Not Required

External service providers Quality System Assessment - Form No:

Guidelines to score Rev :

A. Quality System Requirements
Has the external service providers
defined and documented its quality
A1 policy, objectives and commitments to
quality? (ISO 9001, ISO/IATF 16949
etc..)
NA 0 1
1 - The QMS certification done ,Poorly
ISO 9001, ISO/IATF 16949 not controlled. Found major Gaps like Quality
NA - Not Applicable
certified/Discontinued policy, QMS manual, Departmental objectives
not available/not clearly defined
Score
2 3 4
2 - The Quality system is documented & 4 - The Quality system is documented,
3 - The Quality system is documented &
controlled but found minor gaps in practice e.g controlled and clearly describe the external
controlled but records not updated timely.
revision status not updated. service providers's current practice.

Has the external service providers got

structured organisation with defined roles
A2 , responsibility & authority . (i.e.
procedures, organization charts, quality
manual)
0 – No formal system exists. Not
NA - Not Applicable structured organisation - Individual
control.
1 – Structured control is evidenced, But the
documentation does not exist for roles &
Responsibility.
3 – There is a clear documentation for 4 – There is a clear documentation for
2 – There is a documentation for Org.Chart,
Org.Chart, Clear definition for Authority & Org.Chart, Clear definition for Authority &
Authority & Responsibility but objectives not
Responsibility and interrelationships and Responsibility and interrelationships and
defined
deployment is not effective. deployed effectively.

3 – MRM meetings are conducted regularly 4 – MRM meetings are conducted regularly
Does the external service providers top 2 – MRM meetings are conducted regularly
0 – No Evidence of MRM is being 1 – Formal MRM is being conducted but not and Analysis of Customer complaints, Internal and Analysis of Customer/Field complaints,
A3 management conduct Management NA - Not Applicable and Quality system is reviewed & deployment
conducted. as per frequency defined in QMS rejections, internal audit points are discussed, internal rejections, inspection yield, internal
Review Meetings. is not done.
Effectiveness of actions not monitored. audit feedbacks are monitored

4- Rejection trend monitoring is being

3 - Rejection data is being captured &
happened. All the CAPA in place. Kaizens &
0 - No evidence. Rejection data 1 - Overal rejection data is available, but 2 - Rejection data is being captured & rejection trend monitoring evidenced. Short
A 4 a) Internal Rejection Monitoring (Trend) NA - Not Applicable Pokayokes implemented to arrest
capturing is not being happened monitoring not proper rejection trend monitoring evidenced. term & long term actions have planned &
occurrences in future. CAPA effectiveness
monitored
monitored

4- Robust system defined with responsibility &

2 - System defined to capture all the customer
1 - System defined to capture all the 3 - Robust system defined with responsibility lead time. Implemented sincerely. CAPA
complaints with responsibility. Customer
0 - No proper system defined to handle customer complaints. Customer complaint & lead time. Implemented sincerely. CAPA effectiveness is being monitored. Horizontal
complaint trend is available. CAPA/8D given
A 4 b) Customer complaint Handling NA - Not Applicable customer complaints. Responsibility & data is available.CAPA/8D given for all the effectiveness is being monitored. Horizontal deployment is evidenced. WI, PFMEA &
for all the customer complaints. CAPA
lead time not defined. customer complaints but monitoring not deployment is evidenced. WI, PFMEA & Control Plan has updated. Quality alert has
effectiveness is being monitored. Horizontal
proper Control Plan has not updated been made and displayed in the respective
deployment is not evidenced
area & inspection area

3 - Daily tracking done for despatches. 4 - Daily OTIF is being monitored. ASN
0 - No evidence. Not aware of OTD 1- Monthly delivery plan available for all the 2 - Weekly delivery plan arrived & adherrence
A 4 c) On-time delivery Monitoring ( OTD ) NA - Not Applicable Actions are in place where daily despatch (Advance shipment Note) is being sent to
Monitoring customers. Monthly tracking is in place monitored
schedule not met. customer regularly.

4 - Frequent Customer satisfaction survey

2 - Authenticated Customer satisfaction 3 - Authenticated Customer satisfaction done. Scores are exceeding expectation level.
0 - No evidence. Not aware of Customer 1- Customer satisfaction survey done but no
A 4 d) Customer satisfaction survey NA - Not Applicable survey done. Scores are below expectation survey done. Scores are below expectation Action plan made & implemented for
satisfaction survey authentication
level. No actions planned. level. Action plan made for improvement. improvement. Customers appreciation
evidenced

Does the external service providers have
planned Internal Audit schedule & proper
A5
closure of the Non-conformances raised
during Internal audits
4 – Internal audits are well planned,
2 – Internal audits are conducted as per yearly
0 – No Evidence of Internal audit being 1 – Formal Internal audits calender made as 3 – Internal audits are planned, conducted communicated, conducted regularly and &
NA - Not Applicable calender. Improvement points identified &
conducted. per Quality manual but poor adherrence. regularly and & NCs are addressed & Closed NCs are effectively addressed. No repeated
reviewed in MRM
NCs evidenced

3 – Customer wise audit report is available.

Is there a evidences for the proper
closure of the Non-conformances raised
A6 during external Customer audits and
ensured the effectiveness of
reoccurrence?
2 – Customer wise audit report is available. 4 – Customers are re-invited to do the audit
Action planned for addressing customer's
1 – Customer wise audit report is available. Action planned for addressing customer's after all the action points closure and
0 – No Evidence of audit is being observations with proper responsibilities &
NA - Not Applicable No proper action taken for addressing observations with proper responsibilities & customer audit score has been increased.
conducted. target date. Top management review done for
customer's observations target date. Top management review not done Effectiveness of the actions have been
mapping the progress. All the action points
for mapping the progress tracked.
are closed

Are training needs being identified for all
A7 employees & training calendar are
available & conducted as per plan.
3 - Training schedule & Effectiveness 4 - Training schedule & Effectiveness
1 - On the job training given only for operators 2 - On & Off the job training given. But Not
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No evidence of Training given monitoring procedure are available. Not monitoring procedure are available.
but no training material available . documented properly
updated Frequently reviewed & Updated

