MSA Dec

Ford Proprietary Q1 Site Assessment Instructions
Q1 Site Assessment Evaluation Matrix
1) The Q1 Site Assessment Evaluation Matrix is a 'checklist' used to provide objective evidence that satisfies
the Q1 Site Expectations, see https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Q1.html.
2) Suppliers are required to provide the completed 'checklist' to the responsible STA engineer upon request.
3) Suppliers are required to keep completed copies of the Q1 Site Assessment checklist, and accompanying
corrective action plans, covering the prior 24 months. These copies are to be maintained at the supplier
manufacturing location and available upon request from the responsible STA engineer.
4) Changes to this document are identified by:

- Column A in the Site Assessment: Identifies a change in that row with an "x"
- As identified in the Revision Log
5) The tier 1 supplier is responsible to ensure that all tiers of suppliers are assessed to the applicable Ford
manufacturing process standards.
Refer to https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Ford_GTS.html on Ford Supplier Portal for all these standards except
CQI-xx , which are available through AIAG.
6) Score each sub-element with R/Y/G and the Expectation ranking will automatically be calculated. If you
receive an "INC" in the Expectation ranking, one of the sub-elements was not scored.
Originator: STA Strategy and Business Office

Date Created: 11/20/02
(siminfo@ford.com) Page 1 of 45 Pages
Date Revised: February 2015
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED IN THE Q1 SITE ASSESSMENT
1PP (First Phase of Production Prove-Out - FPDS)

AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
AIMS (Automated Issues Matrix System)
APQP (Advanced Product and Quality Planning)
AWS (Analytical Warranty System)
BTS (Build-To-Schedule)
C&E (Cause and Effect)
CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing)
CC (Critical Characteristic)
CP (Confirmation Prototype)
Cpk (Process Capability Index)
CPU (Cost Per Unit)
CPV (Capacity Planning Volume)
CTQ Critical to Quality
DCP (Dynamic Control Planning)
DDL (Direct Data Link)
DFMEA (Design Failure Modes & Effects Analysis)
DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control -- 6 Sigma Problem solving)
DPMO (Defect per Million Opportunities)
DPU (Defect per Unit)
DTD (Dock-To-Dock)
DVP&R (Design Verification Plan and Report)
ES (Engineering Specifications)
FCPA (Ford Consumer Product Audit)
FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)
FSP (Ford Supplier Portal)
FTT (First-Time-Through)
GAGE R&R (Gauge Repeatability & Reproducibility)
HIC (High Impact Characteristic)
JIT (Just In Time)
KPIV (Key Process Input Variable)
KPOV (Key Process Output Variable)
LRR (Launch Readiness Review)
MP&L (Material Planning and Logistics)
MS (Material Specifications)
MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis)
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
np Chart (Chart for monitoring defective-nonconforming individual products)
OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness)
PD (Product Development)
PEO (Product Engineering Office)
PFMEA (Process Failure Modes & Effects Analysis)
PMT (Program Module Team)
PPAP (Production Part Approval Process)
Ppk (Performance of process)
PSW (Part Submission Warrant)
PVA (Percent Value Add)
PVT (Plant or Product Vehicle Team)
QOS (Quality Operating System)
QR (Quality Rejects)
RPN (Risk Priority Number)
SC (Significant Characteristic)
SDS (System Design Specification)
SEI (Software Engineering Institute)
Originator: STA Strategy and Business Office Date Created: 10/20/02

Page 2 of 45 Pages
(siminfo@ford.com) Date revised: March 2018
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED IN THE Q1 SITE ASSESSMENT
SFMEA (System Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)

SIM (Supplier Improvement Metrics)
SMED (Single Minute Change of Die)
SPC (Statistical Process Control)
SREA (Supplier Request for Engineering Approval)
STA (Supplier Technical Assistance)
TGW (Things Gone Wrong)
TPM (Total Productive Maintenance)
VDA (Verband der Automobilindustrie - International Standard)
VO (Vehicle Operations)
VOC (Voice of the Customer)
WERS (Worldwide Engineering Release System)
YC (Potential Critical Characteristic)
YRT Rolled Throughput Yield
YS (Potential Significant Characteristic)
Originator: STA Strategy and Business Office Date Created: 10/20/02

Page 3 of 45 Pages
(siminfo@ford.com) Date revised: March 2018
Q1 Manufacturing Site Assessment Evaluation Matrix
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
Date: Supplier Contact E-Mail: STA Site Engineer name:
last release Supplier Name: STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
Supplier Site Code: If Supplier Self-Assessment, Approved By: STA Site Engineer Phone#:
Supplier Contact Name: Name: Commodities:
Supplier Contact Phone#:
STA Action
Completion Date
Expectation Guidelines
Responsibility
Expectation &
Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Supplier must list evidence to support each Expectation. All Expectations, regardless of Color Rating, shall have documented
evidence listed, including example part number(s) viewed Evidence (Action Plan,
Responsibility and
Note: The Expectation Guidelines listed below are not to be considered all-
inclusive. Refer to the AIAG Manuals to ensure compliance. The AIAG website
Ford STA input for updated Expectation Due Date Required for is: http://www.aiag.org/
ratings or STA comments on supplier all yellow and red
compliance to the Expectation rated Expectations)
Expectation Element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

Green: (0) RED sub-elements and (0) YELLOW sub-elements - All sub-elements are GREEN
Yellow: (0) RED sub-elements and (1) or more YELLOW sub-elements
Red: (1) or more RED sub-elements
INC: (1) or more sub-elements not ranked RED, YELLOW or GREEN
Expectation Sub-element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

G: High Quality of Event / Meets the Expectation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / Item Complete
Y: Marginal Quality of Event / Marginally meets the Expectation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / Concurred and timed recovery plan in place / on schedule
R: Unacceptable Quality of Event / Does not meet the Expectation and the intent of the Expectation Guidelines / No plan, Inadequate and/or untimed recovery plan in place / Behind schedule
I. Planning for Manufacturing Process Capability
INC I.1. Quality procedures ISO/TS16949, IATF 16949 QOS
I.1.1
X Supplier's quality system is third-party certified to ISO/TS 16949 or IATF 16949 requirements. w Supplier is third party certified to ISO/TS 16949 or IATF 16949, including Ford
Rate this customer specific requirements. Include the name of the Certification Body and the date
sub- of certification and/or re-certification.
element by
entering w Certification has not expired.
r, y, or g in w SOFTWARE SITE ASSESSMENT CAPABILITY AND CERTIFICATION
cell above The software supplier is audited by an official SEI (Software Engineering Institute)
auditing firm and attained, at a minimum, Capability Maturity Model Level 2 certification.
Software developers for this product use the development process for the Capability
Maturity Model level at which they are certified. If assessed at Capability Maturity Model
Level 2, the software supplier has a plan to become certified Capability Maturity Model
Level 3 within twelve (12) months.
I.1.2
X Supplier's environmental system is certified to ISO 14001 as specified in the Environmental w Supplier is third party certified to ISO 14001. Include the name of the registrar
Rate this Requirements Web Guide available through https://web.fsp.ford.com/gtc/docs/envguide.pdf. organization and the date of certification and/or re-certification.
sub-
element by w Certification has not expired.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.1.3
X Supplier's quality manual contains processes for all areas of the site assessment. The quality w Supplier reviews on an annual basis the policies, procedures, and work instructions to
Rate this manual is updated as needed to drive statistically valid continual improvements in the supplier's ensure they are up to date, including Voice of the Customer (VOC) specific
sub- quality system. Supplier's Senior Management Team, including representatives from requirements. This may be included in the annual review of internal audits. Action
element by Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering, and Human Resources perform these reviews. plans are in place for statistically significant continuous improvements.
entering
r, y, or g in w There are records of revisions (change control) to procedures, guidelines and work
cell above instructions that demonstrate that supplier's quality system is being continuously
improved.
4 of 45
Contact: (siminfo@ford.com) Date Created: 11/20/02
Revision Date: March 2018
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
I.1.4
X Nonconformances identified in internal audits are not repeated. w Supplier has an internal quality audit tracking mechanism in place.
Rate this w Supplier's "quality manual" includes a procedure for internal audits and corrective
sub- action implementation process
element by
entering w Supplier has an internal audit schedule and audits are being performed according to
r, y, or g in schedule
cell above
w Does supplier use a "fresh eyes" concept?
NOTE: "Fresh Eyes" review typically involves product review by personnel not directly
associated with the design or manufacture of the product.
w Supplier has records of 3 previous audits, including a list of all non-conformances.
w For all non-conformances, action plans are in place to address the root cause that led
to the issue.
w Supplier implements corrective actions in related activities to prevent recurrence of
similar non-conformances.
w Supplier links issues and corrective actions to customer satisfaction (Supplier uses
customer feedback "Voice of the Customer" to drive the identification of issue root cause
and implementation of permanent corrective action)
I.1.5
X Supplier has a documented process to identify and regularly update customer expectations, w External Critical to Quality (CTQ) customer expectations are obtained from all
Rate this objectives, and requirements. affected customer activities (e.g., Purchasing, STA, PD, Manufacturing Plants, Finance,
sub- MP&L); expectations may include metrics such as, Process Sigma Level, CPU, R/1000,
element by TGW, PPM, warranty, project timing, PSW timing, response time on customer
entering complaints, delivery performance, etc.
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier uses Industry Commodity PPM available from Supplier Improvement Metrics
(SIM) as basis for the PPM target, as applicable
I.1.6
X Supplier has a documented process to identify and regularly update internal expectations, w Supplier identifies internal CTQ metrics that are not covered by external metrics.
Rate this objectives, and requirements.
sub-
element by w Internal metrics may include internal scrap rates, OEE, down-time, change-over time,
entering Ppk, DPU, RTY, etc.
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.1.7
X Supplier has a documented process to translate internal and external expectations, objectives, w Supplier's CTQ measurables relate to Key Process Output Variables (KPOV) that
Rate this and requirements into QOS measurables. predict internal and external customer satisfaction.
sub-
element by w Continuous improvements are developed and tracked through internal and external
entering expectations.
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.1.8
Supplier has a documented process to assign targets and objectives to each QOS measurable.
5 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
I.1.8
X Supplier has a documented process to assign targets and objectives to each QOS measurable. w Senior management has a process to identify responsible individuals and to establish
Rate this timing to meet the assigned targets and objectives.
sub-
element by w The QOS process includes quantifiable improvements.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.1.9
Supplier has a documented process to assign chosen measurables to appropriate management
X w A management champion and team is identified for each CTQ measurable, which is
levels for review, follow-up, and improvements.
Rate this then tracked and reviewed to ensure improvements are being made.
sub-
element by
entering w Performance of these measurable are communicated regularly.
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.1.10
X Supplier utilizes action plans to drive statistically valid continual improvement of chosen metrics w Action items are being closed on time and show statistically valid improvements.
Rate this and are tracked at QOS review meetings.
sub- w These improvements are permanent in nature.
element by
entering w STA invited to supplier's QOS review meetings
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.1.11
X Supplier's management team holds monthly QOS performance review meetings with w Supplier has evidence of the monthly QOS performance review meetings, including
Rate this representatives from Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering, and Human Resources. Improvement what metrics are being tracked and managed.
sub- actions are taken by cross-functional teams that include all levels of the organization.
element by
entering w Supplier has a strategy implementation process with defined roles and responsibilities,
r, y, or g in and on-going actions with timing.
cell above
w Cross-functional teams have been formed and working meetings are being conducted.
w There is evidence of cross-functional team meeting minutes, metrics, and action items
for monthly QOS performance to target review meetings and daily production meetings
with senior plant management.
w Supplier is tracking trends to drive continuous improvement.

w Corporate strategy and objectives are linked to assure continuous improvement of
metrics.
w Supplier's continuous improvement projects utilize statistical quality tools, including
what impact these quality tools have on internal and external CTQ metrics.
w Supplier can demonstrate that an effective daily management review process is in

place with cross-functional representation reviewing and reacting to daily production
metrics. The review process includes meeting minutes and/or an action log.
w Supplier can identify what quality tools are being used and that improving trends are
being tracked.
6 of 45
X
Rate this representatives from Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering, and Human Resources. Improvement
sub- actions are taken by cross-functional teams that include all levels of the organization.
FORD element
PROPRIETARY
by
entering
r, y, or g in
Changed from cell above
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
I.1.12
X QOS performance reviews include a review of all applicable Ford Supplier Improvement Metrics w Supplier monitors customer plant(s) QR trend and 3MIS warranty R/1000 and CPU
Rate this (SIM) key process metrics, and customer satisfaction metrics. performance, and develops action plans to identify and address any negative trends.
sub-
element by
entering w Customer concerns in SIM and quality rejects show improving trends or are at zero
r, y, or g in level.
cell above
w Supplier includes achievement of Q1 in its metrics, as applicable.
w Supplier can access SIM and review QR details on a daily basis.

w Supplier is tracking all Ford SIM metrics.
w Supplier's internal metrics include scrap, downtime, rework, and premium freight, etc.
w Supplier can demonstrate that goals have been set for the Ford SIM metrics with
action plans in place to drive improvement.
w Supplier tracks warranty and has an evaluation process to determine what drives
improvement in warranty costs and customer satisfaction.
I.1.13
X Metrics monitoring customer satisfaction that are related to supplier manufacturing are w Supplier assesses how much the TGW, CPU, and R/1000 are related to supplier
Rate this understood and tracked. manufacturing and action plans are developed based on those findings.
sub-
element by w Supplier has a tracking mechanism for short-term and long-term warranty Things-
entering Gone-Wrong (TGW).
r, y, or g in
Note:
cell above
Ford's Product Development can provide TGW information
Note:
Short-term is defined as < 12 months; Long-term is defined as > 12 months
w Supplier has a tracking mechanism for long-term and short-term warranty Cost-Per-
Unit (CPU).
w Supplier has a tracking mechanism for short-term and long-term warranty R/1000.
w As part of its field return parts analysis, the supplier includes the number of parts and
root cause analysis, where possible
w Supplier has a procedure for short-term and long-term customer satisfaction and is
compliant.
Note:
Customer satisfaction information can be obtained through JD Power or OEM
w Supplier understands and utilizes the High Mileage Reliability process in developing
products for Ford.
w Supplier analyzes low- and high-time in service as part of its continuous improvement
project selection process.
INC I.2. FMEAs/Control Plans
7 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
I.2.1
X All Ford parts have documented design and process failure mode and effects analysis (DFMEA, w Supplier has documented process for developing and continuously improving
Rate this PFMEA), and Control Plans. There is a robust process in place for developing these documents. DFMEAs, PFMEAs, and control plans for all Ford parts. The development and
sub- improvement process ensures that the manufacturing process complies with Critical to
element by Quality process requirements as specified in the Supplier Manufacturing Health Charts
entering located at https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Supplier_Manufacturing_Health_Charts.html.
r, y, or g in
cell above
w Supplier obtains and reviews system and design FMEA or Design Verification Plan &
Report (DVP&R) from a System and/or Design & Release Engineer to ensure that
"effective and credible" PFMEA/Control Plan/work instructions can be developed and
implemented, including sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
w Supplier uses a process flow diagram or surrogate control plan when developing a
PFMEA / DFMEA.
w Supplier incorporates all permanent corrective actions from 8Ds into the FMEAs and
Control Plans.
w Supplier reviews DFMEAs / PFMEAs, identifies "potential cause of failure," and

implements error-proofing, where applicable.
Note: Refer to the Ford FMEA Handbook to ensure that all requirements are met,
available on FSP, Library Services (https://portal.covisint.com/wps/public/fsp/)
Note:
If the supplier-led APQP team does not have system/design FMEA and/or DVP&R, then
the element in the APQP tracking document "MUST" be identified as "RED" and all
related documents, such as PFMEA/Control plan, should be identified as "Yellow".
I.2.2
X FMEAs are reviewed annually or as issues arise. A Pareto is used to focus on 1) severity, 2) the w Supplier understands how to develop a robust FMEA (i.e., understands the process
Rate this product of severity and occurrence, in order to prioritize actions to drive improvements. function, failure mode at that function, its effects and causal factors, and detection
sub- methods).
element by All failure modes that have led to rework operations are included in FMEAs, including
entering actions to eliminate the failure modes and therefore to eliminate the need for future
r, y, or g in rework.
cell above
w Supplier develops recommended actions to eliminate potential failure modes based on
the following priority:
1) highest severity items

