Supplier On-Site Assessment Instructions

Instructions 1. Obtain On-Site Assessment file from the Strategic Sourcing sharepoint site, under the Template section
located at:
http://cipt0283:83/sites/FuncComm/Sourc_Comm/Shared
%20Documents/Supplier_Onsite_Assessment.aspx
2. Send Audit Form form to selected supplier and ask to complete the self assessment and record the
findings in the "Supplier" column. All sections must be filled-out, regardless of applicability. Sections and
questions that do not apply will be identified with the "N/A" label.
3. Upon return of the completed assessment, the Commodity Manger reviews the data, requests any
clarifications, and then prepares for the Copper-led on-site evaluation.
4. The Commodity Leader assembles an appropriate audit team, ideally consisting of representatives from
Quality, Engineering, Materials, and Purchasing, and schedules the on-site assessment.
5. The team evaluates the supplier by asking the questions in the On-Site Assessment (tab Audit Form)
and scores each question based on the evidence observed. Scoring is recorded in the "Cooper" column of
the audit sheet in accordance with the Audit Scoring Definitions shown below.
6. At the completion of the assessment, scores are compiled for both the individual sections of the audit
and an overall result. These results are shown in the tab Scoring Summary.
7. A corective action sheet is included in the audit materials to address any deficiencies identified in the
audit. The sheet can also be used at the team's discrection to catalogue any other further reqired actions
related to sourcing decisions.
8. Complete the Recommendation section and save the file as, vendor name_assessment_MM_YYYY
9. Upload the completed assessment to the Strategic Sourcing sharepoint site using the "Upload the OnSite Assessment" feature.
10. Add comments in the sharepoint site indicating the final thoughts and recommendations.

Audit Scoring Definitions

Score

Segmentati
on

Strategic

Preferred

Maintain

Unacceptabl
e

No documentation

N/A

N/A

Not Required

Documentation
Full documentation
with no missing
requirements
Substantial
documentation with
some missing
requirements
Limited
documentation

Implementation

Results

Full execution. No
non-conformances

Evidence to support full understanding and

implementation

Execution evident
with limited nonconformances
Limited execution
with major nonconformances
No evidence of
implementation

Element required but no evidence of execution

or understanding

Not Required

Element not required

Evidence supports understanding of

requirement with partial execution
Limited evidence of requirement

Coper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

Supplier On-Site Assessment

Supplier Score
Cooper Score

#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!

Supplier Information
Supplier Name:
Plant Location:

Vendor ID #:
Phone #:

Supplier Contact

Supplier E-Mail:

Audit Information
Division :
Commodity Fami
Product Type:
Audit Date:

Auditor Name:
Auditor E-Mail:
Auditor Phone:
Cooper Division:

1. Customer Satisfaction

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

There is a documented process for determining customer satisfaction, including

1.1 frequency of determination, delivered part quality, customer disruptions, field returns,
delivery performance, and customer notifications?
1.2

Metrics monitoring customer satisfaction that are related to supplier manufacturing are
understood and tracked.

1.3

There are projects and programs in place to improve customer satisfaction, with
corrective actions addressed, and a closed-loop review system progress

1.4

Customer dedicated service group with multifunctional team has been established for
key accounts
Customer Satisfaction Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

2. Quality System

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

Do you have a quality system registered to a recognized standard, like

2.1
IS09000/TS16949?
2.2

There are quarterly Management Reviews to verify the effectiveness of the quality
system.

2.3

Each department has goals that are defined and measured and focus on the use quality
policy, objectives, audit results, analysis of data, corrective / preventive actions

Management regularly reviews the status of the Preventive Maintenence completion to

2.4 plan. Management reviews corrective action plans to ensure any backlog (past due)
maintenance has a plan to become current to the PM schedule.
2.5 Internal audit frequency is modified based on non-conformance trends.
2.6 Internal audits are available to verify that the quality system is being followed.
2.7

A formal business/manufacturing system is in place ( Capacity Planning, Shop Floor

Control, ERP, etc.)