B. Contract Review System Requirements
B1 Capacity assessment
Are there established procedures for
B2 contract review? (i.e. Product specs,
Process Capabilities, and CSQSR)
Are there a system / procedures for
B3 Customer RFQ's Receiving, replying,
recording?
Are there a system / procedures for PO
receipt, Verifying and recording? And if
any deviation observed in the P.O
B4 against the offer is getting resolved with
customer? Is there a system ensures the
issue of Order confirmation to the
customer?
C. Design / Documentation Control
( If the design is not a part of the external service
providers scope Put NA in all respective columns)
Is there a system / procedure for
Customer Documents.(Technical
C1
drawings Receiving, Storage, Handling &
Control & readily retrievable)
Is there a evidence of technical
requirement has been captured properly
and reviewed with customer on design
C2
stage? And has procedure for resolving
incomplete or conflicting requirements
from customer?
Separate Product / Process drawings
were made and issued to the line (or)
C3
The Customer drawing directly issued to
the point of use.?
Are there procedures for the
identification, documentation, review and
C4
approval of all Engineering changes and
modifications?
PPAP Elements
Does the external service providers
C5
have knowledge of using PPAP ?
C6 Process flow diagrams or descriptions
NA 0 1
0-Supllier does not have any documents 1-Currently external service providers is not
NA - Not Applicable evidencing the present capacity &
available capacity.
0 – No Evidence of Documented
NA - Not Applicable
Contract review mechanism in place.
0 – No Evidence of Documented RFQ
handling System in place. Customer
NA - Not Applicable
commercial communications are handled
by so many individuals
0 – No Evidence of Documented PO
Receipt, Verification procedure in place.
NA - Not Applicable
Customer commercial communications
are handled by so many individuals
NA 0 1
0 – No standardised system followed for
NA - Not Applicable
document control.
0 – External service providers Doesn't
NA - Not Applicable
aware of Technical requirement.
0 - No Separate drawings have been
NA - Not Applicable followed. Customer drawings were
directly issued to line.
0 - No Evidence of Documentation of
NA - Not Applicable
changes
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about
NA - Not Applicable
PPAP
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about
NA - Not Applicable
PFD
Score
2 3 4
3->25% capacity is available. If the existing 4->45% capacity is available. If the existing
2- Presently < 25% capacity is available,
customers demand goes up, still there will be customers demand goes up, still there will be
mostly due to reduced demand from existing
having any surplus capacity & no investment surpluss capacity >15%. external service surpluss capacity >25%. external service
customers. Very limited investment plan to
plan to enhance providers is open to investment for enhancing providers is open to investment for enhancing
enhance the capacity
the capacity whenever required. the capacity whenever required.
3 – External service providers has the
4 – External service providers has the strong
Documented Contract review procedure with
1 – External service providers has the 2 – External service providers has the Documented Contract review mechanism for
the involvement of CFT signoff. Signed copy
Documented Contract review procedure. CFT Documented Contract review procedure. CFT all the components with the involvement of
available for all the running components.
involvement is not evidenced. Signed copy is involvement is not evidenced. Signed copy is CFT signoff & Risk analysis. Follow the same
Activities like gauges, 3rd party inspection,
not available for most of the parts available for regular running parts. systematically and recorded. Capacity
process validation frequency & process
planning is a part of contract review.
capabilities is being happened as per this.
4 – External service providers has the strong
2 – External service providers has the
1 – External service providers has the 3 – External service providers has the & Stable Documented, system for RFQ
Documented RFQ Receipt, Reply procedure.
Documented RFQ Receipt, Reply procedure. Documented RFQ Receipt, All the RFQs are receipt, Replying. Lead time has been strictly
Lead time for RFQ is defined and monitored.
But the lead time is not monitored. replied within the specified lead time. maintained. Follow the same systematically
Adherence is found for all the regular parts.
and recorded.
1 – External service providers have no 2 – External service providers has the 3 – External service providers has the Clear & 4 – External service providers has the Clear &
Documented Procedure for PO Receipt, Verify Documented Procedure for PO Receipt, Verify Documented Procedure for PO Receipt, Verify Documented Procedure for PO Receipt, Verify
but has the practice of sending the order & has the practice of sending the order & has the practice of sending the order & has the practice of sending the order
confirmation with delivery commitment & confirmation with delivery commitment. confirmation with delivery commitment. confirmation with Clear delivery commitment.
record. Adherence is 50% Adherence is 60% Adherence is 80% Adherence is 100%
Score
2 3 4
4– external service providers has procedure
1 – external service providers has procedure 2– external service providers has procedure 3– external service providers has procedure
for document control , responsibility is defined
for document control but responsibility is not for document control , responsibility is defined for document control , responsibility is defined
& adhered, properly indexed & readily
defined. but not adhered. & adhered but not readily retrievable.
retrievable.
3 – External service providers has the system 4 – External service providers has the system
1 – External service providers has the system 2 – External service providers has the system
for plan, gather and to deploy the Technical to gather and to deploy the Technical
for plan, gather and to deploy the Techinical for plan, gather and to deploy the Technical
requirements. Implemented but not monitored requirements. Implemented & adhered & is
requirement. But poor deployment evidenced.. requirement. Partial adherence evidenced.
the effectiveness properly. upto date
1 - No Separate drawings have been followed. 2 - No Separate drawings have been followed. 3 - Separate drawings have been followed.
4 - Separate drawings have been followed.
Customer drawings were Copied & issued to Customer drawings were Copied, Controlled But not controlled. Some information not
Strong control procedure followed.
line. &issued to line. transferred
3 - Document change records are available for 4 - Document change records are available for
1 - Document change records are available 2 - Document change records are available for
all the changes. Design/ document review all the changes. Design/ document review
with very poor adherrence. Design/ document all the changes. Design/ document review not
done before drawing release. But all the done before drawing release. But all the
review not done before drawing release done before drawing release.
review points have not been addressed. review points have been addressed.
NA - Not Applicable
3 - Done, Properly documented, periodic
1 - Knowledge of PPAP is there, But no PPAP 2 - Limited Experience Using PPAP and for 4 - Well documented Evidences of usage of
review not done. Document changes are not
done practically. few customers PPAP. PPAP effectiveness is being monitored
nline with drawing revision.
4 - PFD covers all the processes and sub-
3 - PFD covers all the processes and sub- processes. Available for all the parts. PFD
1 - PFD is too generic, Available for few 2 - PFD covers all the processes and sub-
processes. Available for all the parts. PFD revision is in line with Drawing revision.
components processes. Available for all the running items.
revision is in line with Drawing revision. Implementation is happening in the Shopfloor
through job card/route card.
 Does external service providers
demonstrates effective use of PFMEA:
quantifies risk, identifies special
C7
characteristics for use in Control Plan,
takes action to reduce RPNs; uses AIAG
criteria to calculate RPNs
3 - Detailed PFMEA is available. All the 4 - Detailed PFMEA is available. All the
2 - PFMEA covers all the processes and sub-
customer complaints have been incorporated. customer complaints have been incorporated.
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about 1 - PFMEA is too generic, Available for few processes. All CTQs identified.Available for all
NA - Not Applicable All CTQs identified. Periodic review has been All CTQs identified. Periodic review been
PFMEA components the running items. Periodic review has not
done. All the actions have not been done. All the actions have been implemented
been done to reduce the RPN
implemented. & RPN recalculated after actions taken.

Does external service providers
C8
demonstrates adherence to control plan.
3 - Control Plan Done, revised as per drawing 4 - Control Plan Done, revised as per drawing
chnges. Controls based on cusomer chnges. Controls based onCusomer
2 - Control plan Done at the initial product
complaints have been incorporated. Control complaints have been incorporated. Control
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about 1 - Control plan Done, All CTQs identified. But development time, CFT members have
NA - Not Applicable plan is directly accessible to operator. plan is directly accessible to operator.
Control Plan not properly documented, Not followed involved. But no further review. Customer
Focused approach for mistake Focused approach for mistake
complaints have not been addressed.
proofing/Pokayoke. Stringent reaction plan is proofing/Pokayoke. Stringent reaction plan is
not available available.

4 - MSA plan has been defined, MSA done for

Measurement Systems Analysis Study
C9
(R&R, Bias, Linearity Etc.,.)
2 - MSA plan has been defined, MSA done for 3 - MSA plan has been defined, MSA done for all the identified measuring instruments.
1 - List of instruments identified for measuring
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about all the identified measuring instruments. all the identified measuring instruments. Action taken where the R&R is more than
NA - Not Applicable CTQs & MSA plan has been defined for the
MSA Action plan not evidenced, where the R&R is Action taken where the R&R is more than 30%. R&R recalculated after improvement.
same. Adherrence is very poor
more than 30% 30%. R&R recalculated after improvement. Action plan evidenced where the R&R is
>10% < 30%.

Process validation for special processes
C 10
e.g plating, welding, powder coating etc.
3 - Special processes identified & validation 4 - Special processes identified & validation
criterion defined. Validation carried out during criterion defined. Validation carried out during
2 - Special processes identified & validation
part development. Re-validation plan & part development. Re-validation plan &
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about 1 - Special processes identified & validation criterion defined. Validation carried out during
NA - Not Applicable frequency defined. Implementation is as per frequency defined. Implementation is as per
Process validation criterion defined. Implementation is very poor part development & validation reports
plan. Operator qualification record is available. plan. Operator qualification record is available.
available.
Proper guidance has not been provided for Skill matrix defined & proper guidance
semi skilled operators. provided for semi skilled operators.

4 - SPC is a regualar practice of production.

1 - List of CTQs identified for process 2 - Monthly plan available to study process 3 - 100% process capability is being studied
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about Online SPC/Process capability study is in
C 11 Initial process Capability studies NA - Not Applicable capability study. Process capability has been capability for all the CTQs of all the parts. for all the CTQs at the process it self. Actions
Process Capability place. Containment actions are evidenced
studied during part development time. 100% adherrance. CPK found > 1.33 evidenced to improve CPK, where it is <=1.67
when the CPK is going down

0 - No evidence, No knowledge about 2 - Limited Experience Using PSW and has 3 - Done, Properly documented, Need some 4 - Well documented Evidences of usage of
C 12 Part submission warrant (PSW) NA - Not Applicable 1 - Done, But not properly documented
PSW training plan more training PSW
D. Production Planning and Product & Process Score
Control Requirements NA 0 1 2 3 4
Is FIFO operated in RM consumption
0 - No proper records have been 1 - Consumption Recorded, FIFO Not 2 - Consumption Recorded, FIFO Not 3 - Consumption Recorded, FIFO Followed, 4 - Consumption Recorded, FIFO Followed,
D1 point and are individual component batch NA - Not Applicable
maintained for RM consumption followed. No traceability followed. Have traceability Have traceability - need improvement Have traceability
numbers traceable ?

Are SOP/WI are available at the point of
use. Are they clearly/ adequately defined
D2
with the machines, equipments, tools,
fixtures, and program to be used.
1 – Work instructions are made, not available
in required place. Specific instructions are not
NA - Not Applicable 0 – No work instructions available
available, inspection methods are not clear-
Need improvement.
3 – Operator instructions are located at the 4 – Appropriate work instructions /Visual aids
2 – Visual aids posted on work stations &
work station, sufficient to ensure that the job are available where needed and clear &
where operator influence can impact the
can be done correctly. Machine no, Program complete enough to carry the process,
quality.Inspection methods are not clear-
no & inspection criterion defined and they are inspection methods etc. 100% implementation
Need improvement.
followed. evidenced.