2) highest criticality ( Severity x Occurrence )
Actions are recorded and when completed, the Revised Severity, Occurrence and
Detection columns are completed, even if the values did not change.
w Supplier reviews performance data to validate the ratings.
8 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
I.2.2
X Supplier
FMEAs are Contact Phone#:
reviewed annually or as issues arise.
A Pareto is used to focus on 1) severity, 2) the
Rate this product of severity and occurrence, in order to prioritize actions to drive improvements.
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Supplier understands what quality tools, such as, cause & effect (C&E) diagrams
(based on process dominance such as "set up", "machine", "fixture/pallet", "tooling",
etc.), P-diagram, DOE, Value chain mapping etc., were used and how analytical data
was developed and used to develop DFMEA (for Design Responsible Supplier) and
PFMEA.
w Supplier has a process to track FMEA revisions. Revision levels are included on
FMEAs.
w Supplier uses the Ford FMEA Handbook available through FSP Library Services.
Note: Per the Ford FMEA Handbook,

>Severity: Rankings of "9" or "10" are restricted to safety or government regulated.
>Occurrence: The criterion for ranking Occurrence "1" is the

probability of failure is remote: failure is unlikely.
>Detection: The criterion for ranking "1" is that detection is almost certain.
I.2.3
X All error detection areas are reviewed and, where feasible, plans exist to move to error w Supplier has a process to move from detection to prevention. Action plans exist
Rate this prevention devices (e.g., poke yoke). showing responsibility and timing.
sub-
element by w Supplier understands where there are opportunities for poke-yoke.
entering w Supplier shows evidence that the error-proofing methods used are effective.
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier understands how to correlate prevention to CCs, SCs and HIs (where
applicable) to determine effectiveness of the method (i.e., can address the causal factor
(failure mode)).
w Supplier can directly relate the detection method to the cause of failure.
Note:
Poke-yoke helps in detection and should be derived from FMEA. Poke Yoke is the
practice of making defects impossible to create, so it is a prevention method, not
a detection method. Poke-Yokes should be physically tested on the shop floor to
ensure they work. Detection methods are measurement systems and should be
included in the control plan and have regularly scheduled gauge R&Rs performed.
I.2.4
X Suppliers, in cooperation with its customers, have identified Critical Characteristics (CCs), w The YCs and YSs (Potential Critical and Significant Characteristics) are defined on the
Rate this Significant Characteristics (SCs) and High Impact Characteristics (HIs - where applicable) on DFMEA and recorded on the Special Characteristics Communication and Agreement
sub- their PFMEAs and Control Plans for every Ford part or family of Ford parts, including. Form (SCCAF), including potential special characteristics manufactured at sub-tier
element by suppliers as appropriate.
entering
r, y, or g in Note:
cell above CCs, SCs and HIs are not necessarily restricted to part characteristics. Process
parameters are equally critical to the parts characteristics. The process parameters must
also be identified as CCs, SCs and HIs and must be monitored and managed through
the control plan.
9 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
I.2.4 STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Suppliers, in cooperation with its customers, have identified Critical Characteristics (CCs),
Expectation &

Sub-element
X
Plan
Due Date
Rate this Significant Characteristics (SCs) and High Impact Characteristics (HIs - where applicable) on
Rating
sub- their PFMEAs and Control Plans for every Ford part or family of Ford parts, including.
Supplier must list evidence to support each Expectation.
element by
entering
All Expectations, regardless of Color Rating, shall have documented
Responsibility and
r, y, or g in Ford STA input for updated Expectation Due Date Required for is: http://www.aiag.org/
cell above
Note:
Critical Characteristics "CC" or inverted delta can be identified by suppliers or by Ford,
but can only be approved by Ford's Design and Release activity and must be identified
on the Ford drawing and/or engineering specification.
I.2.5
Supplier works with Ford (e.g., Program Vehicle Teams (PVT), Design and Release Engineer
X w Supplier determines potential CCs, SCs and HIs (where applicable) from the
and Supplier Technical Assistance (STA)) to establish final agreement of CCs, SCs and His on
Rate this the Special Characteristics Communication and Agreement Form (SCCAF), regardless of the tier system/design FMEA with additional characteristics identified by the PFMEA cross-
sub- functional team, including sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
of manufacture of the special characteristic.
element by
entering Notes:
r, y, or g in 1 For SCs and HIs (where applicable), severity rankings are between 5-8, with
cell above Occurrence rankings between 4-10.The product/process characteristics identified as SC,
HI and CC in the PFMEA must also be identified in the control plan/work instructions.
Additionally, rankings for CC (inverted delta) and OS (operator safety) are severity = 9 or
10, with Occurrence rankings between 1-10.
2 Where the part does not have any Ford-designated special characteristics (CC, SC, or
HI – see the Ford FMEA Handbook), the organization shall select part characteristics for
which process capability is to be demonstrated, and include the selected characteristics
in the Control Plan. The selection of these tier 1 supplier designated part characteristics
is to be included in the special characteristics approval process, recorded on the SCCAF
and may be identified as Characteristic classification “Other”.
I.2.6
X Supplier ensures that all print dimensions and call-out notes on the engineering drawing are w All other dimensions not specified in the control plan have a frequency of inspection
Rate this always met through control plans, work instructions, job set-up instructions, and receiving identified in the layout report and in the quality procedure manual.
sub- inspection, regardless of the point of manufacture of the requirements, including sub-tier
element by suppliers. w Ensure that all product specifications (e.g. dimensions, GD&T tolerances,
entering performance), including those dimensions manufactured by sub-tier suppliers, are met
r, y, or g in by use of strategies which include the Control Plan.
cell above
w Ensure that control methods and frequencies specified are appropriate for each
characteristic and its manufacturing process
w All process or product characteristics being used to manage the manufacturing

process are identified on the control plan, including sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
w Ongoing (post launch) PV (Production Validation) testing as specified in Ford
Engineering Specifications is included in the Control Plan, including identification of any
required PD approval of on-going Ford Product Development approval of test results,
including at sub-tier suppliers where applicable
10 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
I.2.6
Supplier Contact
Supplier ensures Name:
that all print dimensions and call-out notes on the engineering drawing are Name: Commodities:
X
Rate this always met Contact
Supplier through control
Phone#:plans, work instructions, job set-up instructions, and receiving
sub- inspection, regardless of the point of manufacture of the requirements, including sub-tier
element by suppliers.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w There is evidence that full dimensional validation (layout) is completed annually on at

least 5 parts, including the Ford specified dimensions manufactured at sub-tier suppliers.
For more detail, see Ford specific requirements to ISO/TS 16949 or IATF 16949.
Where tooling has multiple cavities, tools or centers, parts are measured for the annual
layout representing every cavity, tool or center.
Note 1: a minimum total number of 5 parts are to be measured with parts from each
cavity, tool or center included (e.g. for 16 cavities, the minimum number of parts
measured is 16 - one per cavity).
Note 2: a suggested approach to ensure coverage of all cavities, tools or/and centers
could be to measure the characteristic at the point of manufacture where subsequent
operations do not change the dimension.
Note: Actual measurement results are available.
w There is operator-based, statistical process control evidence that supports sample

frequency for all print dimensions whether or not they are identified on the control plan.
w Process parameters that affect the Critical to Quality characteristics of a part are
identified and controlled, including sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
w Process Parameters critical to quality should be identified on the control plan with
their upper and lower control limits.
w Supplier is compliant to Vehicle Parts Branding Directive E-108 for any new tooled
parts after 8/1/2002.
The assembly or component part number requires branding on serviceable parts,
regardless of assembly level.
All components of Service Kits shall be identified with Ford part numbers except where a
Branding Exemption has been approved.
Source: Ford internal procedure FAP03-145 Production Part Identification
Note:
E-108 Parts Branding Directive can be found on the Ford Supplier Portal (FSP) at:
https://web.purinfo.ford.com
I.2.7
X Where pass-through characteristics are specified by a Ford Plant, the supplier implements w Supplier has specific controls in place that are robust in preventing and containing
Rate this controls which prevent the shipment of non conforming product to Ford. non-conformances.
sub-
element by w Where required, pass-through characteristics have been identified for all new parts
entering and existing parts. Where required, these pass-through characteristics are identified on
r, y, or g in the PFMEA and control plan. (The intent is to implement robust controls within the
cell above process control plans / work instructions to manage pass-through characteristics to
prevent the shipment of non conforming Pass Through Characteristics to the Ford plant.)
See https://web.lean.ford.com/cqdc/supplier_training.asp for more details on Pass
Through Characteristics
w Where required, supplier has a process for identifying and managing pass-through
characteristics with sub-tier suppliers. Where required, this process includes obtaining
data from sub-tier suppliers to ensure that pass-through characteristics are monitored
and compliant.
11 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
Supplier
I.2.7
Contact Name: Name: Commodities:
X Supplier
Where Contactcharacteristics
pass-through Phone#: are specified by a Ford Plant, the supplier implements
Rate this controls which prevent the shipment of non conforming product to Ford.
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Where required, pass-through characteristics are evaluated jointly between Ford's

manufacturing engineering, product engineer, STA, and the supplier during the
development of PFMEA/Control Plan. (The intent of this process is to identify those
characteristics that could have significant impact on customer satisfaction and warranty
and may not have been identified as SCs, CCs.)
w Where required, supplier reviews error-proofing methods for all pass-through

characteristics. Action plans are in place to implement error-proofing methods, where
required.
Note:
Pass-Through Characteristics (PTC) are defined as: Product Characteristics that are
supplied to receiving Ford Plants by an outside supplier or by an internal (Ford) supplier
that are not controlled by subsequent processing of the using plant. Defective PTCs may
affect Vehicle Operations or the buying public. Use of pass through characteristics is
typically required by Powertrain.
I.2.8
X Control Plan is a result of appropriate quality planning and includes clear linkage between w Supplier can demonstrate linkage between DFMEA, PFMEA, Control Plan, Work
Rate this DFMEA and PFMEA. Instructions, set up instructions, etc. on the APQP/PPAP Evidence Workbook
sub- CAD Standards FECDS C-3 and E-2 provide guidance how to tag characteristics to
element by assist to ensure traceability. FECDS standards are available through
entering https://team.extsp.ford.com/sites/C3PNGMethods/C3PNGMethods.html .
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.2.9
X Control Plans contain the following elements: w Control Plans / Work Instructions are readily available.
Rate this Note:
sub- Additional information on Control Plans can be found in the AIAG Advanced Product
element by Quality Planning and Control Plan Reference manual at http://www.aiag.org/
entering Annex A in ISO/TS 16949 or IATF 16949 also provides requirements for Control Plan
r, y, or g in elements
cell above
-- Operation number / name
-- Part Name / Part Number w Control plans identify the latest part level (suffix)
-- Inspection Requirements
-- Specifications w Product and process CTQ specifications are included in the control plan
-- Control Methods w Control methods are specified in the PFMEA/control plan/work instructions and are
appropriate for the type of process.
w Work instructions clearly define quality acceptance criteria
Note:
Operations may be controlled by, but not limited to, Statistical Process Control,
inspection, attribute data, error-proofing (automated or non-automated), sampling plans,
visual aids, operator instructions, SPC charting, gauging, auto-compensators, etc.
-- SC, CC, HI (where applicable), and Engineering Specifications (ES) w A cross-functional team is formed (including customer) to identify SCs, CCs, HIs
requirements are identified and appropriate (where applicable), and ES
12 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
X
Rate this
Changed from sub- Date: Supplier Contact E-Mail: STA Site Engineer name:
last release element by Supplier Name: STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
entering
r, y, or g in Supplier Site Code: If Supplier Self-Assessment, Approved By: STA Site Engineer Phone#:
cell above
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
-- SC, CC, HI (where applicable), and Engineering Specifications (ES)

requirements are identified and appropriate
w SC, CC, HI (where applicable) and ES control methods are agreed on the Special
Characteristics Communication and Agreement Form (SCCAF) including where control
methods are implemented at sub-tier suppliers
w All CCs, SCs, and HIs (where applicable) from the PFMEA have been identified on
control plans, including sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
w Engineering Specifications (ES) are identified by ES No. on control plans, including

sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
-- SC, CC, HI (where applicable), and ES Control methods (in-process checks, process gauging, w Variable data is being collected by the equipment operators, where appropriate.
and part gauging) are appropriate.
w Listed process parameters and part characteristics are being controlled using the
method identified in the control plan/work instructions, including sub-tier suppliers as
appropriate.
w Gauging method is appropriate for the task and was specified during the APQP
process.
-- Error proofing methods w Error proofing methods that are in place cannot be circumvented by the operator and
that poke yoke is on the plant's certification program.
w Operator understands the reason for the error proofing method.