2.8 Proactive notification of issues which could affect delivery or quality are documented and performed
Does the Supplier have a process for final product identification, including bar code, if
required.
Does the supplier obtain customer waiver (concession/deviation) prior to further
2.10 processing when the product/process is different from what is approved? And are
shipping containers properly identified when this occurs?
2.9

Quality System Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

3. Business System
3.1

Observations / Evidence

A Customer-focused strategy has been developed and deployed to ensure business

portfolio diversity

Is there evidence and use of tools like Electronic Data Interface (EDI), Request For Quote
(RFQ), Advanced Planning and Scheduling (APS) ?
Have contingency plans been prepared to satisfy customer requirements in the event of
3.3 an emergency such as utility interruptions, labor shortages, key equipment failures, and
field returns?
3.2

3.4 Is there a process to address product liability / recall issues?

3.5

Does the supplier have a long-term plan for sustainability, including a system in place to
identify key business and product risks and opportunities?

Are the Purchase Orders reviewed for commitment to qty, price, delivery date, delivery
3.6 method, and any additional special requirements or instructions? If any differences
arises the differences are resolved prior to acceptance of the order.
3.7

Personnel performing specific tasks shall be qualified on the basis of appropriate

education, training, and/or experience.
Business System Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

2of 8

Cooper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

4. EHS and Risk Management

Observations / Evidence

An effective process for EHS is formally defined, well documented and understood with
4.1
systematic root cause investigation and tracked corrective actions for all EHS defects
4.2

A well documented and understood effective process is in place, that requires formal risk
assessment upon change or initial set-up of equipment.

4.3

Knowledge of each waste stream, final location, regulatory permit states of the disposal
site, and quantity involved.

4.4

Does the company comply with OSHA or other applicable safety and health regulations,
specifically in the use of Personal Protection Equipment?

4.5 Procedures in place for hazardous substance control

4.6 Emergency Action and Disaster Recovery Plans established and in place
4.7

All governing requirements are effectively in place (i.e. RoHS, EU REACH, WEEE) and all
materials are approved under applicable requirements, per Division, for the US.
EHS and Risk Management Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

New Product related questions

Supplier Cooper

A formalized New Product Introduction process has been established for new
product
development
projects:and tollgates
- Process identifies
key milestones
- Includes evidence of training on the process
- Documented inputs/outputs for each critical phase

DESIGN RESPONSIBLE SUPPLIERS

New Product Development

Questions

5. New Product Development

Observations / Evidence

N/A

N/A

Do Not Assess- Roll-up Score

N/A

N/A

Do Not Assess- Roll-up Score

N/A

N/A

Do Not Assess- Roll-up Score

N/A

N/A

Do Not Assess- Roll-up Score

-Process shows evidence of Advanced Product Quality Planning techniques (APQP)

There is a process in place to ensure key elements of the Product Design and
Development
are performed:
- Engineering drawings
& spec.
- Design for Manufacturability and Assembly
- DFMEA
-Development of Prototypes
- Design review and verification
- Material spec.
- Drawing & spec changes
- Evidence of design validation testing and confirmation
Process in place to ensure key elements of the process design, development
and
validation
performed:
- Product
/ Processare
quality
review
- Floor Plan Layout
- Packaging standards and spec
- Preventive Maintenance Planning
- Process Capability Study
- Testing and Measurement
- Production validation testing
Capability with the Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
Element #1: Part Submission Warrant (PSW)
Element #2: Design Records & Bubbled part print(s).
Element #6: Process Flow Diagrams
Element #7: Process FMEA
Element #8: Control Plan
Element #9: Measurement System Analysis Studies
Element #10: Dimensional Results
Element #11: Material, Performance Test Results
Element
Element
Element
Element
Element

#12: Initial Process Study (Cpk) Capability Studies

#13: Qualified Laboratory Documentation
#14: Appearance Approval Report
#17: Checking Aids Capability with the Production Part Approval Process
#18: Customer Specific Requirements
New Product Development Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

6. Purchasing and Sub-Supplier Management

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

Purchase Order's are used to communicate product quality requirements to sub-suppliers

6.1 to ensure the requirements are understood and can be met. If any differences arises the
differences are resolved prior to acceptance of the order.
6.2

Other quality requirements are communicated to the sub-suppliers like social

responsibility

6.3 Product and capacity requirements are understood throughout the facility and value chai
6.4

An official sub-supplier management process has been established, in which the

suppliers' performance are monitored and evaluated regularly.