Is there a procedure to authorize the line
D3 to start production for a particular part
number & shift changing ?
2 – Procedure defined for production starting 3 – Robust system defined for production 4 – Robust system defined and implemented.
1 – Procedure defined for production starting
& approval. Displayed near work area. starting with QA/QC approval. QA/QC Checklist made for operator to ensure all
NA - Not Applicable 0 – No procedure is defined. & approval. Only limited to QMS manual. Very
Operators are well aware & implementation is approval being taken before production during necessary parameters before production start
poor implementation.
satisfactory. shift changes. in case of setting changes & shift changes

4 – Periodic CFT review/Employees

Are external service providers initiating
D4 mistake proofing techniques and
monitoring the effectiveness
3 – Mistake proofing approach is evidenced
2 – Employees are empowered to do generate interaction is happening to enhance the nos of
during part development stage as well as
1 –Very limited evidences for mistake proofing mistake proofing ideas. Implementation is pokayokes. Implementation & effectiveness
NA - Not Applicable 0 – No evidence based on employees suggestion.
approach. Effectiveness not monitoring based on these. Effectiveness & horizontal tracking is being done. High RPN
Effectiveness monitoring is done. Nos of
deployment is not evidenced characterstrics from PFMEA have been taken
pokayoke recorded.
as an input for doing Pokayoke

Does the external service providers have

a procedure for preventive maintenance
D5 for tools, machines & Software? Is there
evidence available that such procedure
is implemented and in use?
0 - External service providers is not
NA - Not Applicable
following Preventive maintenance
1 - External service providers has no 2 - External service providers have procedure 3 - External service providers have procedure
4 - External service providers has procedure
procedure but has plan for preventive & plan for preventive maintenance for & plan for preventive maintenance for
for preventive maintenance for tools,
maintenance for machines only & not for tools, machines only not for tools, softwares but not machines, tools, softwares but not followed
machines & Software & followed
softwares. followed properly properly
 Are all critical processes and CTQ
parameters under statistical control?
(e.g.,PCC chart , X bar R chart etc.)
When a process goes out-of-control and
D6
produces nonconforming product, are
triggers defined and documented for the
purpose of initiating a stop build, or stop
shipment action?
Is external service providers monitoring
D7 Cp ,Cpk and following continual
improvement plan
Are the critical machines are identified
D8 and Contingency plan for the same is
available.
Critical operations / stations operator skill
D9 matrix are available & Further training
being given
Is PCR(Process Change Request)
D10
approval system from customer exist
E. Product Inspection, Identification and Lot
Traceability
Are there product identification (e.g. tags,
Route card , colour coding etc..) are
being used for Raw material, In process
E1
products, final products identified with
clear status ? Is there a documented
procedure is available for quality plan
Does the external service providers carry
out incoming inspection ( Parts are not
E2
issued to line without incoming
inspection )
Is there a system for First off and Last off
E3
approval of the production part.
All the measurement tools &
mastermentioned in the control plan are
E4 directly available for the operator? Insp.
Frequency is adhered as per Control
plan
Does the external service providers
utilize outgoing product inspection (Final
E5
Inspection) and testing such as dock
Audits?
Does the external service providers have
got any system for tracking (batch/Lot /
E6
Heat Number system) for the products
delivered to customer?
1 - Actions taken when process goes out of 2 - Actions taken when process goes out of 3- Actions taken when process goes out of
0 - No immediate actions taken when 4 - Has excellent Process control system and
NA - Not Applicable spec. No traceability & no documentation. spec.100% segregation done but records not control limits ,records are documented but No
process goes out of control effectively followed.
Segregation not done documented. evidence for monitoring process capability.
3 - Improvement plan evidenced , Actions 4 - Improvement plan evidenced , Actions
1 - Cp, Cpk Monitored , But plan for 2 - Improvement plan evidenced , But Actions
NA - Not Applicable 0 - Cp,Cpk Not monitored Implemented , But No monitoring on Implemented , Effectiveness Mapped and
improvement does not evidenced not Implemented
effectiveness further improvement planned
2 - Critical machines were identified, No
0 - No machines were identified as 1 - Awareness exists on Critical machines, No 3 - Critical machines were identified, 4 - Critical machines were identified,
NA - Not Applicable contingency plan but Preventive maintenance
Critical for quality, delivery Contingency plan Contingency plan exists, Need improvement Contingency plan exists, Effectively followed
in place
1 - On the job training given, No written 3 - Training schedule & Effectiveness
2 - On & Off the job training given. But Not 4 - Training schedule & Effectiveness
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No evidence of Training given training Manuals, No verification of monitoring procedure are available. Not
documented properly monitoring procedure are available. Updated
effectiveness updated
0 - No Awareness, No knowledge about 2 - Documented Evidenced but customer 3 - Well documented Evidenced along with 4 - Well documented Evidenced along with
NA - Not Applicable 1 - Awareness exists but not followed
PCR. approval not taken customer approval but effectively not followed. customer approval and effectively followed.
Score
NA 0 1 2 3 4
1 - Identification& Traceability is there but 2 - Identification& Traceability is there but 3 - Identification& Traceability System in
0 - No Identification method in place. No 4 - Identification& Traceability System in place
need major improvements. Operators are not need minor improvements. Operators are place. Followed consistently, Routecard/job
NA - Not Applicable traceability of items in shop, No Quality & Followed extensively. Routecard/job card
fully aware about suitable identification fully aware about suitable identification card system is in place. Minor improvements
Plan system is in place & effectively implemented.
methods methods required.
1 - Inward Inspection Done for Few Cases, 2 - Inward Inspection Done but documentation 3 - Inward Inspection Done, Need Minor 4 - Inward Inspection Done, with Well
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Inward inspection system in place
But not documented not effective improvement in system documented system
2 - First off /Last off approval system in place 3 - First off /Last off approval system in place , 4 - First off /Last off approval system in place
0 - No Evidence of First off/Last off 1 - First off approval system in place and but
NA - Not Applicable but all parameters not covered & records not all parameters are covered but records not and followed devotionally. Records are
approval system in place. last off approval is not done
maintained. maintained properly. maintained for verification all the time
1- All the dimensional checking instruments 3-All the instruments/gauges are available for 4-All the instruments/gauges are available for
2-All the instruments/gauges are available for
are available, but geometrical dimension dimensional & geometrical inspection, dimensional & geometrical inspection,
0 - No control plan / Measurement tools dimensional & geometrical inspection, but
NA - Not Applicable checking instruments are not available. inspection frequency is matching to the control inspection frequency is matching to the control
are entirely differrent from control plan. inspection frequency is not matching to the
Inspection frequency is not matching to plan. Proper verification by supervisor or QC plan. Properly verified by supervisor or QC
control plan
control plan person is not evidenced. personnel.
4 - Final Inspection & Dock audit system
2 - external service providers has documented available. external service providers has a
0 - No Evidence of Existence of Final 1 - Parts or features are only inspected after 3 - Final Inspection Done, Dock audit process
NA - Not Applicable criteria indicating when final inspection is system for certifying their processes (e.g.,
inspection system major problem is encountered. not in place.
performed and what to check. through Poke Yoke) on a regular basis
documents capability Check
0 - No Identification method in place. No 2 - Identification & Traceability is there but 3 - Identification& Traceability System in place 4 - Identification& Traceability System in place
1 - Identification is available but no
NA - Not Applicable traceability of items in shop, No Quality followed inconsistently. Quality plan not & followed consistently. No effective quality & Followed extensively. Has effective quality
traceability. No quality plan
Plan available plan plan in place