w Error-proofing methods are tested for effectiveness and, as appropriate, exist in all
areas of operation from warehousing, part processing, testing, and for service parts,
through part packaging.
w Process maps, Kaizan documents, include (1) Load Balancing, (2) Poke Yoke, (3)
Pull/Flow Systems, (4) Small Batch Sizes, (5) Event Minutes, (6) Kaizan Process
Documents, (7) Kaizan Schedules, (8) Kaizan Resources.
-- In-process control methods w Control methods (i.e., in-process gauging, poke yoke, visual inspection, etc.) are
identified on the control plan as specified in the PFMEA and included in the operator's
standard of work. Control methods are modified as required.
-- Sample Size and frequency w Sampling plans are statistically valid (based on quantity and variation) and justify
probability of occurrence for a given cause or failure mode.
-- Required tools, gauges, and other equipment w Required tools, gauges, and other equipment are identified for sub-tier suppliers.
-- Reaction plans must clearly direct the operator on how to act when a process begins to go w Reaction strategies (i.e. part containment, supervisor notification, line shut-down, etc.)
out of control, or a product fails an inspection or test. are specified for out of control conditions.
w Operator(s) understand the conditions for an "Out of Control" state.

w Reaction plans are adhered to (i.e. can provide when, why and what was done when
an operation went down thru downtime sheets, end of line metrics, etc.)
w Roles and responsibilities for all production and production support personnel are in
place to support direct labor personnel, and have specific responsibilities and approval
requirements if reacting to out-of-standard conditions.
INC I.3. Employee Readiness/Training Review
I.3.1
Supplier is responsible for assessing the skills required to perform all activities that affect product
quality.
13 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
I.3.1
X Supplier is responsible for assessing the skills required to perform all activities that affect product w Supplier has a selection criteria process to assign skilled operators to a given
Rate this quality. function.
sub-
element by w There is evidence of skills management procedure.
entering w Supplier manages its training to compensate for turnover rate.
r, y, or g in
cell above w There is a process to manage absenteeism, especially for a given critical
manufacturing process (which is based on severity and occurrence).
w Supplier identifies operator skill set and training requirements.

w As part of the APQP process, employee staffing, skill requirements, and training are
identified, and support program timing.
I.3.2
X Employees have a skills assessment, training plan, and evidence of training. w Supplier has a training program and can demonstrate compliance to training plans.
Rate this w Training is part of the supplier corporate objectives
sub-
element by w There is a process to determine training needs. "On the Job" training recorded
entering and managed
r, y, or g in
cell above
w There is a planned training program for each employee (hourly and salary).
w There is a process in place to address a high turnover rate condition
w Operator qualifications/training records are readily available to the production
supervisor
w Training records of key salaried personnel (i.e., QC manager, Incoming Receiving
managers, etc.) are reviewed regularly for compliance.
w Supplier conducts training on appropriate labor conditions including health and safety
for all employees on a regular basis.
I.3.3
X Supplier ensures that only trained and qualified personnel are involved in all aspects of the w Operators understand the application of the component they are producing.
Rate this manufacturing of Ford Parts, including rework operations. w Operators understand what is critical in the component and what could happen
sub- (consequence of failure mode) if it does not meet specification
element by
entering w Operators are/were part of work instruction development process
r, y, or g in w Operators are/were trained prior to performing the job
cell above
w There is a defined process where operators have the opportunity to provide feedback
(related to the process and/or job) to their supervisor/manager.
INC I.4. Manufacturing Feasibility/APQP/Launch/PPAP/Run-at-Rate Review
I.4.1 Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility

X Supplier has an effective set of processes to support all elements of Preliminary Manufacturing Design Inputs:
Rate this Feasibility Assessment required by Ford's GPDS launch process. Supplier can produce evidence w Supplier has a process to identify customer design inputs (ESOW & PMT).
sub- that all processes are used on all Ford launch activities. Supplier demonstrates effectiveness w Supplier has process to ensure DV/PV requirements are identified / supports GPDS
element by meeting Ford's requirements as reported in Schedule A, Phased PPAP, WERS Alerts, and zero timing.
entering AIMS issues identified at launch. w Sub-system/Component DFMEA are available and are used to develop SCCAF.
r, y, or g in w Supplier incorporates lessons learned to develop manufacturing best practices.
cell above Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility Elements: w Supplier uses CAD modelling to validate GD&T requirements.
Design Inputs w Supplier has a process to escalate issues which may impact ability to delivery Phased
- Engineering Assumptions. PPAP requirements.
- DV/PV Timing can be met. w Escalation process supports GPDS requirements.
- DFMEA & SCCAF Provided. 14 of 45
Contact: (siminfo@ford.com)- Supplier process knowledge to assess capability. Date Created: 11/20/02
- DVA or Variation Simulation to assess design tolerances.
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating

I.4.1 Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility
Responsibility and
X Supplier has an effective set of processes to support all elements of Preliminary Manufacturing all yellow and red Design Inputs:
ratings or STA comments on supplier
Rate this Feasibility Assessment required by Ford's GPDS launch process. Supplier can produce evidence compliance to the Expectation rated Expectations) w Supplier has a process to identify customer design inputs (ESOW & PMT).
sub- that all processes are used on all Ford launch activities. Supplier demonstrates effectiveness w Supplier has process to ensure DV/PV requirements are identified / supports GPDS
element by meeting Ford's requirements as reported in Schedule A, Phased PPAP, WERS Alerts, and zero timing.
entering AIMS issues identified at launch. w Sub-system/Component DFMEA are available and are used to develop SCCAF.
r, y, or g in w Supplier incorporates lessons learned to develop manufacturing best practices.
cell above Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility Elements: w Supplier uses CAD modelling to validate GD&T requirements.
Design Inputs w Supplier has a process to escalate issues which may impact ability to delivery Phased
- Engineering Assumptions. PPAP requirements.
- DV/PV Timing can be met. w Escalation process supports GPDS requirements.
- DFMEA & SCCAF Provided.
- Supplier process knowledge to assess capability.
- DVA or Variation Simulation to assess design tolerances.
- GD& T review/assessment complete.
- Compliance to Escalation Process.
Manufacturing Inputs:
Manufacturing Inputs w Supplier develops a detailed timing plan to support Ford's program timing deliverables
- Cost of capital, tooling, gauging including sub-suppliers. & reviews with Ford STA/PD prior to submission.
- Product can be manufactured as intended & suitable packaging design available per Ford w Supplier has a process to assess capital, tooling and gaging requirements including
timing. sub-suppliers as elements of the APQP/GPDS process.
- Supplier has process knowledge for the intended manufacturing process. (Example items to consider) SCCAF, GD&T, IP ES requirements.
- Historical performance data is available. w Supplier uses SIM, BSAQ, Warranty data PV test results and Mfg. Lessons Learned to
- SCCAF assessed by the suppliers manufacturing team and approved by Ford. develop the supplier's mfg. process.
- Compliance to Escalation Process. w SCCAF development must leverage plant Mfg. Engineering inputs.
w Supplier has a process to incorporate the PFMEA and SCCAF requirements to
develop the control plan.
w Escalation process supports GPDS requirements.
I.4.2
X Supplier has an APQP tracking mechanism in place. w Supplier management reviews, at a minimum, the Ford APQP manufacturing elements
Rate this Supplier has a system to manage parts sourced by Ford in support of new vehicle program to ensure proper tracking, documentation, and action plans.
sub- launches.
element by w All new Ford programs are being tracked according to the Ford APQP Requirements.
entering
r, y, or g in
w Action plans are developed to improve any yellow or red APQP elements.
cell above
Note: Refer to the APQP documentation to ensure that all requirements are met:
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/APQP.html
w Supplier's Program Management Team is separate from the Product Development
team, and both are accountable to senior management.
w Supplier's Program Management Team has dedicated resources to support the
program, including key sub-tier suppliers.
w Program Management Team includes personnel from the supplier's manufacturing

plant.
w Supplier's new programs are tracked and monitored based off of Ford's PD
milestones.
w Supplier has the required CAD/CAM systems to interface with Ford, and that capability
is at the supplier's manufacturing site, where possible. If not possible, supplier can
demonstrate that its system utilizes ongoing product development activities that impact
the manufacturing site's tooling and processing, and that documentation is maintained at
the appropriate customer levels.
w Supplier's PD system is a formalized process that prevents verbal-only design

direction.
15 of 45
I.4.2
X Supplier has an APQP tracking mechanism in place.
Rate this Supplier has a system to manage parts sourced by Ford in support of new vehicle program
launches. Q1 Manufacturing Site Assessment Evaluation Matrix
FORD PROPRIETARY
sub-
element by
entering Date: STA Site Engineer name:
Changed from r, y, or g in
Supplier Contact E-Mail:
last release cell above Supplier Name: STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Supplier uses established Ford/Supplier links to communicate most current program

status or potential issues impacting its ability to meet program expectations. The links
include, but are not limited to, Program Module Team (PMT) Meetings, APQP Status
Reports, Schedule A submissions and regular communication with the customer.
w Suppliers track and report sub-tier supplier component readiness using APQP, in
support of each applicable deliverable and expectation in Ford’s APQP/PPAP Readiness
Assessment (Schedule A). For a part or assembly identified by FCSD (Ford Customer
Service Division) to be serviceable, the supplier reports any APQP deliverable
exceptions to FCSD STA.
w Supplier is active on the PMTs and participates in all program reviews involving the
supplier.
w Milestone reviews are scheduled and conducted to communicate launch status, open
issues, and issue closure status to supplier's senior management.
w There is a defined plan to communicate program status to supplier's manufacturing

plant.
w Supplier understands its design-responsible supplier deliverables and has a system in

place to execute them.
w Supplier has the capability for design, manufacture, adjustment and maintenance of
dies/molds, jigs, tooling and fixtures that are used in all phases of production. If these
activities are outsourced, the supplier has the appropriate level of control and resource
for managing toolmakers (quality, timing etc.).
w Supplier uses Robust Design Principles and customer-approved Design/Testing Lab.
w Supplier tracks and assesses its sub-tier suppliers for APQP readiness.
I.4.3
X Supplier has a process in place to support Ford prototype and pre-production build events in a w Supplier develops pre-production and prototype parts that simulate its production
Rate this timely manner. process.
sub-
element by w Supplier verifies that all prototype parts meet engineering, dimensional, and functional
entering requirements, including prototype parts manufactured by sub-tier suppliers.
r, y, or g in
cell above
w Supplier requires and utilizes Prototype Control Plans.
w Supplier has dedicated resources to support all prototype builds on site at Ford, and
an agreed structure for managing issues.
w Supplier understands the RED Border Process and is operating within the guidelines
w Supplier supports all vehicle walk-around, AIMS, shortage, and change control
meetings.
w Supplier has dedicated Ford Assembly Plant and Vehicle Engineering resources
available to support launch.
w Supplier launch support personnel are technically capable to work on any launch
issue.
16 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
I.4.3
X Supplier
Supplier hasContact
a processName:
in place to support Ford prototype and pre-production build events in a Name: Commodities:
Rate this timely manner.
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Supplier on-site launch support personnel provide timely responses to all launch-
related issues or requirements.
w Supplier launch representatives are empowered to take immediate action on issues

requiring fast turn-around by the launch team.
w Supplier launch representatives are available for around-the-clock access.
w Supplier addresses launch readiness issues with Ford by defining an owner and action
within 24 hours, and drives closure of the issues in an agreed-upon timely manner.
I.4.4 Final Manufacturing Feasibility

X Supplier has an effective set of processes to support all elements of Final Manufacturing w Supplier has a process to implement any post VP design change(s), including revised
Rate this Feasibility Assessment required by Ford's GPDS launch process. Supplier can produce evidence timing/compression timing/ costs as appropriate supporting Phase 0
sub- that all processes are used on all Ford launch activities. Supplier demonstrates effectiveness
element by meeting Ford's requirements as reported in Schedule A, Phased PPAP, WERS Alerts, and zero w Supplier has a process to ensure cross functional approval of the SCCAF by <PA>
entering AIMS issues identified at launch.
r, y, or g in
cell above Final Manufacturing Feasibility Elements: w Supplier has a cadence to review DVP&R cross functionally supporting Phase 0 at TT
- Plans for late design changes after VP are contained by the planned production process in MRD.
order to meet dimensional & capability requirements at Phase 0.
- Supplier's manufacturing team conducts ongoing reviews & status of the DVP&R, confirms PV w Supplier has a process to incorporate PV test requirements in Phase 0 timing
requirements will be met to support Phase 1 PPAP at TT MRD. supporting Phase 1 PPAP at TT MRD.
- Lessons learned from the VP are incorporated prior to Phase 0. w Supplier has a regular cadence to review PPAP timing supporting Phase 0 & Phase 1
- Supplier regularly reviews & maintains PPAP timing plan to support Phase 0. promise date(s).
- SCCAF concurred by cross functional team by <PA>.
- FMEA assessments are complete & evidence of linkage exists between DFMEA, PFMEA, w Supplier has a process to ensure linkage between DFMEA, PFMEA, SCCAF & Control
SCCAF & Control Plan (operations level document). Plan prior to Phase 0.
- Measurement System Analysis (MSA) for all production level gauges (variable & attribute) is
complete prior to Phase 0. This includes all aspects of MSA - accuracy, linearity, stability etc. w Supplier has a method to complete & approve Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
- Supplier applies Machine Acceptance Standards ensuring part compliance to specification prior to Phase 0.
(including process capability).
- Machine Tools & Assembly Equipment maintenance Plans are complete including spare parts w Supplier has a process for Machine Acceptance demonstrating part compliance to
& back up tooling. specification (including process capability Ppk > 1.67) prior to Phase 0.
- Packaging design concept approved prior to Phase 0.
- Site STA approved (CAR) Planning Capacity Analysis Report complete by <FDJ> & supports w Supplier has included packaging approval in their APQP work plan.
APW / MPW requirements.
- Staffing/Training plans complete prior to Phase 0. w Supplier re-assesses capacity assumptions & confirms APW, MPW, OEE, Scrap,
Cycle Time etc. prior to Phase 0.
w Supplier ensures they have training & staffing plans that support Phase 0 & capacity
ramp up.
I.4.5
X Launch Performance Process Launch performance guidance
Rate this Supplier has a process to continuously monitor and improve launch performance.
w Supplier has a system that tracks performance to meet PSW dates.
sub-
element by Part Approval Process
w Supplier manages sub-tier suppliers to assure PSW timing is met.
entering All PPAP documentation must contain the information per the PPAP manual published by the
r, y, or g in Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) - this information must also be available for Ford w Supplier has a process to notify its customers, including buyers, of any slips to PSW
cell above review. Suppliers have a process in place to comply with Global Phased PPAP. timing and reports PPAP planning dates in Vehicle Parts Progress (VPP) for parts to
vehicle assembly plants or Manufacturing Parts Progress (MPP) for parts to Powertrain
plants.
w Supplier has a system in place that responds to all Ford Consumer Product Audit
(FCPA) issues, where applicable.
w Supplier has a process to contain and resolve all FCPA issues prior to the next build.
17 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
I.4.5
X Launch Performance Process
Rate this
sub-
Supplier has a process to continuously monitor and improve launch performance.
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Part Approval Process
Expectation &

