Mechanism System Internal Audit Quality

Outline Procedures

1. Internal Quality System Audit

  • Quality Manager plan Internal Audit Quality System for a period of 12 months, each division at least once in a year.
  • Planning time set for each division depends on the priorities taking into account the urgency of the audit.
  • Some time prior to the audit, MM will determine the audit team, each consisting of two people, is the personnel listed in the list of ISO internal auditor but not of the Division are to be audited (independent). One of them was appointed as chairman.
  • No later than one week prior to the date of the audit, the auditor appointed must be contacted in order to perform the audit preparation. If there is an auditor who is absent, it will have that ready or directly will be replaced by MM. The auditor will confirm the return time of the audit by the Chief of the Division concerned. If forced to do the schedule change, the auditor shall confirm to MM.
  • If necessary MM will be observers and / or other personnel invited to be an observer.

2. Reporting Audit Results

  • After conducting the audit, the auditor prepares a report to mismatches are found, using form Incompatibility Report.
  • In writing the discrepancies in Form, auditors must complete the fields provided and describe the mismatch encountered by working four elements of the findings included in the report, namely:
  • Description of incompatibility (non conformance)
  • The real proof (objective evidence) of the nonconformity
  • Aspect / process mismatch
  • Incompatibility with certain documents.
  • Internal audit reports signed by the Chief Auditor prior to submission to the Coordinating audited for agreement to mismatches, the determination of corrective and preventive actions to be taken by the respective sections.
  • If necessary MM can make changes to the description of the nonconformity before made a copy of it, both editorial changes, changes to categories, cancellation for reasons of lack / not supported by objective evidence, or changes in the number because it has been incorporated into major discrepancies that categorized.
  • As long as there is no agreement yet on the results of audits and corrective actions / preventive from a related field, then Chairman of the Auditor is responsible for reporting status. The report has been considered adequate to be submitted to MM to be studied and made copies to distribute.
  • If the areas to be audited have been fulfilling their corrective and preventive actions before the agreed date, the field will tell MM for verification. If MM did not get the information from the section on the status of corrective and preventive actions, then MM will be verified at the time agreed.
  • And if the corrective and preventive actions have not been carried out at the agreed time, the Head of Division in charge of the system on its part must be made in writing the reasons why such measures have not been done and determine the time of repair. If during the next verification (as agreed) have yet to make corrective and preventive actions, then MM made a discrepancy for the same case.
  • If necessary, the MM may propose actions or changes in the corrective or preventive actions proposed by the Chief of the Division is concerned, with some consideration to support the implementation of quality systems.
  • The audit report will be the basis of a study by the Management Review Meeting.
  • If there is any suggestion or request the correction of the external auditors, the report’s findings and responses follow the steps as in internal audit.