http://www.simple-quality.de/PPAP.html

How can I obtain copies of the Phased PPAP manual and Capacity Verification documentation?

Information is available at: http://www.aiag.org/publications/quality/iatfquality.cfm.

 
Are suppliers still required to update the EASI system or will tracking take place in CMMS3?

The EASI system will be phased out over the two years, and replaced by a modified version of CMMS3 that will include dates, etc., for PSW. PSW and parts progress tracking will take place in CMMS3 going forward. Once an EASI user is transitioned to CMMS3, they should continue all parts progress in CMMS3. There will also be on-line training for these changes.

 
Does Phased PPAP allow me to PPAP tools as they become available for production or do I have to continue with the current requirement to PPAP all tools at the same date? If yes, can I submit an invoice for the tooling as approved?

PPAP is completed on a part number, not to a tool. The intention of Phased PPAP is to help manage the progress to full PSW completion Ð Full PSW is completed when all tools / lines / cavities supports that launch. Completion of your first tool / line / cavity is a Phase 1 completion. This provides Ford with the information that you can produce quality parts but do not have all tools / lines / cavities completed. No change in tooling fund release is planned. Tooling funds would normally be released at Phase 2 completion ( completion of PSW). There has been some thought given to an earlier release of a portion of tooling funding for programs where multiple production lines will be used, but no action is currently planned.

 
Can a supplier PPAP parts produced at a tool shop?

No, parts must be produced at the actual production source.

 
What constitutes "Permission to Ship" at our supplier locations? If a part has an "Alert" how do we use Phase PPAP that does not allow approval with alerted commodities?

Permission to ship is given upon completion of full PSW (Phase 2) or as long as the part is shipping under an approved WERS alert. If a part has not completed full PSW, it must ship under an alert. The benefit of phased PPAP is that it quickly highlights supplier status in PSW completion. Phase 1 completion, while it is not fully PSWÕd, indicates that the supplier has completed 16 of 19 elements and can ship quality parts that can be used for production on non-salable units. However, Phase 1 parts since they have not completed full PSW, must ship under an alert.

 
Some suppliers are ready to PSW prior to 1PP but have no knowledge of the Phase PPAP process or use of CMMS. Many STA engineers also do not have any information on how to access CMMS3. How do we handle this? Do we PSW in EASI?

You are ok to PSW in EASI. As the pilot is rolled out, EASI and CMMS3 will trade information via a data bridge that will update nightly. However, once a supplier user is trained and migrated to CMMS3, they should do all of their parts progress PSW work in CMMS3. This approach was taken for the supplier users, to help reduce confusion by allowing them to transition fully to CMMS3 and not have to operate in two separate systems. Phased PPAP is currently being piloted with suppliers on the P221 program. In this pilot, EASI and CMMS3 will trade all part information for a period of time until CMMS3 takes over -- because of this data bridge, non-P221 parts will be also able to be progressed in CMMS3. As for training, Phased PPAP and CMMS3 training is well underway for STA engineers, and suppliers are being trained on-line. Upon completion of supplier training, and readiness to use CMMS3 Vehicle Parts Progress tool (VPP), suppliers should begin doing all of their PSW work in CMMS3.

 
Do you lose your EASI access once you've completed the VPP training online? One of our people that took the training understood that to be the case. You can see how this will affect the ability to keep up with EASI until the rest of the programs migrate.

Suppliers who complete the on-line training have their permission changed...with the same RACF and password they will be able to do ALL of their part progress and timing work in VPP and they will have "view only" access in EASI. Once transitioned there should be NO need for a user to do any of their work in EASI

 
There is a requirement to answer timing in VPP within 24 hours after the parts arrive in the system. How stringent is this requirement? We already had a hard time with this trying to answer one date...three dates make it even tougher.

Suppliers are required to provide part timing within 24 hours. For Phased PPAP, this requires promise dates for all 3 phases. If you cannot meet the 24 hour requirement, simply input your PSW date information immediately when it becomes available.

 
Has the transition been further developed? Currently my understanding is that the Phase PPAP process starts with P221, then continues with each subsequent Job#1 program. Does this mean running changes will not changeover until each of these subsequent programs hit Job#1? What about minor changes / refreshenings or added starters?

Regarding implementation timing, it is planned to launch the Phased PPAP process with supplier sites that are shipping to the P221 program. Once these supplier sites / users are migrated to CMMS3 VPP, they will do all of your PSW work in VPP. Following this the plan is to roll out to suppliers shipping to selected programs (with Job #1 dates after P221). If you do not supply to P221 you will then be migrated to the new approach on a targeted program with a Job 1 date later than P221. Once migrated to CMMS3 VPP, all required PSWs for running changes, minor / major programs will all be done with the phased PPAP approach.

 
I don't see anything concerning SIM score consequences for late entry of dates or timing slips. How will the performance be tracked? How much damage will poorly managed dates do to the plant?

Ford is currently in the early stages of revising SIM to reflect PSW missed commitments and slips that include Phased PPAP information, which includes integrating data feeds from the new CMMS3 VPP information source. As with all metrics in SIM, this is used as a record of supplier performance activity. However, PSW slips or missed commitments are currently not a part of the Q1 scoring system.

 
The Launch Readiness Review documentation for P221 in Section 4 (Production Capacity) states that it is a requirement for High Impact Suppliers to perform Capacity Verification prior to 1PP. Doesn't this add significant systems cost?

The generic phased PPAP requirements are such that phase 3 (Capacity Verification) may be performed as late as 4 weeks prior to Job 1. After this, Capacity Verification will require a support plan to be input into CMMS3 VPP. However, it is important to note that program teams in special circumstances may modify these capacity verification requirements as necessary to meet their business needs.

 
I thought that we needed to enter the exact CAPACITY NUMBER, not a 1. What is the difference?

Suppliers on the P221 program must input their demonstrated weekly capacity number into CMMS3. Part progress data that has been fed from EASI to CMMS3 is populating the Demonstrated Weekly capacity field with the digit 1 (one) to signify that this part information was fed from EASI. Because EASI does not have a line item for CV, the CV field in CMMS3 VPP had to be populated with a character when the data was transitioned. Only for parts where PSW was completed are we populating that field with a one