Sub-element
element by
Plan
Due Date
entering All PPAP documentation must contain the information per the PPAP manual published by the
Rating
r, y, or g in Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) - this information must also be available for Ford
cell above review. Suppliers have a process in place to comply with Global Phased PPAP. All Expectations, regardless of Color Rating, shall have documented
Responsibility and
w Supplier validates all FCPA fixes with the customer prior closing any AIMS issue.
w Supplier has a formal system to conduct operator-based Quality Stand Downs on all
new product or process launches.
w Supplier drives the operator-based Quality Stand Down process to its supply base.
w Supplier incorporates Quality Stand Down information into the PFMEAS and Control
Plans.
w Supplier has a process to conduct Fresh Eye Reviews on all new products, gauges,
processes, and equipment, and utilizes its personnel from sister plants, divisional and
corporate staff, and/or customers.
w Fresh Eye Review findings are documented by the supplier, and action plans are
developed for all areas requiring improvement.
w Supplier has extraordinary launch plans in place to ensure a safe launch of its new
product.
w Supplier utilizes inspection data to validate extraordinary launch plans.
w Supplier has a process to move out of extraordinary containment plans only when it
has met specific quality expectations required by the Ford Program Launch Team (e.g.,
3000 consecutive parts with ZERO defects found at the supplier's manufacturing site or
ZERO QRs at the Ford Assembly Plant for the first 45 days post-Job#1.
Part approval guidance

w Supplier is compliant to PPAP (AIAG) procedures
Note: Refer to the PPAP reference manual to ensure that all requirements are met:
http://www.aiag.org/
w PPAP documentation must be no more than one year old at the time of initial PSW
submission. Ford Powertrain plants require a copy of the PSW when parts are shipped.
w All PPAP submissions on record are to the latest Ford current design released print.
(Design responsible suppliers submit their designs to Ford for Ford release.)
w Supplier has a process for managing Interim PPAP submissions [with WERS Alert] to
closure of the non conformance prior to Alert expiration.
If an Alert is required, supplier must:

w Select the "No" radio button next to "These results meet all design requirements"
under "Submission Results".
w List the exceptions to released Design Record full compliance in the "Declaration --
EXPLANATION/COMMENTS." field.
w Include the Alert number and description of the Alert on the PSW under "Interim
Status".
w On PSWs with "Alerts", the supplier has submitted a PPAP for these parts prior to
expiration of the Alert.
Note:
If the supplier has not received an approved PSW for parts after Alert expiration, the
supplier is not authorized to ship parts to the Ford plant, and the buyer, product
engineer and STA site engineer must be notified.
18 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Substance use restrictions conform to the latest release of the Ford Restricted
Substance Management Standard (RSMS) WSS-M99P9999-A1 (includes IMDS
materials reporting evidence, e.g., IMDS Module ID for acceptance, in the PPAP
submission)
Note:
Refer to FSP (https://fsp.portal.covisint.com/web/portal/), for the WSS-M99P9999-A1
Standard (RSMS), and review supplier evidence of IMDS material reporting. Rust
inhibitors and other chemicals that may be put on the component for part protection
and/or for manufacturing may require approval from Ford Toxicology department.
Review if approvals were required and obtained for any of the parts produced.
I.4.6
X Suppliers require sub-tier suppliers to have a process in place that effectively satisfies all PPAP w Supplier has a production part approval process for its sub-tier suppliers.
Rate this requirements regardless of sub-tier supplier business relationship with Ford. w When the component is identified by FCSD as being serviceable, supplier ensures that
sub- all serviceable components from sub-tier suppliers meet PPAP requirements, including
element by Ford PPAP customer specifics, available through
entering https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Phased_PPAP.html.
r, y, or g in
cell above
w This procedure requires the supplier to conduct fit and functional approval on their sub-
tier suppliers prior to PPAP submission to Ford
I.4.7
X Run-at-Rate must be completed and supports the stated program requirements (at full-volume w Supplier submits capacity verification documentation and is in compliance to all newly
Rate this production levels) for all Ford parts. launched or added capacity parts.
sub-
Note:
element by
Confirm APW and MPW with buyer, if unknown
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.4.8
X Capacity Verification must include the following elements and be performed on the entire process w Supplier complies with Ford's documented capacity verification procedure, referenced
Rate this or the slowest operation (process bottleneck): machine available hours, shifts, days, machine in FSP. (Run-at-Rate and capacity verification are part of Phased PPAP available on
sub- downtime (planned and unplanned), machine change over, breaks, and quality or scrap. https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Phased_PPAP.html)
element by w Supplier verifies capacity as described in the Phased PPAP Handbook (Phase 3
entering requirements) available through the web link above. The supplier reports Purchased
r, y, or g in Part Capacity (PPC) in GCP for vehicle, or in MCPV for Powertrain, as documented on
cell above the CAR (Capacity Analysis Report) and the PSW.
Note 1: Capacity requirements from Ford include service capacity requirements.
Note 2: GCP and MCPV require the input by the supplier of APPC (Average Purchased
Part Capacity) and MPPC (Maximum Purchased Part Capacity).
Note 3: Supplier personnel completing Ford's Capacity Analysis Report for submission to
Ford or to determine APPC and MPPC must be Certified Capacity Planners. A Certified
Capacity Planner is someone who has completed Ford's capacity training
(https://www.lean.ford.com/cqdc/supplier_training.asp), has passed the test and is
registered in the GCP Supplier Directory.
19 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
I.4.8
X Capacity Verification must include the following elements and be performed on the entire process
Rate this or the slowest operation (process bottleneck): machine available hours, shifts, days, machine
sub- downtime (planned and unplanned), machine change over, breaks, and quality or scrap.
element by
entering
STA Action
Completion Date
r, y, or g in
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
cell above
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Supplier's supporting documents demonstrate compliance to Ford's capacity

requirements.
Note: Capacity requirements may be communicated to suppliers as part of launch
information for new parts or via Capacity Studies either during launch or during mass
production.
w Supplier provides timing on all newly launched or increased capacity parts (e.g., Gantt
charts)
w Supplier utilizes overtime in accordance with local law.
I.4.9
X Supplier monitors capacity and has a process to ensure on-going sufficient capacity on all Ford w Supplier is compliant to Ford's product releases.
Rate this parts. w Staffing support for capacity requirements takes into account turnover rate and
sub- absenteeism.
element by
entering w Supplier has a process to communicate Ford production requirements to sub-tier
r, y, or g in suppliers, and monitors and measures its ongoing effectiveness to ensure 100% delivery
cell above of sub-tier supplier components to meet supplier/Ford demand.
w Supplier has a plan to support capacity requirements in case of production
interruptions due to equipment failure and/or sub-tier supplier performance issues.
INC I.5. Manage the Change
I.5.1
X Supplier has a documented process to effectively implement post - Job 1 design changes, w Supplier has a documented manage the change procedure (e.g. similar to the SREA -
Rate this process changes, or volume changes. Supplier Request for Engineering Approval for process changes).
sub-
element by w Supplier can validate the procedure with a current example of a change.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
I.5.2
X Supplier effectively reviews and updates its quality supporting documentation for these changes. w Supplier has a process to implement internal and external suppliers' (tier 2 or tier 3,
Rate this Examples of documents that may require changes: Process Flow Diagrams, FMEAs, Control etc.) proposed changes, which may or may not involve Ford.
sub- Plans, Operator Instructions, Visual Aids, and PPAP documentation.
element by w Supplier identifies new CTQ metrics associated with the change and implements valid
entering measurement system(s) to track key measurables associated with the process change.
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier can demonstrate effective communication to Ford of a change using the
SREA process.
w Supplier can validate the process using the most recent change, either initiated
internally or by sub-tier suppliers.
I.5.3
Where a supplier proposes to make a permanent change to a previously approved part / process,
the supplier follows a documented process to ensure that proper Ford approvals are gained prior
to implementing the supplier proposed changes.
w Manufacturing process changes are approved using the Supplier Request for Engineering
Approval (SREA) process (through the web based SREA tool (https://web.srea.ford.com/).
w Supplier proposed changes to Ford design released parts are approved using the Change
Request/Concern Report (CR/CR) process in Worldwide Engineering Release System (WERS) . 20 of 45
w Supplier proposed changes to tier 1 or to Ford directed tier 2 manufacturing or ship site Revision Date: March 2018
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
I.5.3
X Where a supplier proposes to make a permanent change to a previously approved part / process, Ford usage of parts from temporarily changed supplier manufacturing processes or
Rate this the supplier follows a documented process to ensure that proper Ford approvals are gained prior temporary part changes are managed through the WERS Alert process with an Interim
sub- to implementing the supplier proposed changes. PPAP submission.
element by w Manufacturing process changes are approved using the Supplier Request for Engineering
entering Approval (SREA) process (through the web based SREA tool (https://web.srea.ford.com/).
r, y, or g in w Supplier proposed changes to Ford design released parts are approved using the Change
cell above Request/Concern Report (CR/CR) process in Worldwide Engineering Release System (WERS) .
w Supplier proposed changes to tier 1 or to Ford directed tier 2 manufacturing or ship site Notes:
locations are approved through the Ford Resourcing process. Refer to the customer notification section in the PPAP manual
w All implemented changes require revised PPAP documentation and PSW approval, per the SREA procedure is available on https://web.qpr.ford.com/SREA.html
PPAP requirements and PPAP submission level of the part.
Note:
Ford plant functional trial requirements are described in the Phased PPAP Handbook.
II. Demonstration of Manufacturing Process Capability
INC II.1. Sub-tier supplier Quality Management
II.1.1
X Supplier has a defined process for managing its supply base including identification of those with w Supplier has a defined process for managing its supply base, including resources
Rate this high impact to quality. to work with sub-tier suppliers.
sub- w Supplier has a process of identifying sub-suppliers with a high impact on quality
element by Sub-tier supplier Sourcing
entering The supplier has a documented process for sourcing new business or resourcing existing
w Supplier has a means of communication to notify high impact sub-suppliers of their
r, y, or g in business to Sub-tier suppliers
status (i.e., e-mail, letter, meeting minutes, database systems, etc.).
cell above
w The Tier 1 supplier is responsible for the quality of the parts produced by all its sub-
tier suppliers, including those sub-tier suppliers directed by Ford but without a Multi-
Party Agreement.
w Where a Multi-Party Agreement exists between Ford, the tier 1 supplier and the sub-
tier supplier, the responsibilities of all parties (Ford, Tier 1 and Sub-Tier) are all
understood and implemented by each responsible party.
w Supplier has a plan in place to develop value stream maps of their tier 1 and 2
suppliers
Note:
Communication includes FMEAs, control plans, pass-through characteristics (where
required), and PPAPs.
Sub-tier supplier sourcing guidance
21 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
Date:
II.1.1 Supplier Contact E-Mail: STA Site Engineer name:
X Supplier has a defined process for managing its supply base including identification of those with
last release Supplier
high impactName:
to quality. STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
Rate this
sub- Supplier Site Code: If Supplier Self-Assessment, Approved By: STA Site Engineer Phone#:
element by Sub-tier supplier Sourcing
entering
Supplier
The supplierContact Name: process for sourcing new business or resourcing existing
has a documented Name: Commodities:
r, y, or g in business
SuppliertoContact
Sub-tier suppliers
Phone#:
cell above
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w The sourcing process assesses and selects sub-tier suppliers based on defined
assessment criteria.
E.g..:
- internal and external quality indicators,
- System certifications (Quality, EMS, Logistics, etc.),
- Compliance to applicable Customer Specific requirements
- Compliance to applicable AIAG released CQI standards & Ford Special Process
Requirements https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Ford_GTS.html
- Previous / Current launch performance,
- Delivery performance
- Feasibility commitment to meet quality, timing and capacity for the sourcing
w The sourcing process includes managing sub-tier suppliers directed by Ford with or
without multi-party agreement. Where a multi-party agreement exists between Ford, the
tier 1 supplier and the sub-tier supplier, the responsibilities of all parties (Ford, Tier 1
and Sub tier) are all understood and implemented by each responsible party
w The sourcing process requires timely communication of appropriate sourcing

information to the sub-tier suppliers like CAD, Volume, Timing, Logistics,
Technical/Technology Requirements, Processing requirement /Special process
requirements, Material requirements, Special characteristics/ES requirements etc.
w The sourcing process requires review & planning (as appropriate) for Tier 1
resources to manage the new sourcing. Resource could include but not limited
manpower, space, equipment etc.
II.1.2
X Supplier requires sub-tier suppliers to have a quality operating system that is similar to ISO/TS w Sub-tier supplier compliance to ISO/TS 16949 or IATF 16949 is demonstrated through
Rate this 16949, IATF 16949, or VDA. Supplier verifies sub-tier supplier compliance by annual on-site tier 1 second party assessment or third party registration of the sub-tier supplier. ISO/TS
sub- assessment of high impact sub-tier supplier facilities. 16949 sub supplier development requirements may be satisfied by tier 1 second party
element by assessment.
entering Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking Suppliers are encouraged to apply the principles outlined in “CQI-19 AIAG
r, y, or g in The supplier has a process to track sub-tier supplier APQP readiness to meet Ford New Sub-tier Supplier Management Process Guideline” to manage all their sub-tier suppliers.
cell above Program/Capacity Uplift/Resource/Engineering changes etc. are met Additionally, Ford reserves the right to require the suppliers to apply the
principles outlined in “CQI-19 AIAG Sub-tier Supplier Management Process
Guideline” to address issues identified by Ford in the supplier's sub-tier supplier
development and management process. Ford will communicate the requirement to apply
CQI- 19 to the specifically selected supplier based on sub-tier supplier
management issues attributed to the tier 1 supplier. Evidence of effectiveness
is based on having a defined process and implementation of the process
w Supplier visits sub-tier suppliers on a predetermined frequency and conducts on-site

assessments.
w Supplier has documented evidence of these assessments
w Supplier communicates working conditions expectations to sub-tier suppliers and

requires compliance to local labor law as specified in the Supplier Social Responsibility
Web Guide https://web.fsp.ford.com/gtc/docs/hrandwc.pdf .
Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking
22 of 45
II.1.2
X Supplier requires sub-tier suppliers to have a quality operating system that is similar to ISO/TS
Rate this 16949, IATF 16949, or VDA. Supplier verifies sub-tier supplier compliance by annual on-site Q1 Manufacturing Site Assessment Evaluation Matrix
FORD PROPRIETARY
sub- assessment of high impact sub-tier supplier facilities.
element by
Changed from entering Date:
Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking Supplier Contact E-Mail: STA Site Engineer name:
last release r, y, or g in The supplier has a process to track sub-tier supplier APQP readiness to meet Ford New
Supplier Name: STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
cell above Program/Capacity Uplift/Resource/Engineering changes etc. are met
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w The supplier uses the Ford specified Sub-tier supplier APQP tracking matrix or
x equivalent to track & report progress at each GPDS Milestones per the following link
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Sub_Tier_APQP.html
w Wherever sub-tier supplier APQP progress is not meeting Ford GPDS requirements,
extra ordinary action plans are developed & tracked regularly to meet Ford
requirements. These are documented in the External supplier APQP/PPAP readiness
assessment - Schedule A and/or in the supplier APQP launch QOS.
w The supplier provides appropriate design inputs (DFMEA, YS/YC), Ford / Tier 1
TGWs / TGRs / BSAQ / Standards (Design or Manufacturing as applicable) to sub-tier
supplier as an input to their FMEA process
w The systemic actions in the link below are referred to and appropriately addressed in
the sub-tier supplier APQP as part of failure mode avoidance
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/TGW_summary_for_Q1_Site_Assessment.xls
II.1.3
X Supplier has a process of PPAP for parts from sub-tier suppliers (regardless of sub-tier supplier w Supplier ensures that all sub-tier supplier PPAP requirements are met, including fit and
Rate this business relationship with Ford). The process requires sub-tier supplier compliance to PPAP part functional approval of parts / materials / assemblies by the tier 1 prior to getting
sub- prior to incorporation of product in supplier manufacturing process (regardless of sub-tier supplier PPAP approval from Ford at each step of Phased PPAP, consistent with Global Phased
element by business relationship with Ford). PPAP (https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Phased_PPAP.html).
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above w The sub-tier supplier compliance to PPAP requirements is documented by the supplier
in their tier 1 PPAP submission to Ford, or is available for review upon Ford request.
When the component is identified by FCSD as being serviceable, the supplier ensures
that the Ford service part number is included in sub-tier PPAP documents.
w Supplier updates PPAP for any change in production part or process.