Are there documented procedures with
clear identified responsibility /authority to
review/approve and criteria / guidelines
E7
to control of nonconforming material
disposition? (e.g., "use as is", scrap,
rework)
Are the non-conforming products and
their storage location clearly identified?
E8
Is there records existing for the inventory
control of non-conforming products?
Does the external service providers
quantify and analyse nonconforming
E9
product and Rework Procedure is
followed?
Does the external service providers
obtain customer authorization prior to
E 10 shipment, whenever the disposition of
non-conforming material is deemed to be
use as is?
Are assemblies properly marked and
tracked through the assembly process to
E 11
ensure no steps in the process flow are
missed?
Does the external service providers use
a disciplined problem solving method
E 12
similar to 8D to address significant
internal and external non-conformances?
Does the CAPA include mistake proofing
or other preventive action to avoid root
cause, re-occurrence and verification to
E 13 ensure effectiveness? If defect is
external service providers related, is
there any system to feedback to IQC for
actions?
F. Measuring Instruments availability & Calibration
Are there list of measuring instruments
F1 available with clear trecebility &
calibration status
Does the Measuring Instruments,
equipments, Jigs & Fixtures, are verified
F2
or re-calibrated at appropriate
frequency?
Are WCPG & WCRG available to do
F3
inhouse calibration for Thread gauges
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Evidence of Documentation
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Evidence of system in place
0 – No evidence of a process for
NA - Not Applicable
verifying the quality of reworked parts.
0 – Evidence that the external service
NA - Not Applicable
providers does not provide notification
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Identification method in place.
NA - Not Applicable 0 – No formal system exists
0 - No evidence, No knowledge about
NA - Not Applicable
CAPA
NA 0 1
0 - List of measuring instruments & ID
NA - Not Applicable nos is not available. No recod available
for calibration date & calibration due.
1 - Calibration system and Frequency are
0 - No evidence, Has no measurement /
NA - Not Applicable made,
Calibration system in place
But not properly documented & followed
0 - There is no WCPG/WCRG available. 1 - There is no WCPG/WCRG available.
NA - Not Applicable No evidence of any calibration of thread Thread gauges are being sent for 3rd party
gauges
3 - Documented Procedures available and
2 - Documented Procedures available and Responsibility/ Authority clearly defined but
Responsibility/ Authority clearly defined but no isdentification system in place near
1 - Documented Procedures available but 4 - Done - Effectively documented &
no isdentification system in place near machines for temporary storage of Rejected/
Responsibility/ Authority not clearly defined Implemented
machines for temporary storage of Rejected/ Rework Components in Shop floor but not
Rework Components in Shop floor followed effectively. Some NC components
found without any identification
2 - Operators are aware about it. 3 - Operators are fully aware about it. Visual 4 - Have very good storage system, Done -
1 - System is defined only in the QMS manual,
Implementation is poor & no visual instruction instruction displayed in the respective area. Effectively Implemented & followed
but no awareness among operators
displayed in the respective area. Minor gaps in Implementation . extensively
3 – Rework procedure is clearly defined & 4 – Rework procedure is clearly defined &
2 – Rework procedure is clearly defined & proper lead time with responsibility has been proper lead time with responsibility has been
1 – Rework criteria is verbally communicated. proper lead time with responsibility has been fixed. Implementation is satifactory. fixed. Implementation is satifactory.
fixed. Found gaps in implementation. Containment action & corrective action has Containment action & corrective action has
not been addressed been addressed
4 – Formal deviation is requested along with
3 – Formal deviation is requested along with
1 – Notification is inconsistent, verbal approval 2 – Notification is made, e-mail approval is supporting data & received for the specific lot
supporting data and received for the specific
is accepted by external service providers. received by external service providers. of parts. Corrective action is included with
lot of parts.
request.
1 - Identification method is defined to know 2 - Identification & Traceability is there. 3 - Identification& Traceability System in place 4 - Identification& Traceability System in place
the status. Operators are not fully aware. Poor Operators are fully aware but is followed and is followed. Job card/ route card & Followed extensively. Has effective quality
implementation. inconsistently. implemented. plan & color coded bins in place.
3 – External service providers’s management
4 – Formal management review for all 8D’s.
2 – Formal “8D” is conducted on customer system requires formal “8D” for significant
1 – Some system exists, but process/system Permanent corrective actions leveraged to
requested external external service providers internal and external issues. Formal review for
level root cause is not identified, or corrective areas which have not yet experienced the
issues only. Process/system level root cause process/system level root cause on external
actions are not correct or fully implemented problem. 8D’s are used on non-production
is identified. issues. Mistake proofing is incorporated
issues
where appropriate.
1 - CAPA Done, But not properly documented, 2 - Limited Experience CAPA and has training 3 - CAPA Done, Properly documented & 4 - Well documented Evidences of Strong
Not followed plan Adhered, Need some more training adherence in place
NA - Not Applicable
2 3 4
2 - List of instruments with unique ID no is 3 - List of instruments with unique ID no is 4 - Detailed master list of instrument with
1 - List of instruments with unique ID no is
available. ID no is not mentioned on the available. ID no is not mentioned on the robust calibration tracking system is
available. But the ID nos are not mentioned on
perticular instrument. Calibration certificate is perticular instrument. Calibration certificate is evidenced. Instrument history card available
the perticular instrument. Calibration
available for all the instruments, but there is available for all the instruments, also for all the instruments, where calibration
certificate is available for most of the
no trecebility for calibration on perticular trecebility for calibration is available on frequency, calibration status & location of the
instruments, but there is no trecebility on
instrument. Calibration tracking system is not perticular instrument. Robust system is instruments are available. Tecebility for
perticular instrument.
upto the mark evidenced for Calibration tracking system. calibration is available on every instruments.
2 - Calibration system and Frequency are
3 - Calibration system and Frequency are
made, Properly documented & Most of the 4 - Well documented Evidences , Calibration
made, Properly documented & Some gauges
gauges area calibrated after due date (with in systems are strictly adhered
area calibrated after due date (with in a week)
a week)
2 - WCPG/WCRG is available for few running 4 - WCPG/WCRG is available for all the
parts. These are available for all the threads 3 - WCPG/WCRG is available for all the thread gauges. Calibration checklist is
on which complaint received.Other gauges thread gauges. Calibration checklist is evidenced before issuing to procuduction.
calibration in a defined time frequency. are being sent for 3rd party calibration in a evidenced before issuing to procuduction. Unique ID no is available and calibration
defined time frequency. frequency define for WCPG & WCRG

Are Customer specific gauges are being
used for the inspection purpose.
F4
E.g.Bore plug guge, Spigot snap gauge
& position gauges etc.
4 - Customer specific gauges are being used
3 - Customer specific gauges are being used for all of the components. Thiese are being
2 - Customer specific gauges are being used
0 - No evidence of using any customer 1 - Customer specific gauges are available for for most of the components. Found minor developed while part development &
NA - Not Applicable for most of the components. Found minor
specific gauges very few cases. Found major gaps gaps. Masters made to validate these gauges horizontally deployed across. Masters made
gaps
before issuing to the production. to validate these gauges before issuing to the
production.

4 - Gauge R& R done for all gauges and

Has the external service providers
performed Gage Repeatability and
F5 Reproducibility studies on key control
characteristics and do they meet the
established criteria
Instruments and Improvements actions taken
3 - Gauge R& R done for All gauges,
1 - Gauge R & R done only on customer 2 - Gauge R & R done for selected gauges for R & R > 10% . (Clear Analysis done on to
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Gauge R & R Monitored Improvements actions taken for R & R > 30%,
demand , But No actions taken for Poor R & R only , But no actions evidenced for R&R identify the variations is due to equipment
Weak Analysis
variability ,or operator variability etc.
evidenced )

4 - Clearly defined system, contingency plan

Is there a process for dispositioning of
F6 product that has been built/tested with
equipment found to be out of calibration?
0 - No System to track the products
NA - Not Applicable produced using gauge went out of
calibration
2 - System Available to track the products
1 - System Available to track the products produced using gauge went out of calibration,
produced using gauge went out of calibration, with clearly defined responsibility. But only
But Responsibility not defined carried out for characteristic checked using
Attribute gauges
3 - Clearly defined system available to track
and WI available, to track and verify the
and verify all the suspect products 100 % and
suspect products 100 % and dispose the
dispose the defective parts available within
defective parts which in pipeline up to
plant, and No system to actions taken on parts
customer end. and also intimating customer if
shipped to customer
customer line is affected

4 - Gauges calibrated at NABL lab at defined

If using external external service
F8 providers - records of calibration (such
as certificates) should be available
3 - Gauges calibrated at NABL lab , But
0 - Records Not Available - No system to 1 - Records Received and filed -But frequency , Certificated Well Maintained with
2 - Gauges calibrated at NABL lab , But records received, preserved for One year only
NA - Not Applicable demand certificates from external Information not adequate (Calibrated with Non clearly defined retention period of more than 3
records received. But not preserved . Next Calibration frequency not reviewed
calibration agency NABL approved agency) years. Next Calibration frequency reviewed
w.r.t results of calibration
w.r.t results of calibration

Score
G. Purchase System Requirements
NA 0 1 2 3 4

4 – System for external service providers

Is there a system / procedure for external
G1 service providers Selection Process with
criteria specified, and approval process?
0 – No Evidence of system in place for
the external service providers Selection
NA - Not Applicable
Process with criteria specified, and
approval process
1 – System for external service providers
selection process has been defined but not
adequately documented & implemented. No
pre-assessment audit done before external
service providers selection
2 – System for external service providers
selection process has been defined,
adequately documented & implemented. No
pre-assessment audit done before external
service providers selection
3 – System for external service providers
selection process has been defined,
selection process has been defined,
adequately documented & implemented. Pre-
adequately documented & implemented. Pre-
assessment audit done before external
assessment audit done before external
service providers selection. Actionplan taken
service providers selection. Actionplan taken
for improvement, where audit score is less.
for improvement, where audit score is less.
Business started after improvement & after
Business started before improvement.
reassessment done

Is PPAP validated only if external service
providers has approved Tier 2 PPAP's
G2
and equivalent internal component
validations?
1- PPAP is being done with Tier-1 external
NA - Not Applicable 0-No evidence of such system service providers.
Major gap observed in the PPAP documents
3-Stringent PPAP made with Tier-1 external 4-Stringent PPAP made with Tier-1 external
2-Stringent PPAP made with Tier-1 external
service providers & Tier-2 external service service providers & Tier-2 external service
service providers, but Tier-2 external service
providers's quality monitored.Tier-2 PPAP not providers's quality monitored.Tier-2 PPAP has
providers's quality not monitored
validated been verified & validated.

Does the external service providers’s

purchasing documents with tier 2
includes all information necessary to
3 - System genrated PO is available for all the 4 - System genrated PO is available for all the
define materials or products to be 0 - No Evidence of Documentation. For 1 - P.O is available for all the outsourcing 2 - System genrated PO is available for all the
out sourcing products & Sub-Con parts with out sourcing products & Sub-Con parts with
G3 ordered. Such information includes item NA - Not Applicable all the out soutcing materials P.O is not material, But it is too generic, Hand written & out sourcing products with relevant operations
relevant operations details. Part rev status is relevant operations details. Part rev status is
name, specification, revision level, there does not contain any specification details. PO is not available for Sub-Con parts
not matching to drawing revision status not matching to drawing revision status
quantity, delivery time, price,
transportation, etc. which is inline with
Win requirement?.

