESOW) received PD <uPTC> production location - Home Line (Including Sub-
3 Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA) PD <uPA> Suppliers)
reviewed & Potential Critical / Significant 18 Gauge Repeatability & Reproducibility (R&R) STA <uTT>
Characteristics (YC / YS’s) completed / cascaded results meet Ford Customer Specifics
4 Preliminary Design / Manufacturing feasibility PD / <uPA> 19 Parts produced from Run at Rate at Cycle Time STA <uTT>
completed including supplier confirmation of tolerances STA off of One Production Stream
from Dimensional Variation Analysis (DVA) studies
20 Parts achieve 100% of print specifications STA <uTT>
5 Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI) agreed to and PD <uPA> (Minimum 5 piece layout)
received
21 Initial Process Capability Study completed and STA / <uTT>
6 Production Drawings available PD <uDC> Dimensional Variation Analysis (DVA) validated PD
7 Plan for Hard Tool Parts completed PD <uDC> 22 Production Validation (PV) Testing completed PD <uTT>
23 Appearance Approval Report (AAR) completed PD <uTT>
8 Production Tool Order and/or Purchase Order received C-Purch <uTD>
9 Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA) STA / <uTD>
No Capacity Verification Deliverables (7 Total) Lead Due
completed PD
24 Capacity Requirements for Average Production C-Purch <uPA>
10 Production Part Approval Timing Plan completed STA / <uTD>
Weekly / Maximum Production Weekly (APW /
(including sub-suppliers) PD
MPW) received
11 Prototype Build Control Plan completed PD <uTD>
25 Capacity Planning completed STA <uDC>
12 Parts are 100% measured, dimensionally known per PD <uTD>
26 Packaging approval submitted MP&L <uTT>
Prototype Build Control Plan and signed off by Eng.
27 Production Run at Cycle Time to demonstrate STA <uPP>
13 Hard Tools completed PD <uTT>
Quality and Capacity Capability on All Additional
Production Streams
14 Final confirmation of Design and Manufacturing STA / <uTD>
28 Production Control Plan completed STA <uJob1>
Feasibility completed PD
29 Final Process Capability established STA <uJob1>
15 Pre-Launch Control Plan completed STA <uTT>
30 Capacity Verified - Supplier Demonstration of STA <uJob1>
16 Design Verification (DV) Testing completed PD <uDC>
Daily Production Volume (APW / MPW)
Quality And Capacity Verification Deliverables Are Rated Separately

Go
Improve the part risk assessment and rating
Stop methodology
PRESENT PROCESS
<Milestone> <MP1> 0 MBJ1

GPDS Timeline
Deliverables NO
Completed
RED
YES
COMPLETE
The Present External Supplier New Part Approval Process Assessment

Is Binary
Go Improve the part risk assessment and rating
Stop methodology
BETTER PROCESS
<Milestone> <MP1> 0 MBJ1

GPDS Timeline
Is There A
Deliverables NO Viable Part NO
RED
Completed Containment
Plan?
YES
YES
YELLOW
COMPLETE
We Have Improved The Part Assessment Process To Better Identify Risk

External Supplier New Part Readiness Assessment – Schedule A
– The External Supplier New Part Readiness Assessment or Schedule A is the

tool by which the External Suppliers perform Advanced Product Quality
Planning (APQP) in accordance with the Ford Customer Specific requirements.
– Successful implementation and use of Schedule A will ultimately prepare the

External Suppliers to complete the Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) –
Part Quality and Capacity Verification.
– The Schedule A is an Excel based document and is submitted on a monthly

basis by all External Suppliers associated with new programs / parts and major
part changes as appropriate.
– The Schedule A comprises of Quality and Capacity related deliverables that are
assessed by the External Suppliers and culminate in the Part Quality and
Capacity Verification
– Data from the Schedule As are rolled up into the External Supplier Part
Readiness Report Card (Schedule B) for review with management
The Present Schedule A version 5.0 Has Been In Use Since 2006
Revisions to the External Supplier New Part Readiness
Assessment – Schedule A version 6.0
– Maintained the look and feel similar to today’s Schedule A to facilitate transition
– Incorporated updates from the Ford Global Product Development System and overall timing improvements
– Enabled teams to focus on critical issues to improve launch quality

– Optimized the present Deliverables / Expectations
– Eliminated redundancies with industry and company established processes / standards
– Reworded to capture the data from the SUPPLIER’s perspective
– Eliminated the need to rate the Expectations
– Established fewer deliverables and expectations aligned with Part Pedigree for better risk identification
– Eliminated need to rate status twice (No Pre-assessments)
– Established a Powertrain unique Schedule A
– Formatted to fewer number of pages to better manage data and communication
We Have Improved The Schedule A For Effectiveness And Efficiency

Migration Plan to Schedule A Version 6.0
– ALL suppliers supporting programs 2015 MY and beyond are required to

start using the revised Schedule A version 6.0
– ALL suppliers supporting programs prior to 2015 MY will continue to use

the current Schedule A version 5.0
– Suppliers can access the revised Schedule A version 6.0 and the training
material at the Ford Supplier Portal page:
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/APQP.html
Suppliers Must Use The Schedule A Version 6.0 On 2015 MY And Beyond
Programs
Learning Objective
The purpose of this training session is to give you step by step

instructions on how to properly fill out the External Supplier APQP /
PPAP Readiness Assessment (Schedule A) document.
External Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Assessment (Schedule A)
Principles of Use:
• Completed by all New Tooled End Item (NTEI) Suppliers
• Submitted to Ford monthly after notification
• Consolidated automatically to produce all roll-up supplier
deliverables & readiness reports
• Required by ISO/TS16949 – Ford Customer Specifics
Relationship to Roll-Up Reports
A
A. Monthly - Supplier
APQP/PPAP Readiness
ASSESSMENT
Submissions for all
Program NTEI Suppliers
B. Supplier APQP/PPAP C. Supplier APQP/PPAP