w When a PPAP is submitted to Ford, all sub-tier supplier PPAPs are updated if the
original PPAP documentation is more than one year old.
w The supplier has a process to manage sub-tier supplier requests for change or
deviations from the approved PPAP. The process is consistent with the requirements of
x the Ford SREA process (see the following link).
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/SREA.html
II.1.4
X The supplier has a process to manage Ford or supplier defined Engineering Specifications (ES), w The supplier has a documented agreement with their sub-tier suppliers to identify
Rate this Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI, or OS), and Pass Through Characteristics (PTC) that are Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI, or OS), Pass Through Characteristics (PTC) and
sub- the responsibility of the sub-tier supplier. their control methods. This agreement cascades, at a minimum, the sub-tier supplier
element by responsible characteristics in Ford's Special Characteristics Communication and
entering Agreement Form (SCCAF) or equivalent.
r, y, or g in
cell above w The supplier ensures controls methods and sampling strategies are statistically valid
and appropriate, refer to the AIAG published SPC manual, available through
23 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
II.1.4
Rating
The supplier has a process

Supplier mustto list
manage Ford or supplier
evidence defined each
to support Engineering Specifications (ES),
Expectation.
X
Rate this Special Characteristics (CC, SC, HI, or OS), and Pass Through Characteristics (PTC) that are
sub- the responsibility of the sub-tier supplier.
Responsibility and
element by ratings or STA comments on supplier all yellow and red
entering compliance to the Expectation rated Expectations)
r, y, or g in
cell above
w The supplier has documented records of sub-tier supplier compliance to Engineering

Specifications, Special Characteristics and PTC, as applicable
w Where pass-through characteristics are required, supplier has a process to identify

and manage sub-tier supplier pass-through characteristics, utilizing error-proofing
methods.
w The PTC control process requires identification of the PTC in sub-tier supplier's
PFMEA and control plan/work instructions, and evidence exists that the supplier has
validated the sub-tier supplier's PFMEA and control plan to ensure the following:
- All part characteristics are considered against the definition below.
- All pass-through characteristics are to customer specifications, regardless of the tier
level of manufacture
- Controls used are appropriate regarding method and frequency.
- Sub-tier supplier has utilized error proofing methods wherever possible
Note: A "Pass Through Characteristic" is one that is NOT subsequently checked beyond
the sub-tier supplier or tier 1 supplier that generated it
II.1.5
X The supplier has a process to periodically review ongoing / launch performance with sub-tier w The supplier assesses sub-tier supplier performance based on defined criteria. E.g.
Rate this suppliers to drive continual improvements in the supply base. QRs, PPM, Warranty, Response time to customer complaints, Delivery performance ,
sub- CPU, R/1000
element by
entering w Supplier verifies sub-tier supplier compliance by annual on-site assessments of high
r, y, or g in impact sub-tier supplier facilities to Quality System, Product Requirements and Ford
cell above customer specific requirements
w Supplier has documented evidence of these assessments and upon request is made
available for Ford STA review
w There is evidence of annual dimensional validation (layout) of all parts from sub-tier
suppliers (regardless of sub-tier supplier business relationship with Ford).
II.1.7
X Supplier conducts systemic reviews with sub-tier suppliers and assures implementation of w Supplier has a procedure in place that defines how to manage sub-suppliers
Rate this corrective actions across supplier facilities for all issues resulting in stop ships, field service generated defects (e.g., 8D review process), including permanent corrective action
sub- actions or QRs verification process
element by
entering w Sub-suppliers have a documented problem solving methodology.
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier has a procedure in place to conduct random incoming quality audits to verify
effectiveness of the corrective actions implemented by a sub-supplier.
w Supplier ensures sub-suppliers' 8D or equivalent corrective action review process

includes notification to FCSD (Ford Customer Service Division) STA for any required
containment action for FCSD identified serviceable components.
x II.1.8
The supplier has a process to assess sub-tier supplier capacity to meet Ford's capacity
requirements.
24 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.1.8
X The supplier has a process to assess sub-tier supplier capacity to meet Ford's capacity w The supplier's capacity process defines the methodology for capacity assessments
Rate this requirements. and timing milestones for completing the sub-tier supplier capacity assessments. For
x sub- method guidance, refer to the Ford Motor Company Capacity Analysis Report User
element by Guide through the link below.
entering
r, y, or g in https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Phased_PPAP.html
x cell above
w The supplier demonstrates the effectiveness of its documented sub-tier capacity
assurance process using an example of sub-tier supplier capacity assessment meeting
x Ford's capacity requirements (APW and MPW) at appropriate GPDS deliverables (25 -
Capacity Planning, 19 Phase 0 PPAP, 30, Phase 3 PPAP) or for a post-launch capacity
change.
w The supplier ensures the sub-tier suppliers have contingency plans to support Ford's
x capacity requirements without any interruption, e.g. in the case of key equipment failure.
INC II.2. Control of Incoming Quality
II.2.1
X Supplier has a strategy for receiving inspection. w Supplier's special characteristics are identified for incoming inspection, including sub-
Rate this tier suppliers as appropriate.
sub-
w The frequency of inspection is greater on high risk sub-tier suppliers
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
II.2.2
X Incoming quality requirements are part of a control plan. If incoming quality inspections are w Incoming quality is defined on control plans
Rate this made, there is evidence of the specification and compliance to the specification. If no incoming w If incoming inspections are made, supplier shows compliance to the specifications
sub- inspections are made, there is a rationale for qualifying sub-tier suppliers.
w Supplier has supporting rationale if no incoming inspections are made.
element by
entering w Supplier has an operator-based SPC control plan in place
r, y, or g in
cell above
II.2.3
X Incoming Quality Operator follows a reaction plan if raw material or purchased part is found to be w Supplier has a containment policy for incoming quality (i.e., tagging, identifying type of
Rate this out of specification. defect, log of defects, 8D review process).
sub- w Supplier has a resolution process for incoming inspection rejects, including notification
element by to FCSD (Ford Customer Service Division) STA for rejects associated with any FCSD
entering identified serviceable components.
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier assigns responsibility for resolution, progress is being tracked, and sufficient
time is allocated to implement permanent corrective action.
II.2.4
X Supplier has appropriate resources to manage sub-tier supplier quality including on-site w Supplier has a process to review sub-tier supplier quality systems.
Rate this assessment of high impact sub-tier supplier facilities.
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above 25 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.2.4
X Supplier has appropriate resources to manage sub-tier supplier quality including on-site
Rate this assessment of high impact sub-tier supplier facilities. w When non-conformities are present, supplier and sub-tier supplier have specific
sub- reaction plans
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
INC II.3 Control Plans / Operator Instructions
II.3.1
X Standardized operator instructions (including control plans, work instructions, job aids, check w Work instructions have all of the necessary details, including quality acceptance
Rate this sheets, job set-up instructions, and illustrations) are developed and available for operators. criteria, process and product control parameters, reference to product drawing release
sub- level and date, specific/special gauges and tools required, reaction plan for process and
element by product non-compliance, point of contact, etc.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier has a process to identify those manufacturing process changes which
require an initial production quality check, e.g. changes or adjustment of tooling, tool
refurbishment, restart of a machine after a shut-down, rotational of personnel with
operator dependent processes, etc. The supplier should also record the results of the
initial production quality check.
w Supplier can demonstrate operator compliance to the work instructions.
II.3.2
X Standardized operator instructions are legible, specific, and controlled. The instructions are w Supplier can demonstrate that operators are adequately trained and supervised in
Rate this available in the area where the work is being performed and are followed by operators as written. correctly carrying out their process function in line with the available documented
sub- instructions, including the correct disposition of set-up and scrap parts.
element by
entering w Wherever possible, visual aids are employed at the work station to define and focus on
r, y, or g in compliance/non-compliance.
cell above
w If there is a multi-lingual workforce, supplier can demonstrate work instructions are
understood.
II.3.3
X Reaction plans are clearly defined and protect Ford from non-conforming materials. w Operators understand the consequences of non-compliant parts and subsequent
Rate this failure reaching the customer (i.e., downstream operation or to the end customer).
sub-
element by
entering w Supplier has a process of notifying customers if non-conforming product has left the
r, y, or g in supplier's facility.
cell above w Supplier has a containment process if non-compliant parts reach the customer.
w Work instructions specify a reaction plan if suspect or non-compliant parts get through
the system.
w This procedure and/or reaction plan instructs the operator or quality activity on what to
do next.
II.3.4
Control Plans are revised and updated when products or processes differ from those in current
production.
26 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.3.4
X Control Plans are revised and updated when products or processes differ from those in current w Control plans are accurate and up to date with latest product/drawing and
Rate this production. process revisions.
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
For more information, refer to the AIAG Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
INC II.4 Process Variability Monitoring/Reduction manual or the Statistical Process Control Manual (SPC) .
II.4.1
X Supplier has determined appropriate statistical techniques. A key aspect of defect prevention is w Supplier has an operator-based statistical process control or process monitoring
Rate this process variability reduction and the use of SPC or an equivalent process monitoring method to method in place (e.g., histogram, control charts, records of process conformance with
sub- indicate when action is necessary, and conversely, when processes should be left alone. rotation of personnel or after unplanned shutdowns, etc.).
element by
entering w These methods of control are appropriate for the given process or product
r, y, or g in characteristics (i.e., X bar - R chart, Individual Moving Range chart, np charts, median
cell above charts, etc. -- SPC toolbox).
w The process is equipped with process controls, in-line gauging, etc.
w Supplier reviews data and makes appropriate improvements to the process.
II.4.2
X Operator-based SPC control charts are optimized for statistically valid sample frequency, sample w The operator-based charts are being utilized to drive changes within the process
Rate this size, and appropriate chart type. SPC checks are performed on a timely basis and out-of-control
sub- conditions prompt corrective action as appropriate.
w The operator-based charts capture what changes have been made to the process to
element by enable verification that adjustment is statistically beneficial (e.g., passes 2-proportion or
entering 2 Sample T test) to the process (tooling changes, machine down time, die change, etc.)
r, y, or g in
cell above
II.4.3
X SPC data is maintained, monitored and used by the equipment operators to drive process and w Evidence of process improvements include: reductions in scrap, reductions in
Rate this product improvements by reducing process variability. Evidence of process improvements rework/repair, and DPU; increases in first-time through capabilities, Rolled Throughput
sub- include: reductions in scrap, reductions in rework/repair, and DPU; increases in first-time through Yield (YRT), Ppk, Process Sigma level, records of error proofing mechanism
element by capabilities, Rolled Throughput Yield (YRT), Ppk, Process Sigma level, records of error proofing implementation; and reductions in machine downtime.
entering mechanism implementation; and reductions in machine downtime.
r, y, or g in w Operator-based SPC charts capture when a change has been made and that the
cell above process has been effectively improved by statistically different before and after data.
w The equipment operator uses the charts to monitor for out of control conditions.
w The cause for an out of control condition is identified and recorded by the equipment
operator, including any action to remedy condition.
w The charts are reviewed by the equipment operator for recurring patterns and
corresponding reaction plans are sufficient
w If a new cause has been identified, the equipment operator has a method to
communicate issues, through the appropriate channels, to the process owner to ensure
that FMEAs/Control plan/work instructions, etc. are updated.
II.4.4
X Ppk is demonstrated to be greater than or equal to 1.67 (initial and final process capability - with w Supplier has a Ppk tracking mechanism in place.
Rate this Phase 3 PPAP) and 1.33 (for on-going production process capability), for all SCs and HIs (where
sub- applicable). For all special characteristics, Ppk trends are tracked over time, and action plans
element by have been put in place to increase these Ppk values by a process of continuously reducing the
27 of 45
entering causes of variability. These trends are part of the Supplier's regular Quality Operating System
r, y, or g in (QOS) performance review. Revision Date: March 2018
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.4.4
X Ppk is demonstrated to be greater than or equal to 1.67 (initial and final process capability - with
Rate this Phase 3 PPAP) and 1.33 (for on-going production process capability), for all SCs and HIs (where
applicable). For all special characteristics, Ppk trends are tracked over time, and action plans w Where the supplier has reduced the frequency of SPC charting, there is statistical
sub- evidence to support this reduction and/or some other method of control is in place. (i.e.,
element by have been put in place to increase these Ppk values by a process of continuously reducing the
causes of variability. These trends are part of the Supplier's regular Quality Operating System they become part of a preventive maintenance program, tool management program, die
entering maintenance / replacement program, equipment vibration analysis program, etc.).
r, y, or g in (QOS) performance review.
cell above CCs require an appropriate control method (verified with data) that prevents shipment of non-
conforming product to Ford.
These requirements also apply to Special Characteristics where those characteristics are w Appropriate control methods using Key Process Input Variables for CCs are to be
manufactured at sub-tier suppliers, as appropriate. reviewed and approved by the STA engineer or a Ford Technical / Process Specialist
Possible control methods include:
w Poke yoke
w Statistical sampling of product characteristics in conjunction with continuous
monitoring and control of Key Process Input Variables as appropriate for the specific
process
w 100% inspection integrated into the manufacturing process with automatic lockout
w Supplier has a method of analyzing and managing statistically generated data (SPC
charts) on the manufacturing process(es) that produce Ford part(s), e.g., Six Sigma.
w Ppk data is used to drive process enhancements that have an impact on product
characteristics (e.g., moving upstream to manage KPIV [Key Process Input Variable]
characteristics, such as, tool feed rate and speed, coolant temperature, bearing failure
rate, tool management strategy, etc.), including sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
w If supplier is not statistically monitoring process/product, how is capability ensured?
w For all Ford identified special characteristics (e.g., SCs), Ppk is > 1.67 (initial and final
process capability) and 1.33 (for on-going production process capability), including sub-
tier suppliers as appropriate.
Note 1: Final Process Capability is demonstrated at Phase 3 PPAP.
Note 2: On-going production process capability is demonstrated using the same sample
size and calculation methods as those used for initial process capability (Ppk calculated
using 25 subgroups of 5 parts), but using measurements collected as part of the Control
Plan sampling strategy defined in the Control Plan for each SC and HI.
w If variable data is used on HIs (where applicable), then Ppk levels for the HI
Characteristic are greater than 1.67 (initial process capability) and 1.33 (for on-going
production process capability).
w If SCs or HIs (where applicable) are not capable, then per PPAP, integrated 100%
inspection or poke yoke controls are incorporated into the manufacturing process and
Control Pans are in place to ensure that product is validated prior to shipment, and
robust corrective action plans are in place to improve the process capability.
w Ppk values are only calculated for processes that are stable, in control and of known
statistical distribution.
28 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
Note:
CRITICAL CHARACTERISTICS (CC): Critical characteristics are designated with the
inverted delta symbol (s) and are those product requirements (dimensions,
performance tests, etc.) or process parameters (rates, temperatures, pressures, etc.)
that can affect compliance with government regulations, or safe vehicle/product function,
and which require specific producer, assembly, shipping or monitoring action and the
inclusion on the Control Plan.
SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS (SC): Significant Characteristics are those product,
process, and test requirements that are important for customer satisfaction and for which
Quality Planning actions must be addressed in a Control Plan.
HIGH IMPACT CHARACTERISTIC (HI): High Impact Characteristics are related to
parameters that severely affect the operation of the process or subsequent operations if
they are outside of the specification tolerance.
OPERATOR SAFETY (OS) characteristics are related to parameters that do

