Title Page

  • Manufacturer

  • Address
  • Customer

  • Address
  • Part Name & Number

  • Quality Manager

  • Conducted on

PPAP Checklist

1. Design Records

  • Is a copy of the drawing included to support the part or assembly (both manufacturer and customer drawings)?

  • Is a list of specification supporting the production of this part provided?

  • Is change level verification assured or available that the supplier has the latest revisions of specification?

  • Is the form of dimension throughout the PPAP identical in all documentation?

  • Is the form of reporting dimensions throughout the PPAP per customer drawing?

  • Have dimensions that affect fit, function and durability been identified?

  • Are reference dimensions identified to minimize inspection layout time?

  • Are sufficient control points and datum surfaces identified to design functional gages?

  • Are tolerances compatible with accepted manufacturing standards?

  • Are there any requirements specified that can’t be evaluated using known inspection techniques?

2. Authorized Engineering Change Documents

  • Are authorized engineering changes applicable?

  • Is approved deviation attached?

  • Is deviation completely filled out?

  • Are proper approvals in place?

  • Does deviation clearly identify number of pieces, time limit, change forthcoming, etc. information for proper PPAP disposition?

3. Customer Engineering Approval

  • Is customer engineering approval required?

  • Is there a formal controlled document for customer engineering approval?

  • Is there a formal controlled document of engineering waiver?

4. Design FMEA

  • Does the FMEA drive Design Improvements as primary objective?

  • Is a statement attached that DFMEA is available to be presented to the customer upon request?

  • Does FMEA consider all major “lessons learned” (such as high warranty, campaigns, etc.) as input to failure mode identification?

  • Has all dimensional tolerances and material properties been considered?

  • Have customer reliability and warranty data been utilized in preparing FMEA?

  • Have the causes been described in terms of something that can be fixed or controlled?

  • Were attribute characteristics included?

  • Does FMEA identify appropriate Special Characteristics candidates, as input to the Special Characteristics selection process?

  • Are New Product Introductions and design changes included in identifying Special Characteristics?

  • Does Analysis/Development/Validation (A/D/V) and/or Design Verification Plan and Report (DVP&R) consider the failure modes from the Design FMEA?

  • Does FMEA address all high-risk Failure Modes, as identified by the FMEA team, with executable Action Plans?

  • Have appropriate countermeasures been planned or taken for high-risk numbers?

  • Were customer plant problems used as an aid in developing the FMEA?

  • Have customer product problems and/or rejections been included with countermeasures?

  • Does submission include action list from Design Review?

5. Process Flow Diagram Assessment

  • Is the Process Flow Chart in place and identifies all manufacturing operations, handling techniques, inspection steps, alternate/back-up processes, and sub-contract suppliers?

  • Does the process layout shall reflect planning so that a logical flow of material can occur during manufacturing of the product?

  • Does the flow chart illustrate the sequence of production?

  • Has the pull system/optimization been considered for this process?

  • Are steps in the process where product is stored and/or staged clearly identified?

  • Does the flow chart describe how the product will move, i.e. roller conveyor, slide containers, tubs, etc?

  • Are the sequences identified (operation or sequence number) so as to follow through to other PPAP documents?

  • Are inspection/quality assurance steps, data recording, attribute checks and/or functional testing included for each process step?

  • Does the flow chart indicating the material flow and control for handling rework and scrap?

  • Does the material flow consider potential quality problems due to handling and subcontracted operations?

  • Does the flow chart include all assembly and packaging operations?

  • Does the flow chart illustrate shipment to the customer and steps to consumption?

  • Is the process flow chart controlled, updated and reviewed for completeness?

  • Does the flow chart identify in detail all in-house alternate or back-up processes and sub-contract alternate or back-up sources of supply for products or services provided?

  • Have alternate or back-up processes or sub-contract suppliers been validated?

6. Process FMEA

  • Does FMEA drive Process Improvements as the primary objective, with emphasis on Error/Mistake Proofing solutions?

  • Is a statement attached that PFMEA is available to be presented to the customer upon request?

  • Did the right people participate as part of the FMEA team throughout the analysis, and are adequately trained in the procedure?