Does the external service providers shall

continuously monitor Tier 1 external
service providers performance by some
key indicators such as quality index,
assessment result, rating, etc. The
G4 external service providers shall have a
documented system to make complaints
and claims to Tier2 external service
providerss and also a system to follow-
up the efficiency of the corrective
actions.
2 - System defined for Tir 1 external service
providers performance monitoring.
1 - System defined for Tir 1 external service
Responsibility defined. Monthly Key
0 - No Evidence of Tir 1 external service providers performance monitoring.
NA - Not Applicable performance indicators are being measured
providers performance monitoring Responsibility defined. No evidence of
and communicated to external service
implementation
providers. No written action plan for
improvement.
3 - System defined for Tir 1 external service
providers performance monitoring.
Responsibility defined. Monthly Key
performance indicators are being measured
and communicated to external service
providers.Action plan taken for improvement
but not being monitored for closure.
4 -System defined for Tir 1 external service
providers performance monitoring.
Responsibility defined. Monthly Key
performance indicators are being measured
and communicated to external service
providers.Action plan taken for improvement &
monitored for closure.

Is there a procedure existing for the

traceability and identification of Material
and equipment from which Tier1 has
G5 been done?
(Batch/Lot / Heat Number system) for the
products delivered to Tier 1 for
processing?
1 – external service providers has the system 4 – external service providers has the strong
0 – No Evidence of system in place for not adequately documented & followed to 2 – external service providers has the proper 3 – external service providers has the system well documented system in place & followed
NA - Not Applicable the Traceability from sub external service have traceability from very few critical system, implemented for few critical & followed sincerely to have traceability for sincerely to have clear traceability from all sub
providerss. parts/process sub external service providerss parts/process. Minor improvements required few critical parts/process. external service providerss. Trecebility is
- need lot of improvements. there upto assembly process.

Are contingency plans in place for any
supply failure from Tier 1 activities that
G6
can influence the product quality / On
time Delivery of Customer?
0 - No critical external service
NA - Not Applicable
providers/processes are identified
2 - Critical external service
1 - Critical external service
providers/processes are identified, but no
providers/processes are identified, but no
contigency plan in case of supply failure.
contigency plan in case of supply failure.
Excess stock/safe stock maintained.
3 - Critical external service
providers/processes are identified, Excess
4 - Done - Effectively documented &
stock/safe stock maintained. Contigency plan
Implemented
made in case of supply failure.Gaps in
implementation.

Is there a system / procedure to make 4 - Robust system defined. Implemented

sure the Customer Drawing/Specification
G7
changes into the immediate effect of
products in progress @ Tier1 place.
3 - Robust system defined. Implemented
1 - Generic system defined, but no evidence 2 - Robust system defined. Implemented in sincerely. Part rev status updated in PO &
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No system/procedure in place sincerely. Part rev status updated in PO &
of implementation few cases with Major Inconsistencies incoming inspection report. Re-PPAP done,
incoming inspection report
verified & approved.

Is there any audit carried out for Tier-1 &
G8
Tier-2 external service providerss
3 - Audit done for all Tier-1 external service 4 - Audit done for all Tier-1 external service
2 - Audit done for all Tier-1 external service
1 - Audit done for only major Tier-1 external providerss & major Tier-2 external service providerss & all Tier-2 external service
providerss. Action plan taken for
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Evidence of any audit. service providerss. Action plan taken for providerss. Action plan taken for providerss. Action plan taken for
improvement, monitored & implemented. Re-
improvement. improvement, monitored & implemented. Re- improvement, monitored & implemented. Re-
audit not done
audit done after improvement. audit done after improvement..

Score
H. 5S & Machine shop control practices
NA 0 1 2 3 4

Is the appropriate tool used as per the
control plan?
H1
Are tools properly maintained?
Does the operator use the tool correctly?
0 - No Control plan. No Evidence of
NA - Not Applicable
usage as per Control plan/WI
1 - Tools are Maintained. Operator use the
tools correctly. Control plan/WI needs
updation.
3 - Tools maintained properly, Control
2 - Tools maintained properly, Control 4 - Tools maintained properly, Operators are
plan/Work Instruction updated.All the
plan/Work Instruction updated. Few Operators strictly following the Control plan/WI. 100%
operators are aware about this & following the
are following as per this. adherence. Tool life is being monitored.
same

Is skilled manpower & adequate spare
H2 parts are available to carryout
uninterrupted maintenance?
0 - No Skilled Labours for maintenance, 1 - Have Semi Skilled, No Evidence of 4 - Have Skilled, Adequate spares available.
2 - Have Semi Skilled. Spares available. - 3 - Have Semi Skilled. Spares available. -
NA - Not Applicable No proper control on machine availability of spares- only breakdown Effectively followed periodic maintenance
Needs major improvements Needs minor improvements
Maintenance Maintenance. plan.

Tools are stored in an appropriate,

clearly defined area with systematic
H3 tracking that provide traceability,
particularly of customer owned tools and
equipments.
2 - Proper system defined for proper tool 4 - Have very good storage system, Done -
1 - Proper system defined for proper tool 3 - Have proper storage system - Needs
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Evidence of system in place. identification. All operators are aware but Effectively Implemented & followed
identification. No evidence of implementation. Minor improvement in implementation
implementation is poor extensively

Is Life of the cutting tools, Production

tools, Jigs are monitored through a
H4 proper system?. Appropriate actions are
taken in advance prior to the end of life
of the same.
1 - Life of the cutting tools, Production tools,
0 - Life monitoring system is not Jigs are monitored through a system.
NA - Not Applicable
evidenced. Adherence is poor & No actions are based on
the same.
3 - Life of the cutting tools, Production tools, 4 - Life of the cutting tools, Production tools,
2 - Life of the cutting tools, Production tools,
Jigs are monitored through a proper system. Jigs are monitored through a proper system.
Jigs are monitored through a proper system.
Actions are not taken in advance prior to the Appropriate actions are taken in advance prior
No actions are based on the same.
end of life of the same. to the end of life of the same.

3 - OEE for critical machines are monitored 4 - OEE for critical machines are monitored
Does all the Productive machines OEE 1 - OEE for critical machines are monitored 2 - OEE for critical machines are monitored
0 - OEE monitoring system is not through a proper system. Actions are not through a proper system. Appropriate actions
H5 are monitored and improvement plans in NA - Not Applicable through a system. Adherence is only 50% & through a proper system. No actions are
evidenced. No knowledge on the same. taken in advance prior to the end of life of the are taken in advance prior to the end of life of
place? No actions are based on the same. based on the same.
same. the same.

2 - Have adequate space-Scope for 3 - Have adequate space-Scope for

Is there adequate work space? Is that 0 - No, Place is not sufficient. No proper 1 - Have adequate space currently-scope for 4 - Sufficient Places are available,
H6 NA - Not Applicable expansion is available, Arrangements are not expansion is available, Arrangements are
work place properly organized? arrangements in the work place expansion is nil. Arrangements are not proper. Arrangements are Very good.
Proper - Need major improvement Proper - Need Minor improvement

Score
I. Handling, Storage, Packaging, and Delivery
NA 0 1 2 3 4

Are there documented procedures for

handling, storing, packaging and delivery 2 - Procedure available in manual , Not at 3 - Procedure available at Point of Use, 4 - Clearly defined procedure & Visual
I1 NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Documented procedure available 1 - Procedure Available for Packaging only
of product? And the same is readily Point of Use Need improvement (Visual standards etc.) standards available at Point of Use.
available at the point of use?

3 - Procedure available, 4 - Clearly defined Procedure available,

Are the material inward, issue, inventory
I2 control records maintained per the
procedures defined?
2 - Procedure Available, Register available
Register for Incoming material and Inventory Register for Incoming material and Inventory
NA - Not Applicable 0 - Not Aware of Inventory control 1 - Aware , No procedure available for Incoming material , But Inventory control
control available - But Needs improvement control available - MOQ levels are defined and
records not Available
(MOQ levels not defined) practiced