Readiness – DELIVERABLE Readiness – SUPPLIER
SUMMARY REPORT SCORECARD
Schedules B & C will be generated

automatically from the Schedule A
documents submitted by suppliers
External Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Assessment (Schedule A) – Detail
The External Supplier APQP Readiness Assessment (Schedule A) contains 3 sections:
1) Header Section
2) Deliverable Status Section
3) Summary Section
1. Header Section
Dialogue box for 1997-2003 users
The Excel based Schedule A is driven by macros. The macros for the file have to be enabled
before using the file.
1. Header Section
There is a unique Schedule A for the Vehicle program and for the Powertrain program. The
Vehicle and the Powertrain Schedule As are aligned to the appropriate milestone timing and
nomenclature. Choose the appropriate Program Type.
For Ford Internal Users Only: Check the “Don’t Show Again” box before selecting the
Program Type.
1. Header Section
The header section of the Assessment provides important information about the part,
supplier, team contacts, and key program dates.
The information in the header MUST be filled out completely and correctly in order to
properly report program status.
The Ford program team will input the necessary program information into the Header
Section before the Schedule A is distributed.
Please note: You will not be able to complete the rest of the Assessment until the
header section is filled out completely – the rest of the rows of the spreadsheet will
remain hidden until this information is completed.
1. Header Section
Current Milestone: Select the correct program milestone – this will be the upcoming
or next program milestone. Check with your PD or STA Engineer for this information.
Vehicle Partition: For the Vehicle Schedule A, select Upperbody or Underbody. For
the Powertrain Schedule A, select PTORough or PTOFinish. Check with your PD or
STA Engineer for this information. Note – this selection will adjust Deliverable timing
as Powertrain and Underbody milestones can occur earlier.
1. Header Section
Priority Site: Click this selection if your site has been designated a Priority Site by
the Ford program team. You will be notified your Priority status via a letter.
Program Information: Enter the correct program code/name/model year. Check with
your PD or STA Engineer for this information. The program code MUST be entered
per the direction from your Ford program team. In most cases, the Ford Program
team will complete this information and send the Schedule A to you.
Submission Dates: Enter the date when the current Schedule A is submitted and the
date when the last Schedule A was submitted.
1. Header Section
Site Information: Enter your 5 digit GSDB Site Code, Name, Address and Q1
Information. Information is obtained from Supplier Improvement Metrics (SIM)
Vehicle PMT: Select the appropriate Program Module Team (PMT). Contact your Ford
PD engineer for the correct selection.
Part Information: Enter the base part number and name for the commodity along with
the number of unique parts released for this commodity. Enter the Ford plants where
the parts will be used.
1. Header Section
For Powertrain Programs Only
Key Program Dates: In most cases, this information will be pre-filled out on the
Schedule A by the Ford program team. Dates for the build events (VP, TT, uTT etc.) are
based on In Plant Dates (IPDs) or Material Required Dates (MRDs)
For Powertrain programs, the program milestone dates are based on Unit timing.
1. Header Section
Ford Contact Information
Supplier Contact Information
(Corporate Directory System ID)
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
N
a
m
e
:
J
O
H
N
D
O
E
1
Lead PD Engineer: ABCDE
3
1
3
5
5
5
-
1
2
1
2
(
Program Contact Phone: ) Site STA Engineer: FGHIJL
e-mail Address: JOHNDOE1@ABC.COM Lead Commodity Buyer: DS78NL
J
O
H
N
D
O
E
2
Plant Contact Name:
3
1
3
5
5
5
-
1
2
1
3
(
Plant Contact Phone: ) MP&L Analyst: FASDLE
email Address: JOHNDOE2@ABC.COM Program Mailbox: P552APQP
Actual
Action Plan/
Completion
Action Plan/ Counter
Evidence Dates Action Plan/
Counter Measure Measure Date
(Metric) Counter Measure Description
Responsibility
DD-MMM-YY
DD-MMM-YY
Supplier & Ford Contact Information: Key information needed throughout the
program. Note the Program Mailbox information – this will be an email address
(“Program Mailbox”@ford.com) where the Schedule A documents will be sent monthly.
There will be a unique mailbox for each program and will be provided by your Ford
program team via the notification letter.
1. Header Section
After all data is entered into the Header Section, press “OK” to make the file functional
for use and reporting.
2. Deliverable Status Section
Structure:
The Deliverable Status

section of the Assessment is
structured in a hierarchy that
includes:
– Deliverables
– Expectations
The suppliers will enter their