  • Is the correct part number, engineering change, and other information documented?

  • Is there evidence that all print, specification, purchase order, attribute, etc. characteristics are included?

  • Are adequate controls in place for all characteristics?

  • Are special controls/actions in place for all Special Characteristics?

  • Are there measurable quality improvement projects in place for Special Characteristics?

  • Is Process FMEA integrated and consistent with the Process Flow Diagram, Process Control Plan and other PPAP documents?

  • Is there evidence of Statistical Process Control for all Special Characteristics or controls as identified and approved in the Control Plan?

  • Are quality performance indicators provided as evidence that sufficient methods are in-place to monitor and control all characteristics?

  • Are the top RPNs addressed with recommended actions and the actions are implemented?

  • Have capability studies been performed to validate the control of the characteristics?

  • Is FMEA completed during the “window of opportunity” where it could most efficiently impact the design of the product or process?

  • Is there evidence that the failure modes with action are carried over to the Process Control Plan?

7. Control Plan

  • Are Control Plans and input criteria reviewed with manufacturing personnel?

  • Are all sections filled out including evidence of cross-functional team involvement?

  • Are detailed and complete Process Control Plans in place to purchase, manufacture, inspect, test, assemble, package, and ship product for each operation performed?

  • Does the Control Plan provide detail methods of correcting out of control processes, handling nonconforming products, and corrective action program on all quality problems including attribute variables?

  • Are Special Characteristics and other major, significant, features of special interest, etc. process variables identified?

  • Are there Process Control Plans in place for all customer part numbers?

  • Are Engineering Test and Performance requirements identified?

  • Is there a documented program for establishing sample sizes and test frequencies?

  • Are gage methods compatible and are they traceable to national standards?

  • Does the Control Plan provide detail on: machine make & model, machine type, machine number/identification, etc.?

  • Is all manufacturing equipment identified i.e. press type, paint booth type, etc.?

  • Is Receiving Inspection, Process Inspection, and Final Inspection included in Control Plan?

  • Have all known customer concerns been identified to facilitate the selection of Special Required/Design/Process Characteristics?

  • Is there evidence of feedback from customer problems or rejections?

  • Are appropriate reaction plans included in the Control Plan?

  • Are Control Plans completed and readily available for alternate or backup process?

  • Are Process Control Plans completed/updated for new product or design changes?

8. Measurement System Analysis

  • Are MSAs for all (including attribute, process controls, etc.) gages listed on the control plan provided?

  • Do all MSAs refer to the correct part number and/or gage family

  • Did the supplier submit an acceptable MSA as above and documented in the AIAG MSA Manual?

  • Have correlation concerns been addressed?

  • Have results been reviewed and approved by the customer?

9. Dimensional Results

  • Are the dimensions references on a ballooned customer drawing or documented within a characteristics library?

  • Is there evidence that all specification and other requirements were documented?

  • Are the correct numbers of parts laid out?

  • Do all requirements, including drawing notes have a response (pass/fail statement is unacceptable)?

  • Are all Special Characteristics highlighted?

  • Do results meet all Design Record Requirements?

  • Is any nonconformance highlighted in the report?

  • Is layout result legible and understandable?

  • Are the inspection sheets approved and signed?

  • Is all reporting against customer specification?

10. Records of Material / Performance Test Results

  • Are material and performance test results provided for chemical, physicals or metallurgical to the customer specification and compliance confirmed?

  • Does the submission include correct part and engineering change level, specification numbers, date and change level, authorized engineering change documents not yet incorporated into the design, test date, quantity tested, the actual results, the material supplier’s name and, when required by the customer, the customer-assigned vendor code, special requirements for approved steel, heat treatment, plating, etc., other relevant information specifically required by the customer?

  • Is any nonconformance highlighted in the report?

  • Is product testing to be done in-house?

  • Are all testing results less than one (1) year old?

  • Is all testing summarized with actual criteria and data (pass/fail statement is unacceptable)?

  • Is test loading sufficient to provide all conditions, i.e. production validation and end use?

  • Have parts manufactured at minimum and maximum specification been tested?