6.5

Is there a formal Sub-suppliers selection process with adequate review of the

performance metrics, business practices, and social responsibility

6.6

Sub-suppliers are required to follow a formal product qualification process and submit
warrants prior to final approval of the part.

6.7 Material Compliance (Internal and External Verification) is in place and utilized
Purchasing and Sub-Supplier Management Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

3of 8

Cooper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

7. Production Control and Planning

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

7.1 Is evidence of Statistical Process Control being used to evaluate the production
processes, where applicable.
7.2 Utilization of product control plans with inspection requirements and identification of key
product/process characteristics
7.3 Process set up verification is used and documented
7.4 The supplier has and maintains a system for traceability on individual product or batches
as
required.
7.5 Inspections based on appropriate sampling plans and are sufficient to detect product
nonconformance. Do the inspection items on the inspection plan meet Customer
requirement?
7.6
Supplier has a strategy for receiving inspection. If incoming quality inspections are
made, there is evidence of the specification and compliance to the specification. If no
incoming inspections are made, there is a rationale for qualifying sub-suppliers.
7.7 Is there evidence of in-process checks, including final inspection, to validate the
manufacturing process and the packaging requirements?
Production Control and Planning Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
8. Change Management

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

8.1 An effective change control process is formally defined, well documented and
understood. Strict advance customer notification process is followed, prior to executing
the change.
8.2 A formal drawing and change control system exists and manufacturing and inspection
have access to adequate and up-to-date drawings.
8.3 Does the supplier have a process to assure the timely review, distribution and
implementation of all customer engineering standards/specifications and changes
including a record of the date on which each change is implemented in production
8.4 Is there a process to ensure parts, product, and materials comply with environment and
regulatory requirements
Change Management Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
9. Inventory Control and Housekeeping

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

Is there a warehouse management system in place that uses formal inventory control
9.1
systems like First in First Out (FIFO) and 5S?
9.2 Is the warehouse temperature and humidity conditions appropriately controlled?
The supplier has continuous improvement plans for plant cleanliness, housekeeping,
9.3 ergonomics, and working conditions. There is evidence that the supplier management
team is following continuous improvement plans.
9.4

Finished and released product/containers are properly labeled and identified to signify
acceptance status

9.5

Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material, chips, debris, contamination,

excessive oil, etc. where part quality can be negatively affected.
Inventory Control and Housekeeping Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

10. Corrective Action and Control of Non-Conforming Product

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

10.1 A corrective action procedure exists and is followed for internal, in-process quality issues
10.2 A corrective action procedure exists and is followed for supplier incoming quality
problems
10.3 A corrective action procedure exists and is followed for customer complaints.
10.4 Problem solving is done in cross-functional teams, using a disciplined problem solving
process (e.g. 8D or 7D) with the appropriate problem solving tools to eliminate root
cause and prevent recurrence?
10.5 Root Cause analysis and corrective action response are completed within agreed upon
time frame.
10.6 Nonconforming material is identified and controlled to prevent its use or shipment to
customers in receiving, in-process, outgoing and customer returns
10.7 Returned material is analyzed for determination of cause for rejection and initiation of
corrective action
10.8

Are the issues identified down to the product/process root cause

10.9 Incoming Quality Operator follows a reaction plan if raw material or purchased part is
found to be out of specification.
10.10

Reworked material is re-qualified prior to use or shipment

Corrective Action and Control of Non-Conforming Product Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