timing, specific status
ratings and action plans in
this section of the document
against each program
milestone or build event.
Deliverables are APQP/PPAP requirements that support Quality Verification (Phase 1 PSW) at <TT>
or <Unit TT> and Capacity Verification (Phase 3 PSW) at <MP2> or <Unit Job1>.
Deliverables are assessed based on their completion date and their impact on achieving Quality and
Capacity Verification.
The Deliverable number (1- 30) is listed in the left column.
Every deliverable is tied to a milestone and has a due date. These are automatically populated based
on the Program Milestone Dates. The milestone and due date for a particular deliverable may differ by
Vehicle Partition.
Expectations provide further details about what needs to be in place for the deliverable to be
complete. You must fulfill the requirements of the expectations when rating a deliverable.
Expectations should be thought of as Quality of Event criteria.
Expectations are no longer rated individually.
Live links are provided within the body of the Expectations to give you access to the relevant
procedures and forms.
Shown above is an example of a Live Link within the body of expectation. Above example gives direct
access to the Ford FMEA Handbook after you log into the Covisint system.
You will need to confirm that you have read and are fully compliant with all the expectations before
sending the file to Ford. Select “Yes” to indicate compliance.
All 30 Deliverables are required to be rated with every submission of the Assessment.
Prior to rating the deliverable, you must enter the Planned Completion Date for the particular
deliverable.
You must rate the deliverable by comparing the Planned Completion Date against the Deliverable
Due Date and choose the appropriate Red / Yellow / Green rating based on the standard definitions.
Rating definitions (Green / Yellow / Red) for the Quality Verification Deliverable #s 1 to 23 are:
Green = Deliverable is on track to be completed by the Deliverable Due Date.
Yellow = Deliverable is not on track for completion by the Deliverable Due Date, but supports
Quality Verification (Phase 1 PSW) no later than the <PP> or <Unit TT> milestone.
Red = Deliverable is not on track for completion by the Deliverable Due Date resulting in
Quality Verification (Phase 1 PSW) completion after the <PP> or <Unit TT> milestone
Rating definitions (Green / Yellow / Red) for the Capacity Verification Deliverable #s 24 to 30 are:
Green = Deliverable is on track to be completed by the Deliverable Due Date
Yellow = Deliverable is not on track for completion by the Deliverable Due Date, but supports
Capacity Verification (Phase 3 PSW) no later than the <MP2> or <Unit Job 1>
milestone
Red = Deliverable is not on track for completion by the Deliverable Due Date resulting in
Capacity Verification (Phase 3 PSW) completion after the <MP2> or <Unit Job 1>
milestone
Example for Green Rating:

Planned Completion Date = 10-Mar-12
Deliverable Due Date = 21-Mar-12
Since the deliverable is on track to be completed by the Deliverable Due Date, the deliverable is rated
Green
Example for Yellow Rating:

Planned Completion Date = 01-Dec-12
Deliverable Due Date = 19-Sep-12
Phase 1 PSW Planned Completion Date (from cell # L247 or P432) = 03-Feb-14
<PP> Date = 21-Apr-14
In this example, the deliverable is not on track for completion by the Deliverable Due Date, but
supports Quality Verification (Phase 1 PSW) requirement of no later than the <PP> milestone. So the
deliverable is rated Yellow.
This same logic applies to the Capacity Verification deliverables and the deliverables for the
Powertrain programs, but aligned to the appropriate rating definition.
When a Yellow, Red or Complete status is entered, a

pop-up box opens up. For Yellow or Red, an Action Plan
needs to be entered. The Action Plan is used to convey
help required and actions being taken to correct
program concerns. If you do not know what to enter for
an Action Plan, contact the responsible Ford PD, STA,
Buyer or MP&L representative for assistance.
For Complete, the Actual Completion Date and Evidence

(optional) needs to be entered.
3. Summary Section
This part of the Assessment is intended to summarize the element status for the entire document.
There are 5 parts to the summary:
1. Current Milestone Deliverable Status
2. Forecast Milestone Deliverable Status
3. Phased PPAP Element Dates
4. Supplier On-Site Evaluation Summary
5. Rating Criteria and Assessment Definition (Discussed on Slide #39)
3. Summary Section
Current Milestone Deliverable Status:
Indicates the status for only those deliverables that are required to be completed by the currently assessed
milestone. These fields are automatically generated based upon input in the Deliverable Status section. The one
exception are the words for the Deliverable Conformance Plan – these must be manually entered
This status is consolidated in the Deliverable Summary Report (Schedule B) and is shown as the individual
supplier status on the Supplier Scorecard document (Schedule C).
Enter a brief summary of the team’s agreed-upon Action Plans against one or more of the 8 categories of the
Deliverable Conformance Plan. This information is used to convey help required and actions being taken to
correct program concerns. If you do not know what to enter, contact the responsible Ford PD, STA, Buyer or
MP&L representative for assistance.
Examples of the Deliverable Conformance Plan are given in the Attachment of this training material.
3. Summary Section
Forecast Milestone Deliverable Summary:
Indicates the status of remaining deliverables not yet required for completion at a given milestone. The
majority of these fields are automatically generated based upon input in the Deliverable Status section.
The Deliverable Conformance fields must be manually entered.
This provides a forward looking view of future deliverables for use by the team.
Examples of the Deliverable Conformance Plan are given in the Attachment of this training material.
3. Summary Section
PPAP Element Dates:
A summary of PV, Homeline and PPAP dates as

outlined in the Planned Completion Date and Actual
Completion Date for the respective Deliverables and
also includes the Build Support Plan. The dates are
automatically populated from the Deliverables, while
Build Support Plans must be manually entered.
A Build Support Plan is the agreement on what type of

parts will be used for production in lieu of fully PPAP’d
parts at the latest design level. PPAP dates must Supplier On-Site Evaluation Summary:
match entry in Vehicle Parts Progress (VPP) and
Manufacturing Parts Progress (MPP). Examples of the Required for Priority suppliers only. The team
Build Support Plan are given in the Attachment of this manually tracks planned and actual visit dates. The
training. data is rolled up on Deliverable Summary Report
(Schedule B).
Resetting Functions
Using different versions of Excel can sometime generate “Run-Time Errors” or can change the
formats in the document like shifting of boxes, compression of text etc..
For Run-time errors, you can continue the input process without exiting Excel and/or the
"Schedule A" worksheet by clicking the “Reset” button at the top of the worksheet.
For format changes, press Ctrl-H from the keyboard and the original settings will be restored
File Readiness Status for Transmittal
File Naming Convention indicates whether the completed Schedule A is ready to send to Ford.
“R” at the beginning of the file name string indicates that all required data has been entered into the
Schedule A and the file is now READY for transmittal to the Ford Program Mailbox.
“NR” at the beginning of the file name string indicates that all required data has not been entered into
the Schedule A and the file is now NOT READY for transmittal to the Ford Program Mailbox. Review
file for missing data and re-save. Contact your Ford STA Engineer for further guidance.
Acronyms
The revised Schedule A has a tab for all the acronyms used within the deliverables and
expectations.
The revised External Supplier APQP /