  • Can additional samples be tested when a reaction plan requires it?

  • Is the specified test sampling size and/or frequency feasible?

11. Initial Process Studies

  • Is there preventive maintenance, gage and fixture calibration, tooling verification needed to maintain an acceptable level of capability?

  • Were results utilized in determining preventative maintenance schedules?

  • Was a study performed on the packaging of products for shipment, assembly operations, and final product conformance?

  • Is the method utilized to perform studies and calculate capability level documented along with evidence that results are within customer requirements?

  • Is the measurement method/device noted?

  • Were correlation studies required and performed?

  • Are results for standard deviation and the distribution noted?

  • Is variable data reporting preferred for process capability reporting?

  • Is the attribute data indicating zero (O) defects found?

  • Does the data indicate that the process is under control?

  • Is the sample size according to the agreed upon criteria and documented within the submission?

  • Are capability studies performed on new product and/or design changes and when process changes are implemented?

  • Is there evidence of capability results feedback to management and production personnel?

  • Is a mechanism in place to feedback the product testing results to the capability study?

  • Is there a program to update the studies on a routine basis?

12. Qualified Laboratory Documentation

  • Is a complete, signed and dated lab scope available?

  • Does the lab scope (as defined on the certification or addendum to the certification) list all tests performed by the lab?

  • Are qualified independent laboratory checks defined?

  • Is the quantity tested identified?

  • Are all Special Characteristics from the drawing (and drawing notes) included?

  • Has testing specification been identified on all tests?

  • Are results reported on the letterhead?

  • Are performance test results and material test (chemical, metallurgical, etc.) results included?

  • Is any nonconformance highlighted in the report?

  • Has customer approval been obtained for the test?

13. Appearance Approval Report

  • Are appearance items identified on the engineering drawing?

  • Is the standard AAR form filled out completely?

  • Is a formal, approved, controlled waiver submitted?

  • Is formal approval in place from the proper organization (engineering, marketing, met lab)?

  • Was submission according to customer specification?

14. Sample Production Parts

  • Are the formal requirements for samples documented?

  • Is there a formal, approved, controlled waiver for samples attached?

  • Are the samples shipped before PPAP Submission with documentation of the parts included?

  • Were the samples measured from taken from the Production Trail Run or a production run?

15. Master Sample

  • Is there evidence of a master sample as per standard?

  • Is there a formal, approved, controlled waiver in place for master sample or documentation to consume master sample in production?

  • Are master samples controlled for life of PPAP records or until a new sample is approved and disposition of old sample?

  • Is the master sample approved by the customer and identified as a master sample?

  • Are master samples available for multiple dies, cavities, molds, impressions, etc.?

16. Checking Aids

  • Is submission according to customer specific requirements?

  • Were prints copies and duplication gages submitted?

  • Are all Checking Aids numbered, calibrated, included in the Control Plan and provided for preventive maintenance plans?

  • Do all Checking Aids have acceptable Measurement Systems Analysis studies?

17. Customer Specific Requirements

  • Is a list of “Specific Requirements” along with compliance documentation provided or a waiver that none exist?

  • Does reporting take place for those requirements listed and all others identified by PPAP approver representative plus other process partners (met lab, engineering, logistics, etc.)?

18. Part Submission Warrant

  • Is the warrant compliant to the AIAG PPAP standard?

  • Is proper detail provided for “Reason for Submission”?

  • Are all fields completed as per PPAP instructions?

  • Is a completed bulk material checklist and warrant in place for all bulk material used in production parts? (See page 36 of AIAG PPAP 4th edition Manual)

  • Submission Level

  • Are specific elements clearly identified for the submission?

  • Are specific elements clearly identified for the submission?

  • Are all 16 elements provided along with full explanation of any that are not provided in full?


  • Additional Comments

  • Quality Manager Name & Signature

The templates available in our Public Library have been created by our customers and employees to help get you started using SafetyCulture's solutions. The templates are intended to be used as hypothetical examples only and should not be used as a substitute for professional advice. You should seek your own professional advice to determine if the use of a template is permissible in your workplace or jurisdiction. You should independently determine whether the template is suitable for your circumstances.