11. Continuous Improvement

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

11.1 Does the supplier use management reviews to guide and track continuous improvement
projects.
11.2 The
supplier maintains a prioritized action plan for continuous improvement as it relates
to product and process characteristic variation.
11.3 The supplier maintains a prioritized action plan for continuous improvement as it relates
to cost reduction and productivity enhancement initiatives, including lead time reduction.
11.4 The supplier maintains a prioritized action plan for continuous improvement as it relates
to the evaluation of the effectiveness of the quality systems.
Continuous Improvement Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

4of 8

Cooper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

12. Measurement and Test

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

12.1 Does the supplier have a formal Measurement Systems Analysis program in place that
includes calibration standards for all gages and test equipment?
12.2 Does the supplier evaluate the impact on the product when an out-of calibration issue is
identified? Reaction plans are identified and followed.
12.3 Adequate calibration intervals have been established, which are determined by the type
of equipment, frequency of use and the occurrence of deviation. The calibration records
are maintained.
12.4 If the measuring devices are calibrated internally, a qualified internal calibrator is a
must. The calibrating methods and instructions for internally-calibrated devices shall be
documented.
gages / standards are traceable to a recognized national / international standard.
12.5 Master
(for example: NIST)

12.6 Calibration status readily available to operators. The expiration date of the calibration is
shown.
12.7 The appropriate precision of the gage based upon print tolerances is determined.
Measurement and Test Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
13. Process Walk

Supplier Cooper

Observations / Evidence

13.1 Process work instructions are documented, up-to-date, available to operators, and are
being followed.
13.2 Setup and operating parameters are documented and utilized as specified.
13.3 Required tools and inspection equipment are identified for each operation and are
utilized as specified.
13.4 Each setup is qualified prior to the start of production as required and critical parameters
are identified, reviewed and approved.
13.5 Repaired production tooling is qualified prior to production use and results documented.
13.6 Are 6S (Safety, Sort, Set in order, Shine, Standardize and Sustain) activities evident
through the facility including ongoing activities to sustain the accomplishments.
13.7 Material identification, acceptance status, and control of non-conforming material is
maintained throughout the manufacturing process and while product is in storage.
13.8 There are control plans that exist for each part number/process, that include
the following:
- Standard for approval and rejection
- Signature and date
- Reaction plans for out of control conditions
- Characteristics to be inspected and/or tested
- Engineering revision level
- Sample size and frequency of observations
- Methodology and tools to be used for inspection and/or test
All inspections are completed, per the control plan, before inventory (stores) or shipping
and include records of appropriate product characteristics.

N/A

N/A

Do Not Assess- Roll-up Score

N/A

N/A

Do Not Assess- Roll-up Score

Are the basic statistical methods widely used to measure the process / product, such as
checklist, histogram, trends chart and etc., where applicable.
Where statistical methods are utilized for control of key characteristics and process
parameters
- Evaluate how they are chosen
- Define what are the statistical methods used
- Determine if the appropriate level of control is established
13.9 Where the Process Control Plan calls for SPC,
- Is the data properly recorded?
- Does the data make sense and are reasonable control limits shown?
- Are out of control points noted with the corrective action taken?
- Does the manufacturing process demonstrate the required capability or performance?
Process Walk Section Score: #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

5of 8

Cooper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

Supplier On-Site Assessment

Corrective Action Form
Supplier Information
Supplier Name:
Plant Location:

0
0

Vendor ID #:
Phone #:

0
0

Supplier Contact

Supplier E-Mail:

Division :
Commodity Fami
Product Type:
Audit Date:

0
0
0
0

Auditor Name:
Auditor E-Mail:
Auditor Phone:
Cooper Division:

0
0
0
0

Audit Information

No.

Item

Non-Conformance

Corrective Action

Responsibilit
Due DateVerification Date and Comments
y

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

6of 8

Cooper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

ments

7of 8

Cooper Industries
Document #3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003

Supplier On-Site Assessment Summary

#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!