PPAP Readiness Assessment
(Schedule A) document will be
available in the current repositories for
both Ford and Supplier personnel.
External Supplier needs access to

Covisint to get into the Ford Supplier
Portal.
The External Supplier APQP / PPAP

Readiness Assessment (Schedule A) –
User Guide is being updated. The
User Guide will continue to reside in
the current repositories for access to
Ford and Supplier personnel.
External Suppliers require access to

Covisint to use these documents
Impact of the Improved APQP/PPAP Process to the
GPDS Supplier Engagement Process
1. Maintain the foundations of GPDS Supplier Engagement Process
2. Maintain the use of the priority supplier filtration criterion
3. Continue to engage the priority suppliers through 4 on-site team

evaluations with the present Ford team membership
a. For Powertrain programs, Plant and ME representative(s) will
accompany the team on select priority suppliers
4. Modify the agendas for the 4 on-site team evaluations to align with the
revised deliverables in the Schedule A
On-Site Evaluations
uLR/ uLS/
Unit Unit Unit DC uTT uJob1 uOKTB
uTD uTT MRD uPP MRD uPP
PTC PA
37MBJ1 27.5MBJ1 20MBJ1 12MBJ1 8MBJ1 5MBJ1 3MBJ1 2MBJ1 0MBJ1
LR/
PTC PA FDJ VP PEC TT PP MP1 OKTB
FEC
26MBJ1 18.5MBJ1 16.5MBJ1 12MBJ1 8MBJ1 5.5MBJ1 5MBJ1 3MBJ1 0MBJ1 -2MBJ1
(666/664)
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Priority
Suppliers
Selected
Cross- Resolve Open Issues

Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
On-Site On-Site to On-Site On-Site
Kick-Off Evaluation Evaluation Proceed Evaluation Evaluation
Meetings #1 #2 to Run- #3 #4
Begin At-Rate
Team Kick-Off Meetings
uLR/ uLS/
PTC PA
LR/
FEC
26MBJ1 18.5MBJ1 16.5MBJ1 12MBJ1 8MBJ1 5.5MBJ1 5MBJ1 3MBJ1 0MBJ1 -2MBJ1
(666/664)
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Priority
Prior to the On-Site Evaluations, the cross-
Suppliers functional Ford team members will meet with their
Selected
supplier team to review program expectations and
Cross- begin the preparations forOpen
Resolve On-site
Issues Evaluations.
Functional
Teams Formed
This is called the “Kick-Off” meeting.
Team Decision
Begin At-Rate
Team Kick-Off Meeting – Key Points
Purpose:
Introduce Ford and supplier team members
Provide them with an overview of the GPDS Supplier Engagement Process
Communicate team expectations prior to On-Site Evaluation #1. A key deliverable will
be Ford and supplier team agreement on the required program and process timing.
Timing: PT: Unit <PTC> - Unit <PTC> + 3 months (37 to 34 MBJ1)

UN: <PSC> - <PSC> + 2.5 months (35.5 to 33 MBJ1)
UP: <PTC> - <PTC> + 3 months (26 to 23 MBJ1)
Note: Actual review timing will depend upon the specific needs of the component and program.
Participants:
Lead: PD Engineer
Support: Site STA Engineer, MP&L Representative (as required), Commodity Buyer
Note: For Powertrain Programs only, Powertrain ME Representative for a subset of
Priority Suppliers
Location:
Ford facility, supplier facility, or teleconference (according to team preference). Meetings
will typically last 2 – 3 hours.
Reference Manual Section III. 9.

55
Ford Confidential
On-Site Evaluation #1
uLR/ uLS/
PTC PA
LR/
FEC
The cross-functional
26MBJ1 18.5MBJ1 16.5MBJ1
team’s first
12MBJ1 8MBJ1
visit is called
5.5MBJ1 5MBJ1
“On-
3MBJ1 0MBJ1 -2MBJ1
(666/664)
Site Evaluation #1 – Verification of Supplier Failure
Supplier
Sourcing Mode Avoidance Strategy & Manufacturing Plan.
Begins
Priority
Timing for this visit will depend on the section of the
Suppliers vehicle where the part resides – Powertrain (PT),
Selected
Underbody (UN), or Upperbody (UP)
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Begin At-Rate
On-Site Evaluation #1 – Key Points
Purpose:
Failure mode avoidance through detailed FMEA and Control Plan reviews
Manufacturing Planning
Capacity Planning
Timing: Powertrain (PT): <uPTC> - <uPA> (37 to 27.5 MBJ1)

Underbody (UN): 2 months after <PSC> - <PTC> (33 to 26 MBJ1)
Upperbody (UP): <PTC> - <PA> (26 to 18.5 MBJ1)
Note: Actual review timing will be dependent upon the specific needs of the component and the program.
MBJ1 timing based on 666/664 program scale
Participants:
Lead: PD Engineer
Support: Site STA Engineer, MP&L Representative, Commodity Buyer
For Powertrain Programs Only - Plant and ME Representative(s) for a
sub-set of Powertrain Priority Suppliers

On-Site Evaluation #1– APQP/PPAP Focus
APQP/PPAP Deliverable Focus 5 Deliverables
APQP/PPAP Deliverables Lead
1 Supplier Site identified Buyer
2 Engineering Statement of Work (ESOW) received PD
3 Design Failure Mode Effects Analysis (DFMEA) reviewed & PD

Potential Critical / Significant Characteristics (YC/YS)
completed / received
4 Preliminary Design and Manufacturing Feasibility completed PD / STA
24 Capacity Requirements for Average Production Weekly / Buyer

Maximum Production Weekly (APW / MPW) received
Note: For Powertrain Programs, Deliverable #5 “Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI)
agreed to and cascaded” has to be completed by <Unit PA>
On-Site Evaluation #1– Expected Outputs
Output Responsibility
1 Updated External Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Supplier (with Cross

Assessment – Schedule A – Confirmation of 5 Required Functional Team
Deliverable Status Consensus)
2 Agreement on Failure Mode Avoidance Strategy All

(Completion of DFMEA & preliminary look at Special
Characteristics)
4 Agreement that supplier has received sufficient engineering PD

information to start design and initiate the APQP/PPAP
process
5 Agreement that supplier has received all the Capacity STA
Requirements in order to complete Capacity Planning
6 Commitment from supplier on feasibility of design and PD / STA

manufacturing to produce the part(s) as specified
7 Updated Manufacturing Site Assessment (MSA) – As STA
required
8 Agreement of timing for next on-site evaluations All
uLR/ uLS/
PTC PA
LR/
PTC
The cross-functional team’s second visit
PA FDJ VP PEC TT
isPP called MP1 OKTB
FEC
(666/664)
26MBJ1 “On-Site
18.5MBJ1 Evaluation
16.5MBJ1 12MBJ1 #2 – Verification
8MBJ1 5.5MBJ1 of Supplier
5MBJ1 3MBJ1 0MBJ1 -2MBJ1
Supplier Launch Preparation and Decision to proceed to Run-

Sourcing
Begins
at-Rate.”
Priority This visit will always occur prior to the supplier’s

Suppliers
Selected shipment of parts to the Verification Prototype <VP>
builds (12 MBJ1)
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Begin At-Rate
Purpose:
Facilities & Tooling Planning/Installation
PFMEA & Pre-Launch Control Plan
Gauging
Staffing & Training Planning
VP Prototype Build Readiness
Run-at-Rate Preparation
Timing: Powertrain (PT): <uDC> - <VP> (20 to 12 MBJ1)
Underbody (UN): <FDJ> - <VP> (16.5 to 12 MBJ1)
Upperbody (UP): <FDJ> - <VP> (16.5 to 12 MBJ1)
Participants:
Lead: PD Engineer , Site STA Engineer
Support: MP&L Representative, Commodity Buyer
Ford Confidential
Reference Manual Section III. 11. 61
On-Site Evaluation #2– APQP/PPAP Focus
5 Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI) agreed to and received PD
6 Production Drawing available PD
7 Plan for Hard Tool Parts completed PD
8 Production Tool Order and/or Purchase Order received Buyer

9 Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA) completed STA / PD
10 Production part approval timing plan completed (including STA / PD
sub-suppliers)
11 Prototype Build Control Plan completed PD
12 Parts are 100% measured, dimensionally known and signed PD
off by Ford engineering
25 Capacity Planning completed STA
Note: For Powertrain Programs, Deliverable #16 “Design Verification (DV) Testing
completed” is added to On-site Evaluation #2 whereas Deliverable #5 is covered in On-
Site Evaluation #1.
1 Updated External Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Supplier (with Cross

Assessment – Schedule A - Confirmation of 9 Required Functional Team
Deliverable Status Consensus)
2 Acceptance of parts to support VP Prototype Build (prior to PD
shipment)
3 Concurrence on manufacturing plans in support of Run-at- STA

Rate event
4 Agreement on PFMEA STA/PD
5 Agreement that the Capacity Plan is Achievable and STA

Consistent with Ford’s Capacity Requirements
6 Confirmation of Design Verification (DV) testing completion PD

for Powertrain programs only
required
uLR/ uLS/
PTC PA
LR/
FEC
(666/664)
26MBJ1 The cross-functional
18.5MBJ1 16.5MBJ1 12MBJ1 team’s
8MBJ1 third visit5MBJ1
5.5MBJ1 is called
3MBJ1 “On-
0MBJ1 -2MBJ1
Supplier
Site Evaluation #3 – Verification of Supplier
Sourcing Capability.
Begins
Priority This visit will always occur prior to the supplier’s

Suppliers
Selected
shipment of parts for production Tool Tryout (TT or
Unit TT) builds
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Begin At-Rate
Purpose:
Completion of PPAP Phase 1
– Dimensional Results
– Production Validation Testing
– Process Capability
– Appearance Approval
Timing: Powertrain (PT): 1 months after <uTD> - <uTT> MRD (11 to 8 MBJ1)
Underbody (UN): <PEC> - <TT> (8 to 5 MBJ1)
Upperbody (UP): <PEC> - <TT> (8 to 5 MBJ1)
Participants:
Lead: Site STA Engineer
Support: PD Engineer , MP&L Representative, Commodity Buyer
On-Site Evaluation #3 – APQP/PPAP Focus
13 Hard Tools completed STA / PD
14 Final confirmation of Design and Manufacturing feasibility completed STA
15 Pre-Launch Control Plan completed STA

16 Design Verification completed PD
17 Facilities / Hard Tools / Production Process / Equipment & Gauges are at the final STA
manufacturing site production location – Home Line (including Sub-Suppliers)
18 Gauge Repeatability & Reproducibility (R&R) results meet Ford Customer STA
Specifics
19 Parts produced from Run at Rate at Cycle Time off of One Production Stream STA
(including Sub-Suppliers)
20 Parts achieve 100% of print specifications STA
21 Initial Process Capability Study completed and Dimensional Variation Analysis STA / PD
(DVA) validated
22 Production Validation (PV) Testing completed PD
23 Appearance Approval Report (AAR) completed PD
26 Packaging approval submitted MP&L
Note: For Powertrain Programs, Deliverable #16 is covered in On-Site Evaluation #2.
1 Updated Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Assessment – Supplier (with Cross

Schedule A – Confirmation of 12 Required Deliverable Functional Team
Status Consensus)
2 Signed Phase 1 PPAP warrant STA/PD

(and Phase 2 PPAP if single production workstream)

required
uLR/ uLS/
Unit Unit Unit DC uOKTB
uTD uTT MRD uPP MRD uTT uPP uJob1
PTC PA
LR/
FEC
26MBJ1
The cross-functional
18.5MBJ1 16.5MBJ1 12MBJ1
team’s
8MBJ1
fourth
5.5MBJ1
visit
5MBJ1
is3MBJ1
called 0MBJ1 -2MBJ1
(666/664)
“On-Site Evaluation #4 – Verification of Supplier
Supplier
Sourcing Capacity.
Begins
Priority
This visit should always occur prior to the supplier’s
Suppliers shipment of parts for Mass Production 2 (MP2)
Selected
builds
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Begin At-Rate
Purpose:
Completion of PPAP Phase 3
– Operators Staffed and Trained
– Ability to Meet Launch Ramp-Up Curve
– Ability to Meet Ongoing Production
– OEE Confirmation
Final Process Capability established
Timing: Powertrain (PT): <uTT> - <uJob1> (5 to 2 MBJ1)
Underbody (UN): <PP> - <MP2> (3 to -1 MBJ1)
Upperbody (UP): <PP> - <MP2> (3 to -1 MBJ1)
Participants:
Lead: Site STA Engineer
Support: PD Engineer , MP&L Representative, Commodity Buyer,
Reference Manual Section III. 13. 69
Ford Confidential
On-Site Evaluation #4 – APQP/PPAP Focus
APQP/PPAP Element + Deliverables Lead
27 Production Run at Cycle Time to demonstrate Quality and STA

Capacity Capability on All Additional Production Streams
(including all Sub-Suppliers)
28 Production Control Plan completed STA
29 Final Process Capability established STA
30 Capacity Verified – Supplier Demonstration of Daily STA

Production Volume (APW / MPW)
On-Site Evaluation #4 – Expected Outputs
1 Updated Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Assessment – Supplier (with Cross

Schedule – Confirm Required Deliverable Status (Final Functional Team
Status) Consensus)
2 Signed Phase 3 PPAP warrant and Capacity Analysis STA

Report
3 Confirmation that the final process capability is established STA

from all Production Streams using mass production parts

required
GPDS Supplier Engagement Manual
The GPDS Supplier Engagement

Manual is being updated for the
changes just discussed. The Manual
will continue to reside in the current
repositories for access to Ford and
Supplier personnel.
“Go Further” with a Web Based Application - eAPQP
– A web-based application that can be accessed from a standard web

browser to:
– Carry-out APQP / PPAP reviews (Schedule A)
– Generate standardized reports (Schedule B, C and D)
– Generate customized reports (ad hoc based on need)
– Provide real time status of supplier readiness
– Application will be accessible across all Ford brands / regions and

by the global supply base
– Application will utilize a Business Process Management platform

allowing flexibility to adapt to business changes as new GPDS
versions are released
– Initial release based on the GPDS 2.2.3
Web Based Application Will Further Enhance Efficiency And

Effectiveness To Manage Launches
Conceptual Mockup of Schedule A in eAPQP
Screen shot from Conceptual Mockup
Implementation Plan of the Web Based Application - eAPQP
Pilot Production Production
Release Release #1 Release #2
Scope Scope Scope
• Pilot release includes: • Content is the same as the Pilot • Content has all the elements of
– Multiple GPDS version support release and includes: Release #1 and also includes:
– Program Maintenance – Multiple GPDS version support – Schedule C, D and dynamic
– Schedule A – Program Maintenance reporting
– Reporting & Integration – Schedule A – Copy GPDS versions
– Schedule B – Reporting & Integration – Remaining automated notification
– APS (Security) integration – Schedule B and bulletins
– SIM NG and GSDB integration – APS (Security) integration – Priority supplier site approval
– Limited automated notification – SIM NG and GSDB integration • Launch on all programs with <PS> in
• Launch on a limited set of suppliers: 4 - – Limited automated notification 2011 and beyond
5 suppliers / program as identified • Launch on all the suppliers for the
below programs identified in the Pilot Release
• Purpose of the Pilot Release is to
ensure a robust Production Release
• Selected suppliers will have to submit
Excel Schedule As during the pilot
release period (2 to 3 months) to
support the programs
Timing Timing Timing

• 4th Quarter 2012 • 1st Quarter 2013 • 2nd Quarter 2013
Programs Programs Programs

• FNA 2015 P552 F-Series <PA> • FNA 2015 P552 F-Series <PA> • All programs with <PS> in 2011 and
• FNA 2015 P552 2.7L Engine <uPA> • FNA 2015 P552 2.7L Engine <uPA> beyond
• APA 2014 C490 C-Value <PA> • APA 2014 C490 C-Value <PA>
•
Ford IT Is Developing
FoE 2015 B479 Fiesta <PA>
A Global Web Based<PA>
• FoE 2015 B479 Fiesta
Application To Carry-out The
External Supplier Part Readiness Assessment & Reporting
75
Ford Confidential
ATTACHMENTS
76
Ford Confidential
Deliverable Conformance &
Build Support Plan Examples
77
Ford Confidential
Deliverable Conformance Plan
When a deliverable is rated Yellow or Red, manually enter a brief summary of the team’s agreed-upon
Action Plans against one or more of the 8 categories of the Deliverable Conformance Plan. This
information is used to convey help required and actions being taken to correct program concerns. If
you do not know what to enter, contact the responsible Ford PD, STA, Buyer or MP&L representative
for assistance.
1. When is a Deliverable Conformance Plan Required?
– Deliverable is rated Yellow or Red
– Required for both Current and Forecast Milestones
2. Where do I input the Deliverable Conformance Plan on the Schedule A?
– For Current Milestone, enter comments in cells N395 to N402

– For Future Milestone, enter comments in cells N414 to N421
Deliverable Conformance Plan - Examples
1. Sourcing
– Purchasing/ Tool Order to be issued on XX/XX/XXXX (<PA>+XX months) to
APW/MPW volume of XXX/XXXX;
– All sourcing to Tier 2 (as applicable) is in progress. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX.
2. Design
– Design FMEA not completed. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
– Design FMEA not reviewed by Ford Team and approved. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX.
– Ford Design FMEA not received /reviewed. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
– Design and manufacturing feasibility not completed and not finalized due to
manufacturing tolerance. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
– SC/CC and HICs not finalized with Cross Functional Teams. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX.
– Detailed production engineering/manufacturing drawing not available. Target
completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
– Potential design changes in progress. Timing will affect all the down stream
activities and Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
3. Production / Hard Tooling –
– Tooling Kick off (KO) received from Ford; Planning for hard tools is in process.
Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
– Tier 2 tooling KO pending commercial agreements. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX.
– Tooling modification for CR # CXXXXXXXX to be completed for a recent design
changes by XX/XXX. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX.
– Pending Long Lead tool order approval, Low volume TO KO to support XX Build
and plan to complete Long Lead Production tool by XX In Plant Date. Target
Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
4. DV & PV Testing –
– DV Testing completed and not reviewed by Ford Team. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– DV testing not completed. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– PV testing not started pending completion of run at rate samples. Target
– PV test in progress. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Re-PV testing in progress due to recent design change. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– PV testing failed and discussion with Ford Team in progress. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
5. Facilities / Production Process / Equipment / Gauges
– Facilities in place at home line; Tooling not on home-line. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Production location is being changed. Discussion with Ford Purchasing in progress. Target
– Equipment and tooling on home-line. Run at rate not completed. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– Equipment and tooling on home-line. Pick and place transfer unit pending installation. Target
– Equipment and tooling @ home-line. End of line tester is not on home line. Target Completion
by XX/XX/XXXX
– Tooling, Facilities and equipment at Home line. Production gages not proved out (Gage R & R
pending). Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– XX out of YYY non-critical dimensions out of spec and discussion with Ford Engineering for
Deviations/Alert Approval in progress. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Equipment, Tooling, Gaging in place; Final Manufacturing feasibility issue identified and issue
being resolved with Ford Team. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Prelaunch plan control plan not approved by Ford team. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– AAR approval samples submitted to Ford. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– AAR samples rejected and tuning in progress. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Process capability not established for all SCs and CCs. XX out of YYY less than Pp,Ppk
requirements (100% certification in place to support XX build). Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– Assess for all of the above conditions through Supply chain (Tier 2, Tier 3, etc., )
6. Capacity
– Capacity planning in progress. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Run at Rate not achieved with 5 day operating pattern. Target Completion
by XX/XX/XXXX
– Run at rate not completed due cross vehicle volume tooling pending kick
off. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– OEE not meeting target. Run at Rate not complete. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– Run at rate not completed due to lack of Ford order/Releases. Target
– Run at rate not completed due to balance out of current model. Target
– Run at rate not completed due to ILVS/Broad cast release delayed. Target
– Run at rate completed on one production stream. all production stream
complete by XX/XX/XXXX
7. Logistics
– Packaging design not complete. Discussion with Ford Packaging
design engineer in progress. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Carryover packaging with minor modification. Target Completion
by XX/XX/XXXX
– New packaging submitted to Ford. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– Packaging Form-150 submitted and awaiting Ford Packaging
approval. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Packaging trial in progress and shipping trial complete by
XX/XXXX
8. Others
– Timing compression under discussion. Target Completion by XX/XX/XXXX
– Operator training plan in place and training in progress. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
– Recovery Plan in progress for an unexpected natural disaster. Target Completion by
XX/XX/XXXX
Build Support Plan
Prior to MP1, your input to the Schedule A document is an important part of Ford’s program readiness
reviews. You will need to pay particular attention to the “Build Support Plan” comments to ensure
this information, if required, is clear and accurate. The Build Support Plan explains the pedigree of
Non-PPAP parts that will be used.
1. When is a Build Support Plan Required?

– Quality Verification (Phase 1 PSW) is not complete by the TT IPD/Unit TT MRD -OR -
– Production Verification (Phase 2 PSW) is not complete by the PP IPD/Unit PP MRD -OR -
– Capacity Verification (Phase 3 PSW) is not complete by the MP2/Unit Job1
2. Where do I input the Build Support Plan on the Schedule A?
– For parts late to Quality Verification (Phase 1 PSW) (shown), enter comments in cell S432
– For parts late to Production Verification (Phase 2 PSW), enter comments in cell S433
– For parts late to Capacity Verification (Phase 3 PSW), enter comments in cell S434
Build Support Plan
3. How should the Build Support Plan be written?
A. Each comment must begin with the build affected: “TT Build: …” “Unit TT Build…..” “PP Build …”
“Unit PP Build…..” “MP1 Build …” etc.
B. When parts have not achieved Phase 1 PPAP by TT or Unit TT, it is important to understand the
Pedigree of the parts that will be supplied to assess the risk to the build. The comment must
describe the Part Pedigree element of Schedule A Deliverable that is missing from the parts:
• Design Verification (DV) Testing , Facility, Hard Tool, Production Process, Equipment,
Gauges, Manufacturing Location, Sub-Supplier Home Line, Gauge R&R, Run at Rate,
Dimensional, Initial Process Capability, Production Validation (PV) Testing, Appearance
Approval, Final Process Capability, Run At Rate on Additional Production Streams, Capacity
C. Alert numbers required for shipments must be listed in the column next to the respective build
support plan comment
Examples:
“TT Build: Parts produced at toolmaker without graining”
“PP Build: Parts less PV testing (80% complete by PP)”
“MP1 Build: Parts not yet achieving Capacity Verification (Phase 3 PSW)”

Beyond My Materials For Student

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Beyond My Materials For Student

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

External Supplier New Part Approval Process (APQP / PPAP)

Answer: Successful completion of Schedule A results in a successful PSW and is part of

2. Question: Will we get a copy of this presentation after the training?

3. Question: When we switch to the new Schedule A would we not need a

Answer: The rating approach to Schedule B including conformance plan is under

5. Question: Do the suppliers need to assess all expectations?

6. Question: Can we get a link to this presentation?

Answer: Yes, the link will be available and distributed.

9. Question: Do we get training credit for attending this WebEx/audio Schedule A?

Answer: Supplier has lead responsibility to populate information in the Schedule A.

12. Question: If Action plans change how/where do you enter data?

14. Question: How critical is the Q1 score on the header?

15. Question: Will suppliers be notified of the upcoming eAPQP system?

Answer: Yes, eAPQP training will be offered.

Answer: This will be included in the eAPQP.

22. Question: May be ok showing 48 deliverables if referring to current ver 5 Schedule A vs 30

Answer: For Powertrain programs Special Characteristics are reviewed at "On-Site

Answer: The APQP/PPAP Evidence Workbook is in addition to the Pass-Through

26. Question: Will existing programs migrate to Schedule A v. 6.0?

– External Supplier New Part Readiness Assessment - Schedule A 16 to 51

– Impact of the Improved APQP/PPAP Process to the GPDS Supplier 52 to 72

– “Go Further” with The Web Based Application – eAPQP 73 to 75

To Train Ford And The External Suppliers On The Improvements And To

Priority Supplier Selection

Monthly Assessment of 48 Deliverables through 2015 MY

Cross-Functional Supplier Engagement (4 Team Evaluations)

Roll-up of Data / Report Out Linked to the Quality Panel

Quality / Capacity Verification

The Present Process Was Launched In 2006

1. Maintain the foundations of GPDS Supplier Engagement Process –

2. Continue to use the External Supplier APQP/PPAP Readiness Assessment (Schedule A) as

Current I. Continuous II. Improve Revised

Key GPDS Updates / Recommendations from

We Have Changed The Process To Accelerate Development Of New Products

1. Link the PD / STA Matched Pair evaluations to the

2. Incorporate GPDS updates and overall timing

3. Enable teams to focus on critical issues to improve

4. Go Improve the part risk assessment and rating methodology

We Have Improved The Effectiveness And Efficiency Of The External

• Failure Mode • Testing & • Testing & Validation • Manufacturing

In The 4th Quarter 2010, The Process Was Strengthened By Adding

1. Adjusted the External Supplier New Part Approval Process timing to

3. Added the requirements for Part Coordination Fixture (<PCF1> / 8.5

4. Added the requirements for Pass Through Characteristics (PTCs), for

We Aligned The External Supplier New Part Approval Process

2. Optimized the present 217 Expectations to 114:

3. Improves launch quality by allowing teams to focus on critical issues sooner

We Optimized The Number Of Deliverables And Expectations To Improve

2 Final confirmation of Design / Manufacturing <PEC> Assesses supplier

3 Production Run at Cycle Time to <PP> Provides an early

4 Final Process Capability established <MP2> Assesses Mass

We Strengthened The Process To Improve Launch Quality

Quality And Capacity Verification Deliverables Are Rated Separately

Quality And Capacity Verification Deliverables Are Rated Separately

<Milestone> <MP1> 0 MBJ1

The Present External Supplier New Part Approval Process Assessment

<Milestone> <MP1> 0 MBJ1

We Have Improved The Part Assessment Process To Better Identify Risk

– The External Supplier New Part Readiness Assessment or Schedule A is the

– Successful implementation and use of Schedule A will ultimately prepare the

– The Schedule A is an Excel based document and is submitted on a monthly

– Enabled teams to focus on critical issues to improve launch quality

– Eliminated need to rate status twice (No Pre-assessments)