Does the external service providers have
the system to and means of handling that
prevent damage or deterioration / Shelf
I3
life? Is the condition of product in stock
assessed at a regular frequency in order
to detect deterioration?
0 - No procedure available for Handling
NA - Not Applicable and Monitoring the condition of long
storage items
2 - Procedure Available for Handling and
1 - Procedure Available for Handling and
storage and Shelf life monitoring. Monitoring
storage only (Shelf life not covered) ,
evidenced for some critical parts. Self life
But No evidence for Monitoring
monitoring is not proper
4 - Clearly defined Procedure Available ,
Monitored Improvement action evidenced -
3 - Procedure Available for Handling and
external service providers Has got Very good
storage and Shelf life monitoring. Monitoring
control on inventory (FIFO & JIT system
evidenced, FIFO implementation not followed
followed) No parts are stored for long
duration.
 Are flammable, corrosive, and toxic
materials properly stored and
segregated? Are temperature, humidity,
I4
Noise level, vibrations monitored in these
storage areas on a regular basis? (Must
for Plating external service providerss)
Does the external service providers have
a process in place to handle premium
I5 shipping requests? Does Premium
shipments are monitored and actions are
in place to control the same?
J. Environmental, Safety, Social & Legal
Responsibility System Requirements
Is there a team of people /person
responsible for developing and
J1 monitoring the safety and health program
with direct access to the top
management?
Has the external service providers
obtained and maintained all
environmental permits and registrations
that apply to their facilities,( for e.g..( Air
J2
Prevention & Control of Pollution Act,
1981 , Water Prevention & Control of
Pollution Act,1974, Environment
Protection Act, 1986 etc..)
Is the external service providers
currently, or at any time during the past
year, subject to any enforcement action
J3
by any governmental authority for non-
compliance with environmental, safety,
or labour requirements at any facility.
Is there a good Visual Management
J4 system to ensure and promote health
safety and environment (HSE)
Are periodic inspections for safety and
health ,scheduled and carried out by
managers / supervisors/ safety
J5
committee? And observations are
recorded and improvement actions are
monitored?
Do employees knows / Training given for
J6 the safety and health hazards specific to
their job assignments?
Whether All Electrical safety is identified
J7
and adequately addressed
Is there a proper recording , reporting
J8
and addressing of safety incidences
Whether Applicable chemical hazards
identified , required MSDS (Material
J9
Safety Data Sheet) evidenced and
proper PPE is provided
Are all employees provided with
applicable & Effective personal protective
J 10
equipment and Whether PPE culture is
adhered to in practice
3 - Proper storage place available . 4 - Proper storage place available .
0 - No proper storage and no monitoring 1 - Proper storage place available . 2 - Proper storage place available .
Temperature, Humidity, Noise level are Automatic Monitoring and triggering process
NA - Not Applicable of Temperature, Humidity , Noise level No monitoring of Temperature, Humidity , Temperature, Humidity, Noise level are
monitored , Manually recorded and Not available to control the Temperature,
etc. Noise level etc. monitored. No records evidenced
updated regularly Humidity, Noise level .
2 - External service providers handles
3 - External service providers handles 4 - External service providers handles
1 - External service providers handles only on Premium shipping ,But No Improvement
0 - External service providers does not Premium shipping, Improvement actions Premium shipping, Root cause analysis and
NA - Not Applicable some cases (delayed till month/ year ends) for actions evidenced (Frequent premium
handle Premium shipment evidenced ( Situation occurs rarely (e.g.. Improvement actions defined and monitored -
selected region - And depends on customer shipping - In process machine break down ,
Transport strike, RM shortage in Market etc. ) Reviewed by Top management
huge Rejection )
Score
NA 0 1 2 3 4
1 - General Awareness 2 - Informal responsibility allocated (e.g., 3 - Responsibility defined , But Inadequately 4 - Clearly identified person/ Team and
NA - Not Applicable 0 - Issue not at Addressed
observed ,Responsibility not well defined Production manager, Plant in charge) execute prompt execution
4 - Done - Effectively documented &
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Evidence of Documentation 1 - Not adequately done 2 - Done with Major Inconsistencies 3 - Done with Minor Inconsistencies
Implemented
0 - Yes, For failed to meet the 3 - No, No warnings from any authorities. But 4 - Systems are in place and No potential for
1 - No, But there is a warning from a 2 - No, No warnings from any authorities. But
NA - Not Applicable requirements. Operations were there was a potential. Now Improved - Need safety threat. All applicable legal compliances
Enforcement authorities and recovered. there is potential. - Can be improved.
Suspended for a period and recovered. some more improvement are properly documented and evidenced
4 - All Critical and important safety and
2 - Good No of Visuals signboards , guidelines
3 - Moderate level of Visual Management on environment related caution and guidelines
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Visual system for HSE 1 - Few ineffective visuals on safety available are available on safety , but none on
Health ,Safety and Environment Displayed are effectively displayed in the right place /
environment aspects
work area
0 - No Evidence of system in place for 4 - Have very good Strong system in place,
1 - No Evidence of system in place for the 2 - Have a system in place for the respective 3 - Have proper system in place for the
NA - Not Applicable the respective area control, No plan of Effectively Implemented & followed
respective area control, Have a plan to do. area - Needs major improvement respective area - Needs Minor improvement
making extensively
1 - General safety training given , But not 2 - Formal safety training given without any 3 -Document training module is evidenced, for
0 - No Evidence of safety & Health 4 -Document training module is evidenced, for
NA - Not Applicable evidenced through records nor evidenced in records or document , Hence consistency in all people and work area with high potential
training to employees all people and all work area
work culture coverage and practice not evidenced safety hazard
0 - Issue Not Addressed at all , & Lots of 1- Some potential electrical hazard observed , 3- Good electrical installation , But No 4 - Fool proof electrical installation with
NA - Not Applicable 2 - No obvious electrical hazard ,
potential for electrical Hazard evidenced untrained persons handling electrical issues. periodical inspection carried out periodic inspection by authorise person
2 - Prompt recording are evidenced , But 4 - Prompt recording are evidenced , Very
1 - Irregular and inconsistence records are 3 - Prompt recording are evidenced , Counter
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No System counter measures are not effective Counter measures are initiated and
evidenced measures are initiated , But not effective
initiated / .Evidenced evidenced
3 - PPE and MSDS are made 4 - All Chemical Hazard identified , All MSDS
0 - No Awareness on chemical handling 1 - Inconsistent practices are seen , with very 2 - PPE provided . MSDS not in usage area ,
NA - Not Applicable available ,People are not well informed But no and applicable PPE evidenced , and people
and No PPE available. few protection aids practice are in consistence
previous NC in practice are well informed
4 - Clearly defined effective PPE plan is in
1 - Ineffective PPE plan and inadequate and 2 - PPE plan is available , but adherence is 3 - Clearly defined effective PPE plan is in
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Evidence of system in place. place and Total adherence is in practice
improper supply very very ineffective, place , But adherence is only 50%
noticed

Is any formal environment management
J 11
system (ISO 14001) is implemented
1- Legally compliant w.r.t Pollution control and 2 - Implementation of EMS is just initiated, But 3- Formal EMS is not implemented . But
0 - No legal compliance , low 4 - Certified ISO 14001 system implemented
hazardous waste management, significant environment impact like Air & reasonable effort in implementation of EMS
NA - Not Applicable environment concern and low and effectively practiced, with clear evidence
But No specific initiative towards environment Water pollution and Hazardous waste and thereby some continuous improvement in
environment awareness of continuous improvement
protection evidenced management is legally compliant environment performance is evidenced

2 - Moderate leakage which is not

Spillages and Leakages( Water,
J 12
Coolants ,Oil, chemical, etc.)
3 - Evidenced controlled spillage and leaks
0 - Evidenced which has potential risk on 1 - Evidenced has potential risk on Land systematically addressed , But limited to the
NA - Not Applicable with secondary containment causing , no 4 - No Spillage and Leakage
Flora and Fauna pollution or Employees health plant without causing ground pollution and
ground pollution and health hazard
Peoples health

3 - Causing problem to the people within the

Air ,Water and Noise Pollution - One or 0 - Causing acute problem to the public 1 - Causing moderate problem to the public 2 - Causing problem to the people within the
J 13 NA - Not Applicable boundary of the factory , But addressed 4 - No Such problems are generated
More of the above causing outside the boundary outside the boundary boundary of the factory
thorough control measures

Are fire extinguishers available? Are the
fire extinguishers suitable to the type of
J 14
fire that may occur (e.g. carbon dioxide
for electrical fires).
4 - Adequate and Appropriate fire
0 - No Safety measures / control 2 - reasonable no of fire extinguishers are 3 - Adequate and Appropriate fire
1 - Few fire extinguishers are evidenced, But extinguishers are available . Well trained and
NA - Not Applicable systems in place, No awareness, No available but trained people are not extinguishers with adequately trained people
not properly maintained adequate no of fire fighters are evidenced.
plan evidenced are not available
Periodic Mock dill conducted

Whether appropriate and adequate First
J 15
aid facilities are provided
(For private companies, financial information must be
obtained from the company. However this
information will not be audited, and the numbers
Does the external service providers
make a Business plan every year and
K1 track the performance against same.
1 - First Aid Box improperly Maintained , 2 - First Aid Box properly Maintained , with 3 - Well Maintained First Aid Box, With 4- Well Maintained Medical centre With
NA - Not Applicable No Facility
No Proper trained person evidenced trained person evidenced formally First Aid trained person available qualified staff
Score
NA 0 1 2 3 4
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No Concept of Annual Business Plan 1 - Makes the Sales Projection for next 3 2 - Plan Available for 1 year only , Actuals 3 - Plan Available for next 3 year only , 4 - Plan Available for next 3 year only ,
years but no detailed Business Plan monitored , But no Gap Analysis carried out & Actuals monitored,(>30 % gap noticed ) in last Actuals monitored,(<10% gap noticed ) in last
No improvement Plan noticed year, Gap Analysis & Improvement Plan year, Gap Analysis & Improvement Plan
Evidenced Evidenced

Does external service providers work to
K2 realize production efficiencies in order to
share savings with customer?
Are Accounting Systems and Working
K3 capital management in Place is
adequate?
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No system in place to monitor
efficiencies over time, No improvement
plan.
NA - Not Applicable 0 - No system in place to monitor
material costs/ fund flow
1 - external service providers can not
demonstrate system efficiency, And does not
willing to share with customers.
1 - Materials are purchased on a need basis
and paid. There is no system followed
2 - external service providers can
demonstrate system efficiency, But does not
willing to share with customers.
2 - There is System in place. But needs major
improvement.
3 - external service providers can 4 - external service providers can
demonstrate system efficiency, Does willing to demonstrate system efficiency, and ready to
share with customers partially. work with customers on all cost cutting
3 - There is System in place. Needs minor 4 - Company
initiatives has ERP
& willing System to monitor all
to share.
improvement. the fund flow. Strong & stable system in place.