Supplier Score
Cooper Score

Supplier Information
Supplier Name:

Vendor ID #:

Plant Location:

Phone #:

Supplier Contact:

Supplier E-Mail:

Division :
Commodity Family
Product Type:
Audit Date:

Audit Information
Auditor Name
Auditor E-Mail
Auditor Phone
Cooper Divisi

0
0
0

0
0
0
0

Initial (Self) Assessment Summary

Points

Section

TotaPossible Percentage
Customer Satisfaction
0l
0
#DIV/0!
Quality System
0
0
#DIV/0!
Business System
0
0
#DIV/0!
Customer
Process
Walk Satisfaction
Quality System
EHS and Risk Management
0
0
#DIV/0!
Measure and Test
100%Business System
New Product Development
0
0
#DIV/0!
50%
Purchasing and Sub-Suplier
Continuous Improvement
0
0
#DIV/0!
0% EHS and Risk Management
Management
Production Control and Planning
0
0
#DIV/0!
Corrective Action and Non-Conforming Prod.
New Product Development
Change Management
0
0
#DIV/0!
Inventory Control and Housekeeping
Purchasing and Sub-Suplier Management Inventory Control and Housekeeping
0
0
#DIV/0!
Production
Change Management
Control and Planning
Corrective Action and Non-Conforming
0
0
#DIV/0!
Prod.
Continuous Improvement
0
0
#DIV/0!
Measure and Test
0
0
#DIV/0!
Process Walk
0
0
#DIV/0!

Score

#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!

Final (Cooper) Assessment Summary

Points

Section

TotaPossible Percentage
Customer Satisfaction
0l
0
#DIV/0!
Quality System
0
0
#DIV/0!
Business System
0
0
#DIV/0!
Customer
Process
Walk Satisfaction
Quality System
EHS and Risk Management
0
0
#DIV/0!
Measure and Test
Business System
New Product Development
0
0
#DIV/0!
Purchasing and Sub-Supplier
0
0
#DIV/0!
Continuous Improvement
EHS and Risk Management
Management
Production Control and Planning
0
0
#DIV/0!
Corrective Action and Non-Conforming Prod.
New Product Development
Change Management
0
0
#DIV/0!
Inventory Control and Housekeeping
Purchasing and Sub-Supplier Management Inventory Control and Housekeeping
0
0
#DIV/0!
Production
Change Management
Control and Planning
Corrective Action and Non-Conforming
0
0
#DIV/0!
Prod.
Continuous Improvement
0
0
#DIV/0!
Measure and Test
0
0
#DIV/0!
Process Walk
0
0
#DIV/0!

Score

#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!

On-Site Assessment Scoring

Overall Score

Segmentation

All Green
>79%

Level 1- Strategic

60-79%

Level 2 - Preferred

40-59%

Level 3 - Maintain

< 39% Level 4 -

Description
Current Supplier: Supplier is currently performing at a Level 1 - Recommend strongly
New Supplier: Performance is consistent with Level 1 performance - Recommend strongly
Current Supplier: Not currently performing at a Level 1 but has the potential with minimal
improvements. Existing business can continue and the supplier can be considered for new business Recommend with Corrective Actions
New Supplier: Has the potential to perform at a Level 1 with minimal improvements required Recommend with Corrective Actions
Current Supplier: Corrective actions are needed for the supplier to improve performance. During
this time, business can continue upon review of corrective actions - Not Recommended - Source
with Risk
New Supplier: Significant corrective actions needed to bring the performance to an acceptable level
- Not Recommended - Source with Risk

Current Supplier: Performance not consistent with minimum Cooper standards. Not
Recommended for New Business. A corrective action plan must be provided and
implemented within 60 days. Failure wil result in alternative site sourcing
Non-Performing
New Supplier: No new business will be awarded. Not Recommended - Do Not Source
On-Site Assessment

Cooper Industries
Document # 3.0004
Issue Date: 11/06/2010
Revision: 003