# Aerospace Supplier Quality System Maturity Assessment > Source: https://netray.co/tools/aerospace-receiving-and-supplier-quality-system-assessment > Publisher: Netray (netray.co), AI and integration engineering for ERP and manufacturing systems. > Section: Free Tools ## Short answer Ten scored questions that test the controls auditors and primes look for in a small aerospace supplier, ending in a maturity band and a prioritized action list. ## Category quality ## Industry Aerospace ## Audience - Quality manager - Supplier quality engineer - Operations manager ## Tool **Kind:** assessment **Questions:** #### How is contract or order review performed before you accept an aerospace order? **Help:** AS9100D clause 8.2.3 **Options:** ##### Informal, based on the sales order entry **Score:** 0 ##### A form exists but is not always completed **Score:** 1 ##### Completed for every new order, records retained **Score:** 2 ##### Completed, includes risk and flowdowns, and blocks release in the ERP until approved **Score:** 3 #### How are special process suppliers approved and monitored? **Options:** ##### No formal approval list **Score:** 0 ##### Approved list exists, rarely reviewed **Score:** 1 ##### Approved list with scope and certificate expiry tracked **Score:** 2 ##### Risk-based surveillance schedule, performance data and Nadcap or customer status all tracked **Score:** 3 #### How do you control customer and regulatory flowdowns to outside providers? **Options:** ##### Not routinely flowed down **Score:** 0 ##### Generic terms on the PO **Score:** 1 ##### Flowdowns selected per order from a clause library **Score:** 2 ##### Flowdowns selected automatically and acknowledged by the supplier **Score:** 3 #### How do you prevent counterfeit and suspect parts? **Options:** ##### No documented process **Score:** 0 ##### Documented procedure, little training or enforcement **Score:** 1 ##### Approved source rules, trained staff and receiving checks **Score:** 2 ##### Source rules enforced in ERP, risk-based test plans and tested reporting route **Score:** 3 #### How complete is traceability from raw material to shipped part? **Options:** ##### Lot traceability only on some jobs **Score:** 0 ##### Paper travelers with lot numbers **Score:** 1 ##### Heat or lot numbers captured in ERP and linked to job and serial **Score:** 2 ##### Full forward and backward traceability retrievable in minutes **Score:** 3 #### How is foreign object debris (FOD) controlled? **Options:** ##### No program **Score:** 0 ##### Housekeeping rules only **Score:** 1 ##### Defined areas, tool control and training **Score:** 2 ##### Program with audits, metrics, tool control and corrective action on findings **Score:** 3 #### How do you manage first article inspection (AS9102)? **Options:** ##### Done when a customer asks **Score:** 0 ##### Done on new parts, triggers for delta FAI unclear **Score:** 1 ##### Triggers defined, forms controlled and reviewed **Score:** 2 ##### Triggers monitored automatically from engineering changes and process changes **Score:** 3 #### How are key characteristics controlled in production? **Options:** ##### Not identified separately **Score:** 0 ##### Identified on drawings, treated like other dimensions **Score:** 1 ##### On the control plan with defined gages and frequencies **Score:** 2 ##### Statistically monitored with capability data and defined reaction plans **Score:** 3 #### How are certificates of conformance and material certs checked at receiving? **Options:** ##### Filed without checking **Score:** 0 ##### Checked by exception **Score:** 1 ##### Checked against PO and spec for every lot **Score:** 2 ##### Checked against PO and spec, with discrepancies logged and trended by supplier **Score:** 3 #### How do you handle nonconformances and corrective action? **Options:** ##### Fixed informally on the shop floor **Score:** 0 ##### NCRs raised, corrective action is slow **Score:** 1 ##### NCR, MRB and CAPA with root cause and closure review **Score:** 2 ##### NCRs trended, escapes reviewed with customers and corrective action effectiveness verified **Score:** 3 **Bands:** #### Reactive **Min:** 0 **Max:** 39 **Verdict:** Core aerospace controls are missing or informal. A prime or auditor will find multiple major issues. **Recommendations:** - Document contract review, approved supplier control and nonconformance handling first - Define a counterfeit prevention process and a FOD program in writing - Train all staff on traceability and record keeping - Consider an outside gap assessment against AS9100D before any audit #### Developing **Min:** 40 **Max:** 64 **Verdict:** Procedures exist but evidence and enforcement are uneven. Audits would likely find repeat gaps. **Recommendations:** - Convert paper approvals to a controlled list with expiry