ISO9001 System Document Package (51) | Supplier Procurement Record Forms: Supplier Investigation Form, Evaluation Form, Approved Supplier List, Purchase Request Form, and Contract Review Form

Document Description: This document is a set of record forms (templates) at the fourth level, specifically for "supplier procurement." It serves ISO 9001:2015 clauses 8.4 (Control of externally provided processes, products, and services), 8.2.3 (Review of requirements for products and services), 8.4.1 (General: Evaluation, selection, and re-evaluation of suppliers), and 7.5.3 (Control of documented information), and provides objective evidence for supplier-side analysis and evaluation under clauses 9.1.3 (Analysis and evaluation) and 10.2 (Nonconformity and corrective action). The second-level procedure documents, "Procurement and External Provision Control Procedure" and "Customer-Related Processes Control Procedure," specify "who does what at what time," while the third-level document, "Supplier Admission and Performance Evaluation Work Instruction," details "how to perform the actions." This document translates these requirements into printable or Excel-replicable tables, scoring rules, and judgment thresholds, explaining what to fill in, when to fill it, how to score, and who should sign off. It is suitable for manufacturing, assembly, injection molding, machining, electronic assembly, engineering services, and trading companies that are establishing or updating their ISO 9001 system. It is also applicable to organizations that have already been certified but have scattered supplier data on individual procurement officers' computers, an outdated approved supplier list, or missing procurement request and contract review processes. Once approved, these forms become controlled records and should be registered in the record list with their numbers and retention periods. Departments using the forms must not add or delete scoring dimensions, change threshold levels, or simplify approval paths.

1. Purpose

To standardize the headers, fields, scoring rules, and archiving requirements for supplier procurement records, ensuring:

a) Admission Based on Evidence: Before any new supplier is added to the cooperation list, there must be investigation data and evaluation scores to support the decision, avoiding the practice of placing orders based on personal introductions and then collecting data six months later.

b) Standardized Selection Criteria: Comparisons between suppliers are based on the same set of dimensions and weights, making procurement decisions explainable and verifiable, rather than based on impressions or price alone.

c) Controlled Procurement: Procurement activities are limited to the current Approved Supplier List. Out-of-scope procurement must go through a special approval process and leave a trace, preventing uncontrolled suppliers from infiltrating the supply chain.

d) Clear Requirements: Purchase requests clearly specify specifications, technical requirements, quantities, delivery dates, and acceptance criteria, reducing the risk of non-conforming deliveries and rework due to vague requirements.

e) Traceable Clauses: Contract (order) reviews are completed before placing orders, with technical, delivery, price, quality assurance, and change control clauses reviewed item by item. Review records can be referred to in case of future disputes.

f) Measurable Performance: Annual supplier performance is scored and graded based on real data (qualification rate, punctuality rate, timeliness of corrective actions). The grades are directly linked to procurement shares, inspection methods, and re-evaluation frequencies, forming a closed loop of survival of the fittest.

2. Scope of Application

2.1 This template set includes the following 6 record forms, covering the main evidence chain from "finding suppliers → evaluating suppliers → listing suppliers → requesting procurement → reviewing contracts → annual re-evaluation":

2.2 Applicable Scenarios:

a) Organizations establishing their system for the first time, building a record carrier for supplier selection and procurement control, and supplementing the three types of evidence required by clause 8.4 (evaluation records, supplier list, control measures).

b) Certified organizations adding new materials, new external processes, switching suppliers, or introducing service suppliers (calibration, testing, transportation, IT maintenance, outsourced construction) should follow the same investigation and evaluation process.

c) Group or headquarters conducting system inspections or centralized procurement audits, using these forms as a unified inspection template and scoring criteria.

d) Customer second-party audits and special customer requirements (such as supplier management requirements in the automotive, medical device, and rail transportation industries) to verify the completeness and data authenticity of supplier control.

2.3 Boundaries with Other Documents: This document only provides table formats and scoring rules. Which suppliers are key suppliers, how to fine-tune the weights of each dimension, how to implement on-site audits, and which sampling schemes to use for incoming inspections are specified in the "Procurement and External Provision Control Procedure" and the "Supplier Admission and Performance Evaluation Work Instruction." If there is a conflict between this form and the procedure documents, the procedure documents take precedence, and the using department should submit a form revision request to the system office.

2.4 Not Applicable: Execution records for incoming inspections are found in the "Production Inspection Record Forms" (package No. 53) and the "Incoming Inspection Work Instruction" (package No. 34). Disposal records for nonconforming incoming materials are found in the "Nonconforming Product Review and Disposal Work Instruction" (package No. 37). Training and position-related records are found in the "Human Resources Record Forms" (package No. 49).

3. Responsibilities

3.1 General Manager (Top Management): Approves decisions involving significant procurement strategies, sole suppliers, and long-term framework agreements; reviews the performance and risks of externally provided processes in management reviews; makes judgments on the delivery risks that may arise from the elimination of key suppliers.

3.2 Management Representative (System Manager): Approves the Approved Supplier List and its grade adjustments; reviews whether the evaluation dimensions and thresholds align with system requirements; spot-checks the data sources of evaluation records for authenticity; promotes major supplier quality issues into corrective actions and management reviews.

3.3 Procurement Department: Manages the QR-SC series forms; organizes the investigation, data collection, and evaluation of new suppliers; establishes and maintains the Approved Supplier List; receives and preliminarily reviews procurement requests; organizes contract (order) reviews and archiving; aggregates annual supplier performance data and organizes re-evaluations; promptly notifies the warehouse, inspection, and using departments of restricted, suspended, or eliminated suppliers.

3.4 Quality Department: Participates in the evaluation and annual performance review of suppliers, providing data on batch qualification rates, abnormal occurrences, and timeliness of corrective actions; conducts on-site audits or system document reviews for key suppliers; confirms whether the process control capabilities and inspection methods of external process suppliers meet the requirements; makes judgments on veto items.

3.5 Technical Department (Process/Research and Development): Confirms the technical capabilities and process compatibility of suppliers in evaluations and contract reviews; reviews the completeness of technical requirements, drawing versions, and acceptance standards; proposes confirmation requirements for supplier changes involving special characteristics, key materials, or alternative materials.

3.6 Production Department (Planning): Confirms the feasibility of delivery dates and production scheduling, as well as the alignment with safety stock in contract reviews; specifies the usage purpose and requisition time requirements in procurement requests.

3.7 Finance Department: Reviews prices, payment terms, invoice and tax requirements, currency and exchange rate risks in contract reviews; participates in the review of supplier financial stability documentation.

3.8 Warehouse and Inspection: Verifies deliveries against the list and orders, and does not accept deliveries if the supplier, order, or technical requirements do not match; immediately escalates any discrepancies in supplier names with the list.

4. Form Templates and Filling Instructions

4.0 General Filling Rules (Applicable to all forms in this set):

a) Fill out using blue-black ink or approved electronic forms; do not use pencils or erasable pens. Electronic forms must have a modification trace and approval permissions.

b) Correct errors by drawing a single line through them, signing the name and date next to the correction, and keeping the original text legible. Do not overwrite, cover, or tear out pages to re-fill.

c) Slash or fill in "／" for fields with no content; do not leave them blank to avoid being questioned about post-filling during audits.

d) Scoring items must specify the scoring basis and data source. Evaluation forms with only scores and no basis are weak in audits.

e) Signing must be done by the individual, and the procurement request and approval must not be completed by the same person.

4.1 Supplier Basic Information Investigation Form (QR-SC-01)

Field List

Filling Instructions:

a) All supporting documents must be valid within their effective periods. Copies must be marked "consistent with the original" and stamped by the supplier; the procurement officer must verify and sign the date.

b) When traders or agents supply goods, they must provide a manufacturer's authorization letter and the manufacturer's system certificate to avoid "middlemen bidding with others' certificates."

c) If the production address differs from the registered address and there are relocation plans, this must be noted in the remarks and the impact on delivery times and system certificate coverage assessed.

d) The investigation form is the input for evaluation, not the conclusion. After collecting all materials, proceed to the scoring phase in 4.2; do not directly list suppliers based on the investigation form.

e) For key suppliers, sole suppliers, or suppliers involving special characteristics, an on-site audit should be added after document review, and the audit conclusion should be attached to the investigation form.

4.2 Supplier Admission Evaluation Form (QR-SC-02)

Field List

Scoring Dimensions, Weights, and Judgment Criteria

Grade Judgment Thresholds

Veto Items (Automatic rejection if any one is met, no scoring involved)

a) No valid business license, or the business scope does not cover the proposed supply content.

b) Provided system certificates, test reports, or qualification certificates are expired, suspended, or found to be forged upon verification.

c) Listed in the serious illegal and untrustworthy list, listed as a discredited被执行人, or involved in major ongoing litigation affecting contract fulfillment.

d) On-site audit finds significant quality or safety risks and the supplier refuses to rectify.

e) Supplier refuses to accept quality assurance and compensation clauses in the contract.

Example Row

Filling Instructions:

a) Scoring must be accompanied by a basis, for example, "Quality Assurance Capability 25 points (System certification valid +18, 3 batches of sample tests passed +5, no independent laboratory -3)," allowing the conclusion to be traced back.

b) The evaluation team should include at least quality and procurement, with technical, production, and finance participating based on the importance of the supply. Single-person scoring forms are easily considered formalistic in audits.

c) Conditionally qualified must specify the rectification content, responsible person, completion deadline, and verification method; do not list in the list until rectification is verified.

d) Supplier numbers, once assigned, should not be changed due to name or equity changes; changes should be recorded in the list's remarks to ensure historical data comparability.

4.3 Approved Supplier List (QR-SC-03)

Field List

Example Row

Filling Instructions:

a) The list is the sole basis for procurement release: suppliers not on this list must not be ordered, and urgent procurement must follow a special approval process, with reasons and remedial arrangements noted in the procurement request (how long to complete the evaluation).

b) Grades are not labels but must be reflected in differential management: A grade can have relaxed inspections, priority share allocation, and participation in new product development; B grade is routinely controlled; C grade has stricter inspections and limited improvement time; two consecutive D grades trigger elimination.

c) The list is verified quarterly (certificate validity, status changes) and revised at least annually. The previous version must be retained, with the effective date and approver recorded.

d) In the event of major incoming material quality incidents, delivery incidents, or compliance events, the supplier's status should be immediately changed to "Limited purchase" or "Suspended," and a written notice should be sent to the warehouse, inspection, production, and using departments. Changing the list without notification is ineffective.

e) Eliminated suppliers should not be directly deleted from the list but should have their status changed to "Pending elimination." After clearing work-in-progress, inventory, in-transit orders, and tooling, they can be archived.

4.4 Purchase Request Form (QR-SC-04)

Field List

Example Row

Filling Instructions:

a) The requesting department must not specify suppliers outside the list; if necessary (customer-specified, sole source, technical uniqueness), complete the investigation and evaluation first, or attach a special approval explanation and obtain approval from the management representative.

b) The technical requirements section must be understandable by a third party—specify the drawing number and version, which is more reliable than "as per the previous batch sample." Special characteristics must specify control requirements and verification methods.

c) Application and approval must be separated; if the amount reaches the authorization limit, a higher-level approval is required. Splitting a single requirement into multiple orders to avoid approval is a common overstepping issue in audits.

d) Verify inventory and in-transit before applying, which is the first line of defense against stagnant inventory and capital occupation. Applications with blank or "unclear" inventory and in-transit fields can be returned by the procurement department.

e) After delivery, the procurement officer fills in the execution results, forming a traceable chain of "application—order—delivery—inspection," facilitating monthly analysis of procurement timeliness and deviation reasons.

4.5 Purchase Contract (Order) Review Form (QR-SC-05)

Field List

Review Items and Responsibility Division Example

Example Row

Filling Instructions:

a) Reviews must occur before signing or formally placing the order; "sign first, review later" is harder to explain in audits than "no review."

b) Conditional passes must specify conditions and responsible persons; orders should not be placed until conditions are met or the order quantity must be controlled.

c) Quality assurance clauses are the most easily simplified; at a minimum, they should cover: incoming inspection method, handling time and cost-bearing for nonconforming batches, traceability and recall for batch defects, and responsibility for failures within the warranty period.

d) Change control clauses should clearly state that "changes not confirmed in writing are considered major breaches," and require suppliers to provide samples and test data before changes, which must be re-confirmed by the company before batch supply.

e) After contract fulfillment, complete the loop registration, feeding back the on-time delivery, quality performance, and compensation execution to the annual performance evaluation in 4.6. The two forms should be linked by the same supplier number.

4.6 Supplier Annual Performance Evaluation Form (QR-SC-06)

Field List

Scoring Rules Example (Total Score 100)

Example Row

Filling Instructions:

a) All indicators must be traceable to specific records: qualification rates to inspection records and nonconforming product disposal records, punctuality rates to orders and warehouse entry documents, rectification situations to supplier abnormality logs. Scoring based on impressions is not allowed.

b) The denominator must be consistent—batches rather than pieces for qualification rates, or specify the statistical basis in the table header to ensure comparability across different years.

c) For suppliers supplying multiple materials, it is advisable to evaluate each material separately and then combine the overall grade to prevent "good data from low-risk materials masking bad data from high-risk materials."

d) Rectification requirements for D-grade suppliers must specify content, deadlines, verification methods, and consequences of non-compliance, and include procurement arrangements during the rectification period (reduced share, stricter inspection, activation of backup suppliers).

e) Elimination decisions must assess alternative supply and work-in-progress disposal, especially for suppliers involving tooling, special materials, and certification coverage. The decision-making process should be recorded in the management review input.

5. Form Flow and Related Documents

5.1 Process Steps (Textual Flowchart)

a) Demand Identification (new products, new materials, new processes) → Initial Screening of Candidate Suppliers → Filling QR-SC-01 to Collect Data → Data Review and Necessary Qualification Verification;

b) Organize Evaluation Team → Filling QR-SC-02 to Score Each Dimension → Veto Item Screening → Weighted Summation and Grade Determination → Review by Procurement Head and Approval by Management Representative;

c) Admission Approved → Add a New Row to QR-SC-03 (assign supplier number, set grade, control measures, and re-evaluation cycle) → Notify Inspection and Warehouse to Implement Corresponding Inspection Methods;

d) Using Department Fills QR-SC-04 (including inventory and in-transit verification, technical requirement references, suggested suppliers) → Co-signature and Approval → Procurement Department Inquires or Compares Prices → Enter Contract Review;

e) Filling QR-SC-05 to Review Each Item (technical, delivery, business, qualification, quality assurance, change control) → Authorized Approval → Sign Contract or Place Order → Register in Contract Ledger;

f) Incoming Inspection (based on control measures in the list and contract agreements) → Qualified for Storage; Nonconforming handled according to the nonconforming product process and recorded in the supplier abnormality log;

g) End of Evaluation Period → Collect Qualification Rate, Punctuality Rate, and Rectification Data → Filling QR-SC-06 to Score and Grade → Apply Conclusions to the List (increase share, relax inspection, stricter, limited purchase, suspension, elimination) → Notify Supplier and Track Rectification → Enter Corrective Actions and Next Year's Admission Re-evaluation if Necessary.

5.2 Related Records (The record list should also register the number, storage department, and retention period)

Supplier Basic Information Investigation Form, Supplier Admission Evaluation Form, Approved Supplier List (including historical versions), Purchase Request Form, Purchase Contract (Order) Review Form, Supplier Annual Performance Evaluation Form, Supplier On-Site Audit Report, Sample Approval Letter and Trial Batch Report, Supplier Qualification Document Copies, Comparison and Inquiry Records, Contract Ledger, Supplier Abnormality and Rectification Log, Supplier Change Notification and Confirmation Records.

5.3 Related Documents

"Procurement and External Provision Control Procedure," "Customer-Related Processes Control Procedure," "Nonconforming Product Control Procedure," "Nonconformity and Corrective Action Procedure," "Document Control Procedure," "Record Control Procedure," "Supplier Admission and Performance Evaluation Work Instruction," "Incoming Inspection Work Instruction," "Nonconforming Product Review and Disposal Work Instruction," "Corrective Action Implementation and Verification Work Instruction," "Record Filling and Archiving Work Instruction."

6. Usage Instructions

6.1 Customization Based on Actual Conditions

a) Trading and Light-Asset Enterprises: The equipment and production capacity fields in 4.1 can be downplayed, focusing instead on resource integration capabilities, authorization levels, and inventory assurance, but manufacturer information and system certificates must still be provided, as the quality of delivery ultimately depends on the manufacturer.

b) Multi-Variety, Small-Batch Enterprises: With many suppliers and small individual amounts, not all evaluations need to follow the full process—set amount and risk thresholds, simplify low-value general items (fasteners, packaging materials, office supplies) to a one-page evaluation, and conduct full evaluations and on-site audits for key and dedicated materials.

c) Service Suppliers (calibration, testing, transportation, IT maintenance, outsourced construction): Replace "incoming batch qualification rate" with service delivery qualification rate and rework rate, and "delivery punctuality rate" with response time and on-site arrival rate, maintaining the same evaluation dimension structure.

d) Strongly Regulated Industries (automotive, medical devices): Add customer-specific veto items in 4.2 (e.g., requiring suppliers to pass specific system certifications, possess specific process capabilities, accept second-party audits), and include PPAP or equivalent approval, traceability and recall, warranty period, and sample retention requirements in the quality assurance clauses of 4.5.

e) Group Centralized Procurement Model: QR-SC-01 and QR-SC-02 are uniformly executed by the group procurement center. The QR-SC-03 list can be managed at two levels: "group-wide list + plant-specific list," but it must be clear which level has the authority to approve additions and eliminations to avoid conflicts between the two lists.

f) Small Enterprises: QR-SC-02 and QR-SC-06 can be combined into a "Supplier Evaluation and Re-evaluation Form," recording both admission and re-evaluation conclusions in one form, but veto items, grade thresholds, and data sources must not be omitted.

Modification Principle: Field names can be replaced according to the industry, but the five bottom lines—"evaluation based on evidence, list with boundaries, procurement with approval, contract with review, performance with data"—should not be deleted. Deleting any one of these will degrade the control of externally provided processes to verbal management.

6.2 Audit Focus Points

1. Auditors typically randomly select 2-3 suppliers from the list and trace back to check if the investigation forms, evaluation forms, and on-site audit records are complete, and if the evaluation date is earlier than the first procurement date.

2. Update status of the list: Are there approval records for additions, grade adjustments, limited purchases, and suspensions? Have these been notified to the warehouse and inspection? Are there actual orders from suppliers not on the list?

3. Are the scoring bases for evaluations specific and verifiable, and does the evaluation team really cover quality and procurement?

4. Are the criteria for key suppliers clearly defined, and are there actual differences in the control measures for key and general suppliers?

5. Are the technical requirements in procurement requests clearly specified to drawing versions and standards, or are there vague statements like "as per sample" that cannot be verified?

6. Is the contract (order) review completed before placing the order, and are quality assurance and change control clauses included in the contract or technical agreement?

7. Are there records of notification and re-confirmation for supplier changes (materials, processes, origins, sub-suppliers)? Have first articles or initial batches been verified?

8. Do the annual performance evaluation data match the inspection records, order documents, and abnormality logs? Are the grades and follow-up measures actually implemented?

9. Are D-grade suppliers only given an evaluation form without adjusting procurement shares, tightening inspections, or setting rectification deadlines, making the evaluation a formality?

10. After eliminating a supplier, are work-in-progress, inventory, tooling, and in-transit orders handled, or do legacy issues only surface six months later?

The correct approach is to make the six forms interlock: the investigation form answers "who is this supplier and can they do it," the evaluation form answers "are they qualified and under what conditions," the list answers "what can be purchased and how strictly controlled," the request form answers "why to buy, what to buy, and from whom," the contract review form answers "are all clauses clearly negotiated," and the performance evaluation form answers "how did they perform this year and how to treat them next year." The six forms form a chain, making supplier management no longer a personal experience of the procurement officer but a judgment process that can be recalculated by anyone. During audits, randomly selecting a supplier allows the entire evidence chain from investigation to performance to be traced using the form number and date.

Six forms link the entire lifecycle evidence chain of suppliers

Knowledge code: 2.3.1

Version: v20260809

Author: QTank QTank is dedicated to providing systematic professional knowledge, methodologies, and practical tools for quality management practitioners, helping enterprises continuously improve their quality capabilities.