not affect the product but may have an impact on the safety or
governmental regulations applicable for the process operation, e.g.,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA] requirements,
Ford Health and Safety Specifications. This is a hazard for in-plant
operators. These characteristics should be included on a safety signoff.
These are failure modes with a severity rating of 9 or 10 due to an
effect of the process on the process operator.
II.4.5
X Machine capability for SCs, CCs and HIs (where applicable) must be demonstrated on all new w Supplier has procedures in place to qualify new equipment, specifically for SCs, HIs
Rate this equipment and tooling. and CCs
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
For more information, refer to the AIAG Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA) manual
INC II.5. Measurement System Capability, Calibration and Use (hyperlink below):
II.5.1
X Supplier ensures that all gauges are available for use as identified in the control plan to support w Supplier can validate gauge availability on-site per the control plan.
Rate this Ford requirements. The gauge calibration and gauge maintenance program ensures that back-
sub- up gauges or a back-up gauging process is available to support inspections required by the
element by control plan.
entering
r, y, or g in w Gauges are available on-site with the appropriate capability (e.g., appropriate gauge,
cell above measurement method and datum point) to meet the measurement requirements of the
control plan.
In exceptional circumstances, if measurement capability is not available on-site, the
supplier has a defined strategy for using a third party for this item, including timing and
availability.
29 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
II.5.1
Supplier ensures that all gauges are available for use as identified in the control plan to support STA Action
Completion Date
X
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Ford requirements. The gauge calibration and gauge maintenance program ensures that back-
Rate this
Plan
Due Date
up gauges or a back-up gauging process is available to support inspections required by the
Rating
sub-
control plan.
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
Responsibility and
cell above ratings or STA comments on supplier all yellow and red
w Where poke yokes are used, the poke yoke equipment is included in the calibration
schedule and is validated regularly (e.g. at the beginning and end of each shift) using a
test "rabbit".
w Test "rabbits" used to verify poke yoke functionality are included in the supplier's
calibration and maintenance schedule.
w Supplier has evidence that a published schedule is followed and on-track for the
calibration and maintenance of inspection, measuring and test equipment (including test
software).
w Gauging procedures with visual aids are posted at the work station
II.5.2 w Supplier has a gauge R & R tracking mechanism in place.

X Variable gauges are used for all SCs and CCs, whenever possible. HI gauges are per the control w Both company and personal gauges are evaluated and tracked.
Rate this plan. All gauges (company and employee-owned) are identified per the control plan. w There is a process in place to drive compliance.
sub- w Is the tracking system automated or manual?
element by
entering w If variable gauges are not being used, supplier can provide solid justification as to
r, y, or g in why not.
cell above w Gauge R&R studies may also completed with attribute gauges (see PPAP customer
specifics, https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Ford_Specifics_for_PPAP.pdf).
II.5.3
X Gauge R & R is to conform with the guidelines in the AIAG Measurement Systems Analysis w Gauge R&R studies are to be completed for all gauges used to check Ford product
Rate this (MSA) manual. Whenever gauge R&R does not meet these guidelines, specific plans are in regardless of type or measurement system.
sub- place which adheres to the guideline. Additionally, the supplier has the appropriate measurement
element by capability for all stages of production.
w Method and frequency of gauge R&R is specified for every measurement system,
entering including attribute gauge R&R.
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier has evidence that any employee who uses a gauge follows the same
measurement processes for the gauge as the employees who participated in the original
gauge R&R study
w Where AIAG MSA guidelines are not met, an improvement plan is available.
Note:
It is recommended that gauge error be held within an acceptable level. gauges with an
error greater than 10% must be reviewed against the tolerance and associated risks are
evaluated.
While Gauge R&R requirements are typically percent of study, to determine the ability of
the gauging to discriminate between parts, where a process is highly capable, it may be
appropriate to use percent of tolerance to demonstrate that the gauging can identify part
compliance to specification. See customer specifics
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Ford_Specifics_for_PPAP.pdf
Note:
Efforts must be made to conduct measurement correlation studies (i.e., a method of
inspection between the supplier and the receiving plant). Some of the gauges may
require isolators to reduce the impact of the manufacturing equipment vibration on the
measurement.
II.5.4
Supplier has a documented "dropped / damaged gauge" policy that is followed by all employees.
This ensures that only functional, in-specification gauges are used.
30 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.5.4
X Supplier has a documented "dropped / damaged gauge" policy that is followed by all employees. w Operators know and understand the procedure
Rate this This ensures that only functional, in-specification gauges are used. w Records of dropped/damaged gauges are in compliance
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
II.5.5
X Gauge masters are traceable to a national or international equivalent standard. Gauge w Supplier has a gauge maintenance program.
Rate this calibration and maintenance is performed on an appropriate schedule and per specification using w Records show compliance. If supplier is using gauge blocks to qualify micrometers
sub- gauge masters or standards traceable to national or international equivalent standards. and calipers, then they are certified to National Institute of Standards & Technology
element by (NIST) or international equivalent.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
II.5.6
X Supplier conducts regular evaluation of error proofing devices. w Evidence is recorded that error proofing devices are tested for all failure modes on the
Rate this shop floor at a regular frequency (e.g., daily or at the start of each shift) to ensure they
sub- work.
element by
entering w The frequency of checks should be set to correspond to the divisions between
r, y, or g in homogeneous lots of production.
cell above
INC II.6. Control of Parts/Part Identification/Packaging/Shipping
II.6.1
X Supplier has a documented process for positive part identification and part control in all stages of w Supplier has controls and processes in place for handling rework, repair, and scrap,
Rate this production, rework, repair, scrap, testing, laboratories, storage areas, office areas, etc. which include documentation, evaluation, segregation, quarantine, disposition and
sub- recording.
element by
entering w Work instructions for management of rework, repair, scrap, etc., have all of the
r, y, or g in necessary details, including quality acceptance criteria, process and product control
cell above parameters, reference to product drawing release level and date, specific/special gauges
and tools required.
w Applicable service processes should be followed regarding the re-use of parts if an

assembly is disassembled and re-assembled for any reason (e.g., rework).
w Supplier ensures that rework operation does not by-pass any quality operation
performed in the original process and assures that part conforms to customer
requirements.
w Supplier has a process to evaluate if further traceability is required for reworked

components.
w Individual parts are identified for traceability, when and where feasible, including
segregation of reworked product.
w Supplier has a process to ensure that the part is not reworked more than once for the
same issue.
31 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
II.6.1
Changed from
Date:
Supplier has a documented process for positive part identification and part control in all stages of
Supplier Contact E-Mail: STA Site Engineer name:
X
last release Supplier Name:
Rate this production, rework, repair, scrap, testing, laboratories, storage areas, office areas, etc. STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
sub- Supplier Site Code: If Supplier Self-Assessment, Approved By: STA Site Engineer Phone#:
element by
entering Supplier Contact Name: Name: Commodities:
r, y, or g in Supplier Contact Phone#:
cell above
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w The supplier must have evidence that the process for marking of parts with their part
numbers (direct marking and labelling) is evaluated in the PFMEA and appropriate
actions taken as necessary
w Supplier’s procedures require verification that part branding is in compliant to Vehicle

Parts Branding Directive E-108 for any new tooled parts after 8/1/2002 and is evaluated
using Part Trademark Compliance Check Sheet. Branding verification include sub-tier
supplier components for all part or assembly identified to be serviceable by FCSD (Ford
Customer Service Division) .
w Automated ID scanning systems must be subject to a Measurement System Analysis

to check for capability.
w Processes at suppliers and sub suppliers to be risk assessed for :-

- Potential for different parts to be mixed together.
- Potential for a part to be dispatched incomplete.
- Potential for assemblies to have wrong components fitted (mis-builds).
- Potential for a part to be dispatched under the wrong identity.
The whole production route (including all processing operations, rework/rectification,
storage and dispatch areas) is to be reviewed as part of the risk assessment.
Note:
A good system should identify "where the part has been and where it is going."
Everything has its place identified and it must be in its place. (All parts outside of a
production area (i.e., offices, labs, testing etc.) must have identification tag).
II.6.2
X Supplier has lot traceability of product shipped to Ford, including reworked product. w Where supplier has a lot traceability system in operation, system is capable
Rate this communicating information to Ford, as required.
sub-
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
II.6.3
X Supplier takes measures to ensure that production processes control handling, storage, and w All aspects of part handling throughout the production process should be monitored for
Rate this packaging as to prevent damage or deterioration, and preserve product quality. the occurrence of handling or storage damage. There should be documented analysis
sub- and corrective action plans to eliminate the cause of functional defects.
element by
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above
w Supplier has documented involvement in package design and testing, and
improvements are being made to ensure product quality
w Should supplier have responsibility for maintaining returnable dunnage, there is a
process for reviewing internal and external transportation bins for structural damage and
holes. (Potential for Hi-Lo forks causing product damage.)
w Supplier should define the disposition of parts that are dropped in the course of
production
32 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
II.6.3
X Supplier takes measures to ensure that production processes control handling, storage, and
Rate this packaging as to prevent damage or deterioration, and preserve product quality.
sub-
element by STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
entering
Plan
Due Date
r, y, or g in
Rating
cell above Supplier must list evidence to support each Expectation. All Expectations, regardless of Color Rating, shall have documented
Responsibility and
w Where stacking standards exist, the supplier should define the acceptance
standard for any stacking of components.
w Supplier has a process for reviewing storage areas all environmental and adverse
conditions are considered in the entire design of packaging and facilities.
w Returnable Ford dunnage is appropriately maintained and cleaned, if supplier