dates - Add flowdown selection and supplier acknowledgment to purchasing - Introduce a risk-based surveillance schedule for special process suppliers - Review nonconformance trends monthly #### Controlled **Min:** 65 **Max:** 84 **Verdict:** Most controls are in place and followed. Focus on consistency and system enforcement. **Recommendations:** - Enforce supplier approvals and flowdowns inside the ERP - Use capability data on key characteristics - Run internal audits against customer-specific requirements - Link supplier performance to the approved list status #### Predictive **Min:** 85 **Max:** 100 **Verdict:** Controls are systemic and data-driven. Keep verifying that practice matches procedure. **Recommendations:** - Test your counterfeit reporting route end to end - Review risk scoring against real escapes each year - Share supplier performance trends with outside providers - Look for time-consuming manual steps that can be automated safely ## Content **Intro:** Primes and registrars look for the same set of controls in small aerospace suppliers: order review, supplier approval, flowdowns, counterfeit prevention, traceability, FOD, FAI, key characteristics, receiving and corrective action. This assessment scores ten of them so you can see where to spend effort. **Sections:** #### How to use the assessment **Body:** Answer based on what actually happens on the floor and in the ERP, not what the procedure says. Ask the people who do the work. Each question scores 0 to 3, and the total is shown as a percentage in one of four bands. Use the result as a conversation starter for your management review, not as a certification claim. Repeat the assessment every six months and compare the answers question by question rather than only the total. #### What the ten questions test **Body:** Questions are drawn from the clauses auditors sample most often in AS9100D: 8.2.3 for order review, 8.4 for external providers, 8.1.4 for counterfeit prevention, 8.5.2 for identification and traceability, 8.5.1 for production controls including key characteristics, 8.6 for release and receiving checks, and 10.2 for nonconformity and corrective action. First article and FOD are included because both are common customer-driven requirements. **Bullets:** - Order review and flowdowns before work starts - Supplier approval and surveillance during sourcing - Traceability, FOD and key characteristic control in production - Receiving checks and corrective action at the boundaries #### Reading your result **Body:** A low score in one area matters more than a high average. A shop scoring three on nine questions and zero on counterfeit prevention still has a serious gap. Look at which answers scored 0 or 1 and fix those first, because they usually correspond to missing evidence. Do not chase a perfect score; the top band is about enforcement in systems, which is only worth the effort if volume and customer requirements justify it. #### Common mistakes when self-assessing **Body:** People overrate controls they own and underrate those they inherited. Ask someone outside the function to challenge the score. Another trap is scoring an intended control as in place when it is implemented in one cell only. Sample three recent orders for each question and see whether the evidence is there. **Cta:** If the same gaps keep reappearing in audits, we can look at which controls could be enforced by your ERP instead of by memory. **Faq:** #### Is this assessment a substitute for an AS9100 audit? **Answer:** No. It is an internal self-check of ten control areas. A certification audit examines every clause of the standard and sampled evidence. Use it to prepare and to find gaps early, not to claim conformity. #### What if my customers require NADCAP or AS9100 certification? **Answer:** Then the controls in this assessment are the baseline. The certification scheme or customer will add requirements, so use the result to prepare and confirm the applicable standards from your contracts. #### How often should we repeat it? **Answer:** Every six months is a practical interval, and after any major audit finding, customer escape or change in contract requirements. Compare the answer for each question over time. #### Does the score leave my browser? **Answer:** The assessment runs in your browser. The results are for your use. Any follow-up with us is optional and is a separate action. ## Search terms aerospace supplier quality assessment, AS9100 readiness self assessment, supplier quality maturity assessment, aerospace quality system self audit, AS9100 gap assessment questionnaire, prime supplier quality audit preparation, aerospace supplier readiness, quality system maturity score --- Talk to an engineer: https://netray.co/contact?intent=erp_ai | Machine catalog: https://netray.co/agent/catalog.json