Does the external service providers NA - Not Applicable 0 - Own Funds are <20% of the total
having Sufficient funds to run the Investment in Business. Balance Funds
Business are borrowed from Market or Financial
institutions
K4
1 - Own Funds are >20% but <50% of the
total Investment in Business. Balance Funds
are borrowed from Market or Financial
institutions.
2 - Own Funds are >50% of the total
Investment in Business. Balance Funds are
borrowed from Market or Financial institutions.
external service providers is not having
capbility to Invest further funds into Business
or borrow funds
3 - Own funds are >50% of the total
Investment in Business. Balance Funds are
borrowed from Market or Financial institutions.
external service providers is having capability
to Invest more funds into Business for
Business growth or borrow from market. Have
demonstrated the same in past.
4 - external service providers is part of a well
known Business group. Fincially strong. Own
funds are >50% of the total Investment in
Business. Balance Funds are borrowed from
Market or Financial institutions. external
service providers is having capability to Invest
more funds into Business for Business growth.

K5 Type of Business Entity NA - Not Applicable 0 - Sole Propreitorship firm. 1 - Partnetship firm 2 - Pvt limited company 3 - Public limited company (Not listed) 4 - Public limited company (Listed Entity)
 Aud

SL No

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18
 Audit Prepera

Requirments

Organization Chart Number Replace.

Prepare Roles & Responsibility & Authorised -QMP-5.3-D/A , As per new Organizaion Chart.

A4-a) Internal rejection trend percentage convert to PPM.

Include one more quality objectives in QMP-6.2 D/A Objective, to have inhouse rejections less than 500 PPM Always.

Inhouse rejection ( Inprocess NC & CA, QMP-10.2-R/B Rev - 00.( Update the format number).

A4c)Dispatch tracker OTD tracker. ( Plan - Actual - Schedule-Qty).

Update Customer satisfaction servey format no - As QMP-9.1.2 R/A - Rev - 00

Training plan no - QMP - 7.2 - R/B-Rev-00.

Operator Skill matrix.

Customer Complaint Handling

Horizantal deployment for existing NC , Quality Alert.

8D CAPA available in place.

Quality also for rejection at customer CP / PFMEA / - Recent NC / 8D.

MRM - Once in 6 Months Defined in Quality manual -QMP-9.3 R/A-Rev-00

Minutes Of MRM - QMP - 9.3-R/B Format to be change for action .

One sample MRM to be preparation before wipro audit.

A5 - Internal audit is once in 6 months.

One internal audit has to be prepared before going wipro approval.

on Of ISO Documentation
Targaet Completed
Date Date
tion

Status

Updated

To be change as per the discussion

Update the data from April-23 o mar-24

Change QMP 6.2 D/A to include inhouse rejection PPM target in quality

NC format number format number/Name it as inprocess NCs and corrective actions

Ref old format avl with saritha madam

Tarining attendence records as per plan

Prepare for all employees

MAKE ca AS PER DISCUSSION/////MAKE IT FILE

Updated

Updated

Prepare CP/PFMEA/PFD

Auditor

Auditor

Auditor

Auditor

Auditor
 STEEL PROFILES INDIA PVT LTD
Doc. No : QMP - 5.3 - D/B

ORGANIZATION CHART Rev. No : 00

Page : 1 of 1

Mr.Parveen Goyal(Managing Director)

Sales ,Purchase & Marketing

Mr.VikramSingh
Singh Mr.Niranjana
Ms.Saritha
Ms.Saritha Mr.Vikram Mr.UmeshKamath
Mr.Umesh Kamath Mr.NiranjanaNU
NU
HR&Accounts
&Accounts Dispatch QA-Incharge
HR Dispatch PPC & Production I/cI/c
PPC & Production QA-Incharge

Store's Final
FinalInspector's Line
Store's Inspector's LineInspector's
Inspector's

Conventional M/c.
VMC Programmers Maintanance .Operators CNC Programmers

VMC M/c. Operators Helpers CNC M/c. Operators

MR :
 Format No : QMO-7.2 - R/A REV -00

STEEL PROFILES INDIA

OPERATORS SKILL MATRIX

SKILL's

Awareness About Safety

Awareness About Finish
Measuring Instruments

customer requirements

Awareness About Fire

Awareness About NC

( Visual inspection)
Knowledge About

Awareness About
Drawing Reading

Goods Handling
parts Handling
Programming

Recautions
Job Set Up
VMC / CNC

VMC / CNC

Handling
Operate Min Score 10

Safty
Sl Name Of The Photograph Of
Designation VMC / CNC
No Employee The Employee
Machine Max Score - 100

CNC Programmer &

1 Abdul
Operator ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

2 Raaju H CNC Machine Operator ü ü r ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

3 Sikander CNC Machine Operator ü ü r ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

7
 SKILL MATRIX

PROFILE SECTION

SKILL's

Awareness About Safety

Awareness About Finish
Measuring Instruments

Customer requirements

Awareness About Fire

Awareness About NC

( Visual inspection)
Band Saw Cutting

Knowledge About

Awareness About
Drawing Reading

Goods Handling
parts Handling

Precautions
Job Setting
Band Saw

Handling
Min Score 10

Machine
Sl Name Of The Photograph Of Cutting

Safty
Designation
No Employee The Employee Machine
Max Score - 100
Operting

1 Venkatesh Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

2 Revanna Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

3 Venugopal Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

4 Suresh Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

5 Rohith Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

6 Guranna Gowda Operator

ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

7 Nagaraj Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

8 Krishna Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

9 Mithlesh Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

10 Shree Raam Operator

ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü

11 Manjunaath Operator
ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü ü
 Doc. No.:QMP - 7.2 - R/B

Steel Profiles India Annual Training Plan-2024 Rev. No.:00

Issue Date:

Jan-24 Feb-24 Mar-24 Apr-24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24
Sl No Training Topic

P A P A P A P A P A P A P A P A P A P A P A P A

1 QMS Awareness P A

2 House Keeping P A

3 Insert Life Control P A

4 Reading drawing P A

5 Control of Rejection P A

6 Customer complaint handling P A

7 CNC machine operating P A

8 Tapping process P A

9 Statistical process control (SPC) P A

10 Measurement system analysis (MSA) P A

11 PPAP Documentation P A

12 In-process & Final inspection P A

Note: P-Planned; A-Actual; P-Status.

Prepared by :- Mr Niranjana NU Approved by:-

 Doc. No.:
Steel Profiles India Pvt Ltd
Rev. No.:

Training Attendance Record Issue Date:

Training Subject :

Date : Faculty Details : Duration :

Attended By

Sl. No. Name of the Participant Signature Remarks

Prepared By : Approved :
Prepared By : Approved :
 STEEL PROFILES INDIA
Rec. No : QMP-9.1.2 R/A

Customer Satisfaction Survey Rev. No : 00

Page : 1 of 2

Name of the Company

Please provide us your valuable inference of our performance as per the 5 - point scale based on the parameters and factors
as indicated below.
Rating 1 2 3 4 5
Inference Poor Bad Average Good Excellent
Rating
SL No Factor (Please P in the boxes)
1 2 3 4 5
1. Quality
1 Consistency in Quality.

2 Feed back from us on quality related issue.

3 Problem solving process.

4 Our efforts at maintaining improving product quality.

5 Identification and Labeling.

6 House Keeping and Safety

7 Packing
2. Purchase
1 Order acknowledgement from us.

2 Flexibility in scheduling.

3 Ease of contacting us if required - Phone / E-mail.

4 Response to delivery related queries.

5 Documentation quality (LR / DC / Invoice, etc.)

6 Price Competitiveness.
3. Delivery
1 On time Delivery.

2 Response to Meet Exigencies.

4. Finance
1 Adequacy of documents - DC / Invoice.

2 Frequency of visit by our personnel.

5. Service
1 Time taken for development.

2 Our response to your special requirements.

3 Our response to your communication

YOUR VALUABLE SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT (On specific issue, please)

Name Date
Designation Seal & Sign
 STEEL PROFILES INDIA PV
On Time Delivery Handling S
Month Of APRIL - 2024
Item Qty
Customer PO No / Mail Dated
Required Required
WIPRO M027 140 T03 100

WIPRO M005 080 V62 80

WIPRO M005 063 V34 200

WIPRO M027 150 E07 180

WIPRO M027 120 830 350

WIPRO S005 040 073 285

WIPRO M045 140 E81 0

WIPRO S027 080 S86 0

WIPRO S027 063 094 150

WIPRO M045 140 E81 100

WIPRO M007 203 501 0

WIPRO S018 070 026 1600

WIPRO M005 063 V55 150

WIPRO M005 080 V50 200

WIPRO S019 090 041 200

WIPRO S027 080 S86 0

WIPRO S005 250 099 60

WIPRO S005 250 100 800

WIPRO S027 080 117 60

WIPRO S019 080 123 100

WIPRO M027 120 K87 1500

WIPRO M027 090 V66 0

WIPRO M027 110 R28 2500

WIPRO S005 080 186 60

WIPRO M027 110 U12 650

WIPRO M009 050 048 300

ILES INDIA PVT LTD
livery Handling Sheet
Of APRIL - 2024
On Time Yes /
Due On Actual On Remarks
No
YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES

YES
YES

YES

YES

YES

YES
STEEL PROFILES INDIA

Month: Jun-24

Pending
Total Bin Schedule Planned Actual
Sl. No. Part number Supplier Schedule
Qty Qty Qty Qty
Qty

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
 Steel
Customer C

Sl No Date Part Name Part Number Name Of Customer

1 3/5/2024 ROD EYE CWM027 150 E07 WIPRO-HPR

2 4/25/2024 COLLOR CWS045 125 096 WIPRO-HPR
 Steel Profiles India
Customer Complaint Tracker Register

Rejection Machining Complaint

Customer Complaint Batch Qty
Qty Vendor Date

Gas Cutting Mark Observed On Radius Surface 1 23 B.J.Engg 3/5/2024

Gas Cutting Mark Observed On Radius Surface 1 15 B.J.Engg 4/25/2024
 8D Submission 8D Submitted
VQPR Number Status
Target Date Date

IG-03-08 4/25/2024 4/25/2024 Closed

D0324 4/28/2024 4/28/2024 Closed
 Steel Profiles Ind
Internal Rejection Tracker Reg

Name Of
Sl No Date Part Name Part Number Machine Name
Customer

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62
el Profiles India
nal Rejection Tracker Register

Production
Reason For Rejection Rejection Detection Stage Rejection Qty
Qty
Operator Inspector
Status
Name Name
 INTERNAL REJECTION TREND IN PPM - 2024-25
STEEL PROFILES INDIA
PPM of
Month Production qty Internal rej.
Rej.
Apr-24 10000 5 500.00
May-24 16582 2 120.61
PPM of Rej. Jun-24 17942 9 501.62
600.00 Jul-24 19302 6 310.85
Aug-24 20662 4 193.59
Sep-24 22022 0 0.00
500.00 501.62
500.00 Oct-24 23382 2 85.54
Nov-24 24742 6 242.50
Dec-24 26102 6 229.87
400.00 Jan-25 27462 5 182.07
Feb-25 #DIV/0!
310.85 Mar-25 #DIV/0!
Axis Title

300.00
208198 45 #DIV/0!
242.50
229.87
193.59
200.00 182.07

120.61
100.00 85.54

0.00
0.00
Apr-24 May-24 Jun-24 Jul-24 Aug-24 Sep-24 Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25

Axis Title

Year FY2024-25 FY2025-26 FY2026-27 FY2027-28

Apr'24 May'24 Jun'24 Jul'24 Aug'24 Sep'24 Oct'24 Nov'24 Dec'24 Jan'25 Feb'25 Mar'25
YTD

Target 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0

Actual 2024-2025 500.00 120.61 501.62

Prepared By: Niranjan NU Review & Approved By: Shivakumar TM

 Page: 1/3
Status Report No
Compl Date 24.04.2024
8D report
VQPR # D0324
Report date 25.04.2024
D0 - Symptom of failure (As seen/reported by the customer) Prepared by Mr. Niranjana NU
Gas Cut Marks Observed
Verified by Mr. Niranjana NU
D1 - Analysis team Names Function
1 Mr. Parveen Goyal (SPI) Managing Director
Approved by Umesh Kamath
2 Mr. Niranjana Uppar (SPI) QA
3 Mr. Vikram Singh (SPI) Dispatch Dept Quality Alert no Date
4 Mr. Umesh Kamath(SPI) PPC
1 4/25/2024
5 Mr.Sonu (SPI) Operator
D2 - Problem Description
Part name Collor , Drawing no. S045150096, Profile Radius Zone Gas Cutting Mark Observed.
Details of complaint part
External service
Part# S045150096 M/s Steel Profiles India Pvt Ltd - Peenya Bangalore.
provider Name
Date of PPAP
Part name Collor
approval
16.02.2021

Qty supplied 15 no's

Rejected Qty 1 No's

Pictures/Photographs
Gas Cutting mark observed
Profile Radius Found Ok free
NOT OK
from gas cutting marks

Not ok Ok

D3 - Containment actions
Check List Quantity Containment actions planned Resp Action status
3.1 Stocks at Customer 15 no's Available Stock 100% Segregated all pieces found ok. SPI Completed

3.2 Stocks in transit Nil

3.3 Finished Goods stock 0 0

3.4 Waiting for FI&T Nil

3.5 WIP - In-house Nil

3.6 Stocks at Stores Nil

3.7 WIP - SCs and External

Nil
service providers

3.8 At other locations if any Nil

Verification/Validation of containment actions

TOTAL STOCK - 23 Nos Segregated,1 nos got rejected at customer place .

*Abbreviations: RPN-Risk priority number, FI&T - Final inspection and checklist, WIP - Work in progress, SC - Sub contractor

# Internal to Wipro
 Status Report No
Compl Date 24.04.2024
8D report
VQPR # D0324
Report date 25.04.2024
Power failure

Page: 2/3
D4 - Root cause analysis
Cause and effect diagram

Man Machines Material

Wrong offset Power failure
Operator not checking in self inspection

Nossel Got Damged

Line inspector also not maintain
setup report

Gas Cut Marks

Observed
Speed, feed ,Radius &
depth cut variation

Wrong tool selection

Methods Measurements Environment

Possible causes and validations :

Sino : Possible Cause Verification / Validation Relation Status(Ok/

Significant/In significant Not ok)

Man power :
Operator not checking in Final
inspection Inspection Skipped at Final Inspection
1 stage Gas Cut Mark not identified Significant OK

Verified found ok no wrong offset

2 Wrong offset noticed In-significant Not OK

Machine :

Verified power failure happened during

1 Power failure process Significant OK

2 Nossel Got Damaged Verified nossel Is purely ok condition In-significant Not OK

Verified found gas flow veriation

3 Gas Supply issue during process happened due to power cut Significant OK

Material :

Method:
Speed, feed ,Radius & depth cut
1 variation Verified the same found ok In-significant Not OK

Wrong tool selection Verified the 32X32mm DNMG tool found

2 ok In-significant Not OK

Measurements :

Environment :

SCM-CL-73. Rev 02. Dtd: 17-01-2022. Retention period: 2 years_x000D_ Internal to Wipro
#
 Status Report No
Compl Date 24.04.2024
8D report
VQPR # D0324
Report date 25.04.2024
Process Flow

Band Saw Cutting

Process Failure Detection Failure

Why 1? Customer unable to use the material Customer unable to use the material Flame Gas Cutting

Normalizing (Heat Treatment)

Why 2? Gas Cutting mark observed During Cutting process not verifed visually 100% skipped

Deburring &
During the process power cut happend,due to gas flow During Chipping and cleaning not highlighted by deburring person Chipping,Cleaning
Why 3? due to no awareness about profile aesthetic
& oxygen level veriation.

Why 4? Due to Oxygen level flow variation cutting pressure is Identification Punching
unneven happened Final inspection stage only sampling inspection done

Why 5? Final Inspection

Not ok part mixed up with ok parts Not ok part mixedup with ok parts
Dispatch

Verification/Validation of the Root cause Conclusion on the Root cause

As per above why why analysis the root causes are found valid 1. During the process power cut happend,due to gas flow & oxygen level veriation,Due to
Oxygen level flow variation cutting pressure is unneven happened.

2. During Cutting process not verifed visually 100% skipped ,During Chipping and cleaning
not highlighted by deburring person due to no awareness about profile aesthetic

Escape points, causes and actions

Escape points Causes Actions planned
1. During Chipping and cleaning not highlighted by deburring person due 1. Awareness mode training given to operator profile aesthetic during the process should be report to
During in process and final production supervisor.
to no awareness about profile aesthetic
inspection stage is hence not 2. Self inspection & Final inspection to be followed, Esure 100% Visual Compulsory as per
2. During the process power cut happend,due to gas flow & oxygen level
detected due to Sampling WCS Aesthetic wipro requirement.
veriation.
inspection done. 3. Quality Alert displayed at shopfloor and machine area the same in work instruction.

D5 - PERMANENT CORRECTIVE ACTIONS Responsibility

1. Ensure 100% Visual Inspection Compulsory Mandatory as per Quaility Alert and Ref Work instruction. & Target date
2.Awareness mode training given to operator profile aesthetic during the process should be report to QC & production supervisor.

3. Final inspection will do 100% with white paint mark "OK" identification on part. Niranjana NU

4/25/2024
D6 - Updating of documents for sustenance Responsibility
Revision/correction of following Documents (Wherever applicable) & Target date
Design drawings -
Process sheets -
FMEA -
Control Plan -
Work Instructions -
Audit checklists -
Others if any Quality Alert displayed near the Final Inspection Area Immediate
D7 - Actions to prevent re-occurrence on other models

Horizontal deployment of the same process to the other similar parts.

D8 - Team/Individual recognition 4/25/2024

Thanks to team

Problem Identified CAPA agreed CAPA Implemented, Under monitoring Issue closed & signed off
email communication hence unsigned
Page: 3/3

# Internal to Wipro
533.75 533.75
535.91 650
-2.16 116.25