ISO 9001 8.4.1 requires criteria for evaluation, selection, monitoring and re-evaluation of external providers, with records. AS9100 8.4.1 requires a register of external providers with approval status (approved, conditional, disapproved) and scope of approval (product type, process family). IATF 16949 8.4.1.2 requires a documented selection process with risk assessment; 8.4.2.3 requires suppliers to be certified to ISO 9001 at minimum (developing toward IATF 16949) unless the customer authorises otherwise.
Columns
| Column | Content |
|---|---|
| Supplier, ID, site | Legal name and the manufacturing site actually approved |
| Status | approved / conditional / probation / disqualified / pending |
| Scope | Commodities and processes approved (machining; anodising; heat treat to AMS 2770) |
| Risk class | high / medium / low (product impact, process complexity, supply risk) |
| Certification and expiry | ISO 9001, IATF 16949, AS9100, NADCAP (with scope) |
| Approval basis | Audit, questionnaire, first article, customer direction |
| Last evaluation and next due | From scorecard history; interval by risk |
| Conditions | For conditional / probation: what must improve, by when (condition_until) |
| Single source / backup | Contingency for critical parts (IATF 6.1.2.3) |
| Approved by | Role with authority (purchasing + quality) |
| Customer-directed | Supplier mandated by the customer (still monitored; responsibility stays with you) |
Status meanings
| Status | Orders allowed | Typical controls |
|---|---|---|
| Approved | Yes, within scope | Normal monitoring |
| Conditional | Yes, within scope, with conditions | Tightened inspection, improvement plan, end date |
| Probation | Existing parts only, no new business | SCAR, development plan, escalation |
| Pending | No (or prototype only with approval) | Assessment in progress |
| Disqualified | No | Phase-out plan for any remaining parts |
Re-evaluation intervals
High risk every 12 months, medium every 24, low every 36, or immediately after a major quality event, a certification change, a site or ownership change, or a scorecard grade D.
8d-problem-solving-report-writer
Write and review 8D problem-solving reports for customer complaints and serious nonconformities (automotive and aerospace practice: Ford Global 8D, VDA, GM, Stellantis formats): D0 emergency response, D1 cross-functional team and champion, D2 problem description with 5W2H and is / is-not and no cause in the statement, D3 interim containment within 24 hours with verification and clean point, D4 verified occurrence and escape (non-detection) root causes plus systemic cause, D5 permanent corrective actions for each cause verified before implementation, D6 implementation, validation with production data and removal of containment, D7 PFMEA, control plan and read-across to similar products, D8 closure and recognition. Checks an 8D discipline by discipline for missing content, human-error root causes, missing escape cause or action, late containment and dates out of order.
acceptance-sampling-plan-selector
Select and evaluate acceptance sampling plans for incoming, in-process and final inspection: ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 / ISO 2859-1 single sampling under normal inspection (code letter from lot size and inspection level I, II, III, S-1 to S-4; sample size, Ac and Re from AQL, following the table's arrows to the correct plan; 100% when n reaches the lot size; AQLs above 10 per 100 units), operating characteristic curves (Pa at any quality, producer's quality level, indifference point, LTPD, AOQ and AOQL, binomial or hypergeometric), plans designed from producer and consumer risk, and c = 0 zero-acceptance plans. Covers AQL choice by defect class, switching rules between normal, tightened and reduced inspection, when sampling is not appropriate, and random sampling.
apqp-phase-planner
Plan and track Advanced Product Quality Planning (AIAG APQP 3rd edition, IATF 16949) for a new or changed automotive part: back-schedule the five phases (plan and define, product design, process design, product and process validation, launch and feedback) from the start-of-production date by program complexity, with overlap, PPAP lead and safe-launch period; list the deliverables and gate for each phase (DFMEA, DVP&R, feasibility, process flow, PFMEA, control plans, MSA, Ppk, run at rate, PPAP, safe launch, lessons learned); adjust for build-to-print suppliers; flag compressed timelines and late or untracked deliverables against a status list. Covers gate reviews, red/yellow/green status reporting, run at rate and safe-launch exit criteria.
as9100-gap-analyzer
Run an AS9100D / EN 9100:2018 gap analysis for aviation, space and defence suppliers on the requirements added to ISO 9001: on-time delivery and conformity focus, management representative, ethics and human-factors awareness, operational planning and operational risk management, configuration management, product safety, counterfeit-part prevention, special requirements, critical items and key characteristics, external provider register and flow-down, FOD prevention, tooling and NC program control, special process validation, first article inspection (AS9102), traceability, in-service data and nonconforming product control. Generates and scores a worksheet, grades missing core controls as major, and checks invalid n/a claims. Covers AS9101/AS9104, OASIS, AS9102 FAI forms, counterfeit standards (AS5553, AS6174, AS6081), NADCAP and the planned IA9100 transition.
audit-report-writer
Write internal, supplier and pre-certification audit reports with the content ISO 19011:2018 6.5 expects: audit objectives, scope, criteria with revisions, dates, team and auditees, method and sampling statement, specific strengths, findings table and three-part finding details (requirement, evidence, statement), conclusion on the degree of fulfilment of criteria, diverging opinions, follow-up deadlines and distribution. Builds a Markdown report from a JSON audit record, generates the conclusion from the findings (major / minor / none) and flags reports missing required content or findings without clause or evidence. Covers conclusion wording, closing meetings, response expectations and verifying corrective actions.
capa-effectiveness-checker
Verify whether a corrective action actually worked (ISO 9001 10.2.1 d, IATF 16949, 8D D6) with statistics instead of 'no complaints so far': before/after defect-rate comparison with an exact conditional binomial test for Poisson counts and a minimum practical reduction, zero-defect demonstration size (n = ln(1-C)/ln(1-p), rule of three) with progress so far, and exact Clopper-Pearson upper bounds on the post-action defect rate. Returns effective, not yet demonstrated (with the units still needed) or not effective. Covers setting effectiveness criteria when the CAPA is opened, choosing the window by problem frequency, leading indicators for rare failures (Cpk, SPC stability, error-proofing checks, LPA), and traps such as volume changes, detection changes and containment masking.