responsible. Measures are taken to repair or replace worn or broken dunnage.
II.6.4
X Supplier follows Ford packaging requirements see w Supplier dunnage is Ford approved and documented.
Rate this https://comm.extsp.ford.com/sites/MPLB2B/Pages/MPLdefault.aspx. At pack-out, the Ford w Supplier complies with MMOG/LE requirement. Results are available.
sub- packaging guidelines are available for use and followed as required.
w Supplier complies with FCSD (Ford Customer Service division) packaging
element by requirements for all Ford service shipments as defined in the global Packaging Website
entering through Ford Supplier Portal FCSD page https://web.purinfo.ford.com/ on Covisint.
r, y, or g in Evidence of compliance is included in PPAP documents and supported by packaging
cell above visual aids.
w "Ford Plant Specific" packaging instructions are posted, when required.
INC II.7 Testing/Engineering Specifications
II.7.1
X All inspections, measurements, and tests, including Engineering Specifications (ES) and Material w Supplier has a documented process in place to ensure that the latest Engineering
Rate this Specifications (MS), are performed according to documented control plans, instructions, and/or Specifications (ES) are accessible (ED, SDS, MS, etc.), including for sub-tier suppliers
sub- procedures to ensure product requirements are met, including at sub-tier suppliers as as appropriate.
element by appropriate.
w Supplier complies with all blueprint and/or engineering specification requirements (ES,
entering SDS, MS, etc.) including at sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
r, y, or g in - Supplier complies with Critical to Quality process requirements as specified in the
cell above Supplier Manufacturing Health Charts, including at sub-tier suppliers as appropriate.
Results are available. See
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Supplier_Manufacturing_Health_Charts.html on Ford
Supplier Portal for the requirements.
II.7.2
X Appropriate reaction plans address what actions should take place if there is a test or inspection w Supplier has an engineering specification (ES) failure procedure including at sub-tier
Rate this failure, and includes product containment and customer notification policy for all events. suppliers as appropriate.
sub-
element by w Reaction plans include directions on who is to act, if production is to stop, what
entering shipments are to stop or to be recalled, and what actions are deemed necessary to
r, y, or g in protect and notify Ford, including Ford Customer Service Division (FCSD) for affected
cell above FCSD identified serviceable parts.
II.7.3
Suppliers and sub-tier suppliers providing heat-treated components are required to meet Ford
Manufacturing Standard W-HTX and meet the requirements of CQI-9 Special Process: Heat
Treat System Assessment. To reduce the risk of embrittlement, heat-treated steel components
are required to conform with Ford material specification WSS-M99A3-A. 33 of 45
The tier 1 supplier is responsible to ensure that all tiers of heat treat suppliers are annually Revision Date: March 2018
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.7.3
X Suppliers and sub-tier suppliers providing heat-treated components are required to meet Ford w Supplier can verify that a valid heat treat system assessment exists, for all heat treated
Rate this Manufacturing Standard W-HTX and meet the requirements of CQI-9 Special Process: Heat components and all requirements are met. W-HTX is the Ford manufacturing standard
sub- Treat System Assessment. To reduce the risk of embrittlement, heat-treated steel components to control heat-treating processes and auxiliary equipment. This includes: Process
element by are required to conform with Ford material specification WSS-M99A3-A. Monitoring Test Frequencies, Laboratory Control Test Frequencies, In-process Test
entering The tier 1 supplier is responsible to ensure that all tiers of heat treat suppliers are annually Frequencies, and the minimum requirements for each heat treat process type defined
r, y, or g in assessed to CQI-9. within W-HTX
cell above Ford reserves the right to require Special Manufacturing process Requirements at the tier 1
supplier and sub-tier suppliers
w The tier 1 supplier is responsible to ensure that all tiers of suppliers are assessed to
the applicable Ford manufacturing process standards.
Refer to https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Ford_GTS.html on Ford Supplier Portal for all
these standards except CQI-xx , which are available through AIAG.
w The CQI-9 Special Process: Heat Treat System Assessment is to be used to assess all
heat treat processes annually, regardless of tier level, and each item in the assessment
is to be rated one of the following:
w "Satisfactory", if the requirements are met,
w "Not Satisfactory" if the requirements are not met or
w "Needs Immediate Action" if a non conforming product is suspected or found.
If there are any "Not Satisfactory" or "Needs Immediate Action" findings, corrective
action plans are to be developed and implemented within 90 days. "Needs Immediate
Action" requires containment.
See https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Ford_GTS.html on Ford Supplier Portal for the
requirements.
INC II.8 Preventive Maintenance (PM) / Housekeeping
II.8.1
X Supplier has instituted practices that include reactive, preventive, and predictive maintenance. w Supplier has a process in place to improve the management, maintenance, and life-
Rate this The maintenance system supports process capability improvement. cycle of equipment and tooling.
sub- w Supplier's maintenance program includes a process for reviewing manufacturing
element by Supplier incorporates DFMEA / PFMEA / Special Characteristics, Key Process Input Variables
(KPIVs) and Key Process Output Variables (KPOVs) when developing the maintenance plan equipment and material handling systems (e.g., guards, conveyor belts, etc.)
entering
r, y, or g in program.
cell above w The supplier ensures that PM is conducted according to the schedule for all processes
Management regularly reviews (at least quarterly) the status of the PM completion to plan. that impact all part characteristics, especially SCs and CCs, including sub-tier suppliers
Management reviews corrective action plans to ensure any backlog (past due) maintenance has as appropriate.
a plan to become current to the PM schedule. Management undertakes an evaluation to
determine if there is a reduction of machine/process downtime.
w Supplier's maintenance department tracks unscheduled downtime versus scheduled
downtime, and develops improvement actions to eliminate causes of unscheduled
downtime
w Supplier's maintenance program incorporates product Special Characteristics in PM

process
w Lessons from events due to unscheduled downtime are incorporated into the
scheduled maintenance program to improve OEE.
w The maintenance schedule has specific responsibilities assigned.
w Supplier's predictive maintenance is based on valid statistical methods.
w There are minutes of management meetings related to the PM program.
34 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
II.8.1
X Supplier
Date: has instituted practices that include reactive, preventive, and predictive maintenance. Supplier Contact E-Mail: STA Site Engineer name:
Changed from The maintenance system supports process capability improvement.
Rate this
last release
sub-
Supplier Name: STA Site Engineer E-Mail:
element by Supplier
Supplier incorporates
Site Code: DFMEA / PFMEA / Special Characteristics, Key Process Input Variables If Supplier Self-Assessment, Approved By: STA Site Engineer Phone#:
entering (KPIVs) and Key Process Output Variables (KPOVs) when developing the maintenance plan
r, y, or g in Supplier
program. Contact Name: Name: Commodities:
cell above Supplier Contact Phone#:
Management regularly reviews (at least quarterly) the status of the PM completion to plan.
Management reviews corrective action plans to ensure any backlog (past due) maintenance has
a plan to become current to the PM schedule. Management undertakes an evaluation to
determine if there is a reduction of machine/process downtime.
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
w Supplier has adequate spare parts on hand based on historical equipment

maintenance records and equipment vendor recommendations
w Trend/performance charts demonstrate effectiveness of PM program (i.e., up-time

trend)
w New failure modes and causes identified from the PM program that affect part quality
(scheduled or unscheduled) have been looped back to the product's PFMEA, control
plans, and work instructions.
II.8.2
X Supplier validates relevant product characteristics after tool / mold / jig / machine / equipment or w Supplier has a detailed process to verify part quality from planned or unplanned
Rate this other maintenance activity (planned or unplanned). Also, the supplier validates relevant product downtime
sub- characteristics after special cause events (e.g., power outage, natural disaster, etc.) that affect
element by tool / mold / jig / machine / equipment w Machine acceptance after maintenance downtime may include first piece approval,
entering material testing, dimensional and / or process capability
r, y, or g in Supplier assesses and documents risk to product quality in case of any deviation from the
cell above established maintenance plan program (e.g. rescheduling of maintenance program due to w For catastrophic events, repeat the initial machine acceptance process as appropriate
capacity constraints, personnel availability, etc.) to the severity of the event
w Supplier's maintenance plan also includes risk assessment for any PM deviation.
Supplier ensures that the maintenance plan program frequency (e.g. inspection, clean, replace, Deviation from the PM plan requires management approval.
refurbishment, etc.) is based on statistical analysis of historical performance or surrogate data of
mean time between failures (MTBF) or other standards. If relevant data are unavailable, the data w Supplier's PM process utilizes Six Sigma, Lean Manufacturing tools or surrogate data
shall be collected as part of the pre-launch control plan data acquisition. when historical data are not available
w Baseline maintenance plan may be based on manufacturer's recommendations and
pre-launch control plan
II.8.3
X Supplier ensures that only trained personnel have access to change Programmable Control w Supplier has a process which defines authorized personnel to gain access to update
Rate this Systems (PLC, CNC, Automation HMI, etc.) inputs. any Programmable Control Systems (PLC, CNC, Automation HMI, etc.)
sub-
element by Supplier validates that any bypass installed by the machine builder for debugging purposes is w Supplier's authorized personnel list is cascaded to the production and maintenance
entering removed prior to production equipment homeline approval(s). team(s)
r, y, or g in w Supplier's machine acceptance process includes a step to remove any bypass needed
cell above Supplier validates that old / obsolete Programmable Control Systems (PLC, CNC, Automation
HMI, etc.) software levels are removed from the system and cannot be used in production. for machine debugging
w Supplier has a process to identify and delete old / obsolete Programmable Control
Systems (PLC, CNC, Automation HMI, etc.) software
II.8.4
X The supplier has continuous improvement plans for plant cleanliness, housekeeping, w Supplier has a process to review manufacturing / repair / rework processing and
Rate this ergonomics, and working conditions, and audits their facility at least monthly. There is evidence shipping areas for "any" potential to contaminate or damage finished parts, including the
sub- that the supplier management team is following continuous improvement plans. dunnage prior to shipping to customer plant(s) (e.g., finished machined parts, bearings,
element by seals/gaskets, brakes, fuel and power steering lines, hoses, etc. cannot accept "any"
entering Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material, chips, debris, contamination, excessive oil, contamination. Contamination in the raw materials for injection molded and powdered
r, y, or g in etc. where part quality can be negatively affected. metal components can impact product quality and performance.).
cell above
w Where supplier identifies areas of concerns, actions plans are developed to implement
improvements, and closure of issues is documented.
w There is a documented procedure for plant cleanliness, housekeeping, and labor
conditions as mandated by local law and customer expectations.
w There is adequate lighting for inspection, measuring, and test equipment
35 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
II.8.4
X The supplier has continuous improvement plans for plant cleanliness, housekeeping,
Rate this ergonomics, and working conditions, and audits their facility at least monthly. There is evidence
sub- that the supplier management team is following continuous improvement plans.
element by STA Action
Completion Date
entering Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material, chips, debris, contamination, excessive oil,
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
etc. where part quality can be negatively affected.

r, y, or g in
Plan
Due Date
Rating
cell above
Responsibility and
w Supplier's QOS performance review has safety as one of the metrics
w Supplier's QOS performance review tracks injuries related to ergonomic issues
w Supplier has a process in place to assess physical and chemical risk to workers as
well as appropriate health and safety measures in place to mitigate risk.
w Emergency systems are in place and well communicated to employees.
INC II.9 Manufacturing Flow / Process Engineering / 6 Sigma and Lean Manufacturing Metrics
II.9.1
X Supplier uses lean manufacturing and Six-Sigma principles for current and new model parts Supplier is driving continuous improvement utilizing JIT production principles listed
Rate this incorporating JIT (just in time production), waste elimination, and team based structured problem below:
sub- solving to drive continuous improvement for quality, process capability, and manufacturing
element by efficiency. w Continuous flow processing, one piece flow or controlled batch size.
entering w Supplier only produces to customer demand (Takt).
r, y, or g in w Supplier produces to replenishment Pull signal.
cell above
w Supplier controls batch size by lowering changeover time (SMED).
w Lean principles and Six Sigma are integrated into corporate objectives.
Supplier is driving continuous improvement by utilizing automation principles listed
below:
w A system that stops the process when defects are detected.

w Rapid supervisor alert, a signal that a defect has been detected.
w High intensity use of error-proofing (poke yoke).
w Supplier is driving continuous improvement by utilizing flexible labor process and
system principles listed below:
w Flexible machine/cell design. Machines that provide maximum efficiency and flexibility.
w Cell combination: Multiple product cell maximizing labor efficiency.

w Supplier drives continuous improvement by utilizing planned and structured
workstation and cell Kaizan principles listed below:
w Line side, metrics based problem resolution with team leaders. Operators and team
leaders improve effectiveness of work cell.
w Structured workstation-level improvement activity: Operators and team leaders
improve effectiveness of work cell.
w Structured cell-level improvement activity: A system that encourages metrics based
continuous improvement actions and recognizes employee contributions.
w Employee recognition program: A system that encourages continuous improvement
actions and recognizes employee contributions.
II.9.2
X Supplier includes key manufacturing and Six-Sigma-type measurables within its QOS. A w Supplier understands and uses lean and Six Sigma metrics
Rate this minimum of two lean- and one Six Sigma-type measurables show trends or history of
sub- improvement in the past six months. Lean and Six Sigma measurables include some of the
element by following: First Time Through (FTT), Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), Dock to Dock
entering (DTD), Percent Value Add (PVA) and Ppk.
r, y, or g in
cell above 36 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Responsibility and
II.9.2
X Supplier includes key manufacturing and Six-Sigma-type measurables within its QOS. A
Rate this minimum of two lean- and one Six Sigma-type measurables show trends or history of w Supplier uses lean manufacturing and Six Sigma principles to eliminate waste and to
sub- improvement in the past six months. Lean and Six Sigma measurables include some of the manage its production, and is comparable to Ford's specified lean and Six Sigma
element by following: First Time Through (FTT), Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), Dock to Dock metrics.
entering (DTD), Percent Value Add (PVA) and Ppk.
r, y, or g in w Lean and Six Sigma metrics are used to drive improvement and process variability
cell above reduction.
Note:
For more information and/or training, refer to the Global STA Training and Education
web-site on Ford Supplier Portal: https://www.lean.ford.com/
INC II.10 Problem Solving/Corrective Actions
II.10.1
X Supplier uses a structured problem solving method (e.g., 8D) to address customer concerns and w Supplier has a documented problem solving methodology.
Rate this complaints. w Supplier has clearly described systemic root cause and corrective actions, which can
sub- be found in the actual process, work instructions, control plans, or procedures
element by implemented in similar processes in all similar facilities of the supplier, to prevent
entering recurrence.
r, y, or g in
cell above
w There is a linkage to FMEAs and control plans incorporating lessons learned.
w Supplier uses Six Sigma and 8D principles and all of the appropriate statistical quality
tools to identify root cause.
w Supplier shows evidence that Six Sigma metrics and 8Ds are driving to systemic
resolutions preventing recurrence of the identified failure modes, and tracked and closed
with Ford assembly plants on a timely basis.
w Work force is trained in problem-solving methodologies (e.g., 8D, Six Sigma Green
Belt/Black Belt)
w Supplier tracks internal quality issues, utilizing 6 Sigma DMAIC or 8D problem-solving

methodology.
w Supplier reviews pareto charts (or other analysis tool) of recent problems and
implements 6 Sigma project based error-proofing, where applicable.
Note:
Prioritization should be based on importance to the customer as defined by CTQ.
II.10.2
X Methods are established to communicate quality concerns to the supplier's production and w Supplier has a procedure to communicate corrective actions and process
Rate this support personnel. Corrective actions are submitted to the supplier's management team for improvements resulting from problem solving efforts within its organization and to similar
sub- review. The corrective actions are communicated to, and replicated in all affected areas in the areas.
element by supplier's organization.
entering w CTQ Customer complaints are communicated to operators.
r, y, or g in w Supplier includes appropriate production operators as part of the problem solving team
cell above w There is a process to capture lessons learned
w Lessons learned are built back into the work instructions and procedures
w Lessons learned are incorporated in the current and new programs
w Supplier takes lessons learned and incorporates them into all similar processes.
37 of 45
FORD PROPRIETARY
Changed from
STA Action
Completion Date
II.10.2
Responsibility
Expectation &

Sub-element
X Methods are established to communicate quality concerns to the supplier's production and
Plan
Due Date
Rating
Rate this support personnel. Corrective actions are submitted to the supplier's management team for
review. TheSupplier
correctivemust
actionslist
are evidence toto,support
communicated each
and replicated in Expectation.
all affected areas in the
sub-
element by supplier's organization.
Responsibility and
entering Ford STA input for updated Expectation Due Date Required for is: http://www.aiag.org/
r, y, or g in ratings or STA comments on supplier all yellow and red
cell above compliance to the Expectation rated Expectations)
II.10.3
X Supplier has a process in place to address customer plant concerns in a timely and thorough w If supplier's Q1 endorsement has been rescinded by a Ford customer plant based on
Rate this manner. the supplier demonstrated QR trend or 3MIS warranty R/1000 and CPU performance,
sub- the supplier has submitted a CAP (corrective action plan) to STA within 30 days
element by addressing the underlying root cause.
entering
r, y, or g in Note:
cell above Failure to do so may represent a 'violation of trust' and trigger a Q1 recommend revoke
signal in SIM.
II.10.4
X Supplier reviews previous launches and incorporates lessons learned in future launch plans to w Supplier reviews its previous launches with Ford PD, VO, and STA, utilizing an 8-D
Rate this achieve flawless launch. process to address issues.
sub-
element by w PD lessons learned are formalized within the supplier's design development system.
entering
r, y, or g in
cell above w Supplier has a system in place to capture and archive lessons learned, systemically
implementing the corrective actions to prevent recurrence of the failure modes identified.
w Supplier develops and implements agreed-upon work plans to assure successful

launches going forward.
38 of 45
Q1 Site Assessment Summary Report
Date: Site Overall Rating: INCOMPLETE

Supplier Name: % Green Elements 0%
Green = (0) RED elements and (0) YELLOW elements - All elements are GREEN
Supplier Site Code: Yellow= (0) RED elements and (1) or more YELLOW elements # Green Elements 0
Red = (1) or more RED elements
STA Site Engineer name: INC = (1) or more sub-elements not ranked RED, YELLOW or GREEN # Yellow Elements 0
# Red Elements 0
# INC Elements 15
Total # Elements 15
Element Sub-Element Due Date Element Sub-Element Due Date Element Sub-Element Due Date
INC I.1. Quality procedures ISO/TS16949, IATF 16949 QOS INC I.5. Manage the Change INC II.6. Control of Parts/Part Identification/Packaging/Shipping
I.1.1 0 I.5.1 0 II.6.1 0
I.1.2 0 I.5.2 0 II.6.2 0
I.1.3 0 I.5.3 0 II.6.3 0
I.1.4 0 II.6.4 0
I.1.5 0 INC II.1. Sub-tier supplier Quality Management
I.1.6 0 II.1.1 0 INC II.7 Testing/Engineering Specifications
I.1.7 0 II.1.2 0 II.7.1 0
I.1.8 0 II.1.3 0 II.7.2 0
I.1.9 0 II.1.4 0 II.7.3 0
I.1.10 0 II.1.5 0
I.1.11 0 II.1.7 0 INC II.8 Preventive Maintenance (PM) / Housekeeping
I.1.12 0 II.1.8 0 II.8.1 0
I.1.13 0 II.8.2 0
INC II.2. Control of Incoming Quality II.8.3 0
INC I.2. FMEAs/Control Plans II.2.1 0 II.8.4 0
I.2.1 0 II.2.2 0
I.2.2 0 II.2.3 0 INC II.9 Manufacturing Flow / Process Engineering / 6 Sigma and Lean Manuf
I.2.3 0 II.2.4 0 II.9.1 0
I.2.4 0 II.9.2 0
I.2.5 0 INC II.3 Control Plans / Operator Instructions
I.2.6 0 II.3.1 0 INC II.10 Problem Solving/Corrective Actions
I.2.7 0 II.3.2 0 II.10.1 0
I.2.8 0 II.3.3 0 II.10.2 0
I.2.9 0 II.3.4 0 II.10.3 0
II.10.4 0
INC I.3. Employee Readiness/Training Review INC II.4 Process Variability Monitoring/Reduction
I.3.1 0 II.4.1 0
I.3.2 0 II.4.2 0
I.3.3 0 II.4.3 0
II.4.4 0
INC I.4. Manufacturing Feasibility/APQP/Launch/PPAP/Run-at-Rate Review II.4.5 0
I.4.1 0
I.4.2 0 INC II.5. Measurement System Capability, Calibration and Use
I.4.3 0 II.5.1 0
I.4.4 0 II.5.2 0
I.4.5 0 II.5.3 0
I.4.6 0 II.5.4 0
I.4.7 0 II.5.5 0
I.4.8 0 II.5.6 0
I.4.9 0
Contact: siminfo@ford.com Page 39 of 45 Date revised: March 2018

Q1 Manufacturing Site Assessment
Update January 2008
Sections / Elements Description of update
Red / yellow / green definitions Aligned with GPDS definitions
I.1, I.1.1, I.2.6, II.1.2, II.6.4 Eliminated QS-9000 and MS-9000 references
II, II.1.6, II.7.3 Clarified the use of CQI-9 and W-HTX heat treat requirements
I.2.6, II.1.5, II.3.1, II.5.3, II.6.1, Assessment requirements improved based on lessons learned
I.3.2, I.4.8, II.1.2, II.8.3 Working conditions requirements added

Update 2005
I.2.2, I.2.9, I.3.3, II.6, II.6.1, II.6.2 Strengthened management of reworked parts, rework manufacturing
processes and acceptance criteria
I.4.2 Improved management of tooling from design through implementation
I.5.1, II.4.1 More explicit requirement for quality checks at regular intervals, including error
proofing devices
II.5, II.5.1, II.5.3, II.5.6 More extensive management of measurement systems, (including
subcontracted measurements services), with explicit mention of pre-production
applications
II.6.3 Added requirement of a dropped part policy and compliance with stacking
standards where specified
March 2018
II.8.1 Added emphasis on equipment preventive maintenance where special
characteristics are involved
Heading II, II.1.6, II.7.3, heat Increased emphasis on use of the Heat Treat System Survey and WHTX Heat
treat process checklist Treat Standard rather than the heat treat process checklist.
I.2.1, I.2.2 Corrected references to the current FMEA manual
I.2.4 Alignment of the site assessment with the updated Ford procedure on
identification of Significant and Critical Characteristics, especially
designating the D&R (Design and Release) engineer with Ford full responsibility
for CC designation
I.2.7, II.1.1, II.1.5 Designating pass through characteristics as being "where specified" since they
are not universally used
II.4.4 The site assessment is modified to align with the updated corporate procedure
for designation for special characteristics requires manufacturers to prevent
shipment of non conforming CC parts, this can be achieved through use of
error proofing devices.
I.1.2 Correction of obsolete specifications regarding ISO 14001 registration

requirements
I.1.4, I.1.5, I.1.7, I.1.13, I.2.2, Several terms and acronyms were not defined or explained, this has been
I.2.4, I.4.5 corrected
I.1.8, I.1.10, I.1.12, I.2.3, I.4.2, Responsibilities and objectives are clarified to require quantifiable objectives
II.5.2 and specific timing
II.6.4 Packaging trial forms were previously incorrectly identified, this has been
corrected.
1-Sep-05 Process Checklists Updated September 2005, checklists show details

13-Jun-06 Process Checklists Process Checklists were moved to
https://web.qpr.ford.com/sta/Manufacturing_Process_Checklists.xls
March 2018
Update February 2015
This requirement now linked to the corporate Environmental Requirements Web
I.1.2 Guide
I.1.5 Supplier uses Industry Commodity PPM from SIM to drive PPM improvement
I.1.6 Use Ppk for process capability
Change focus of QOS alone to describe metrics and identify QOS performance
I.1.11 as being metrics
I.1.12 Supplier includes achievement of Q1 in its metrics
I.2.1 Added that supplier is to ensure sub-tier suppliers use a similar approach
Eliminated mention of RPNs due to the removal of RPN focus in the FMEA
I.2.2 manual
Change “HIC” to “HI” in line with the current Ford internal orporate special
characteristic procedure, also added requirement to record special characteristics
I.2.4, I.2.5 on the SCCAF
Align terminology with current definitions throughout the Q1MSA and added
I.2.5 applicability of special characteristics to sub-tier suppliers
Reinforced the requirement of print dimension compliance is also applicable to
sub-tier suppliers.
Align with Ford customer specifics and Schedule A specifying 5 pieces for Annual
I.2.6 Layout and represent all machine cavities.
Control requirements clarified to apply to Powertrain and Vehicle, as appropriate,
I.2.7 and corrected the training link
Include APQP/PPAP Evidence Work book as appropriate and appropriate CAD
I.2.8 standards
Special Characteristics SCCAF requirements clarified and applicability to sub-tier
I.2.9 suppliers reinforced
I.4.2 Include requirements for sub-tier supplier APQP tracking and reporting
I.4.3 Applicability to sub-tier suppliers reinforced
Add the requirement to report PSW planning timing into VPP and MPP as
I.4.4 appropriate
March 2018
Add clarification of use of Interim PSW whenever a part is submitted for PPAP
with an Alert per Exception Management in Phased PPAP
I.4.5 Updated the RSMS and IMDS reporting requirements
Guidance updated to ensure sub-tier supplier components meet PPAP
I.4.6 requirements if identified as serviceable
Guidance updated to clarify Purchased Part Capacity (PPC) reporting
requirements
Clarification that capacity requirements may be updated at any phase of the
I.4.7 program life
Expectation and guidance updated to align with SREA process and notification of
I.5.3 every change through the appropriate approval process
I.5.3 Added conditions for use of % of tolerance Gauge R&R
Removed the special process assessments from the section header and updated
Section II header the appropriate Expectations of section II
Clarified guidance on directed tier 2 suppliers, stating where tier 1 has
II.1.1 responsibility and where responsibility may be shared with Ford
Update to permit 2nd party assessment per the customer specifics. Add
reference to use of CQI-19 for assessment of sub-tier supplier management by
II.1.2 tier 1
Clarified component part approval required prior to end item PPAP submission,
per Phased PPAP
Specified tier 1 must manage and track component approvals for all PPAP
submissions with sub-tier supplier components, including service part numbers
II.1.3 as appropriate
Replace the use of Cpk throughout with Ppk for initial and ongoing process
capability. Add published acceptable controls for CCs. Add Final Process
II.4.4 Capability as part of Phase 3 PPAP
Calibration masters or standards specified to be traceable to national or
II.5.5 international standards
Branding requirements (E-108) requirements updated including serviceable sub-
II.6.1 tier components
Guidance requirements for service updated indicating evidence of compliance is
II.6.4 included with service PPAP
Clarified the tier 1 is required to ensure compliance with all applicable
II.7.3 manufacturing process standards
II.8.2 Added a requirement for adequate spare parts based on historical usage
March 2018
The guidance is updated to give a focus on prevention of recurrence and using
II.10.1 lessons learned
Guidance updated to emphasize system implementation of corrective actions to
II.10.4 prevent recurrence of failure modes
Column Headings Added STA comments / evidence column in line with e Q1MSA

Update September 2015
I.4.1 Added a section on Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility
I.4.2 Combined the previous I.4.1 and I.4.2 requirements
I.4.4 Added a section on Final Manufacturing Feasibility
I.4.5 Combined the previous I.4.4 and I.4.5 requirements
II.1.1 Added a section on sub-tier supplier sourcing
II.1.2 Added a section on sub-tier supplier APQP
II.1.3 Updated sub-tier supplier PPAP requirements
II.1.4 Added a new section on sub-tier supplier capacity
Combined sections on sub-tier supplier product characteristics, including pass
II.1.5 through characteristics and Engineering Specification requirements
II.1.6 Added a new section on sub-tier supplier launch performance
II.1.7 Added QRs to systemic corrective action requirements
II.8.1 Added use of KPIVs and KPOVs for input to PM plan definition
II.8.3 Added section on programmable controls and their impact on PM
II.8.4 Combined the prior II.8.3 and II.8.4 sections

Update November 2015
Throughout Corrected spelling errors

Update September 2016
March 2018
II.7.3 Aligned guidance with e Q1MSA wording, re-ordered, not content change
II.1 (all expectations of this Aligned all expections and guidance with e Q1MSA wording, re-ordered, not
element) content change, including removal of expectation II.1.6, since that was
inactivated in e Q1MSA.

Update November 2016
II.1.2 and II.1.3 Aligned guidance with e Q1MSA wording, no content change
Removed II.1.6 in line with inactivation of II.1.6 in eQ1MSA. Updated wording
II.1.6 and II.1.8 and requirements of II.1.8 in this Excel version in line with II.1.8 in eQ1MSA.

Correction August 2017
I.4.4 Spelling error corrected

Correction March 2018
I.1.1, I.2.6, I.2.9, II.1.2 IATF 16949 added as a replacement for ISO/TS 16949
March 2018

MSA Dec

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

MSA Dec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ford Proprietary Q1 Site Assessment Instructions

Q1 Site Assessment Evaluation Matrix

4) Changes to this document are identified by:

Originator: STA Strategy and Business Office

1PP (First Phase of Production Prove-Out - FPDS)

Originator: STA Strategy and Business Office Date Created: 10/20/02

SFMEA (System Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)

Originator: STA Strategy and Business Office Date Created: 10/20/02

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

Expectation Element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

Expectation Sub-element G/Y/R DEFINITION:

I. Planning for Manufacturing Process Capability

INC I.1. Quality procedures ISO/TS16949, IATF 16949 QOS

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier has records of 3 previous audits, including a list of all non-conformances.

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier is tracking trends to drive continuous improvement.

w Supplier can demonstrate that an effective daily management review process is in

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier can access SIM and review QR details on a daily basis.

INC I.2. FMEAs/Control Plans

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier reviews DFMEAs / PFMEAs, identifies "potential cause of failure," and

1) highest severity items

w Supplier reviews performance data to validate the ratings.

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

Note: Per the Ford FMEA Handbook,

>Occurrence: The criterion for ranking Occurrence "1" is the

I.2.4 STA Action

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w All process or product characteristics being used to manage the manufacturing

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w There is evidence that full dimensional validation (layout) is completed annually on at

Note: Actual measurement results are available.

w There is operator-based, statistical process control evidence that supports sample

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Where required, pass-through characteristics are evaluated jointly between Ford's

w Where required, supplier reviews error-proofing methods for all pass-through

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

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

w Engineering Specifications (ES) are identified by ES No. on control plans, including

w Operator understands the reason for the error proofing method.

w Operator(s) understand the conditions for an "Out of Control" state.

INC I.3. Employee Readiness/Training Review

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier identifies operator skill set and training requirements.

INC I.4. Manufacturing Feasibility/APQP/Launch/PPAP/Run-at-Rate Review

I.4.1 Preliminary Manufacturing Feasibility

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

Supplier must list evidence to support each Expectation.

w Program Management Team includes personnel from the supplier's manufacturing

w Supplier's PD system is a formalized process that prevents verbal-only design

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier uses established Ford/Supplier links to communicate most current program

w There is a defined plan to communicate program status to supplier's manufacturing

w Supplier understands its design-responsible supplier deliverables and has a system in

w Supplier uses Robust Design Principles and customer-approved Design/Testing Lab.

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

w Supplier launch representatives are empowered to take immediate action on issues

I.4.4 Final Manufacturing Feasibility

Expectation Supplier Comments / Evidence Comments /

Part approval guidance

If an Alert is required, supplier must: