An ISO 9001 precision fabricator whose QA team spent two weeks per cycle hand-linking certificates of analysis and PPAP packets into the MasterControl audit pack. We rebuilt the QA intake as a pipeline: LlamaParse on the typed documents, LandingAI on hand-stamped acceptance signatures, MasterControl as the system of record, the audit thread built during receipt, not during audit prep.
| Part # | Type | Supplier | Rev | Linked |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HX-44021 | CofA, lot 8842 | Ridgepoint Steel | C | linked |
| HX-44022 | PPAP level 3 | Maple Polymers | D | linked |
| HX-44023 | CofA, lot 8843 | Northstar Alloys | B | pending |
| HX-44024 | PPAP level 2 | Cedar Casting | A | review |
| HX-44025 | CofA, lot 8844 | Brightline Plating | E | linked |
| HX-44026 | PPAP level 4 | Foothill Springs | C | linked |
| HX-44027 |
| CofA, lot 8845 |
| Harbor Fasteners |
| B |
| review |
| HX-44028 | PPAP level 3 | Westbrook Gaskets | D | pending |
At a glance
One QA team, one MasterControl instance, one ISO audit cycle nobody wanted to repeat the way it used to run.
The engagement
The stack
ISO 27001 · ISO 9001 · DPA and NDA signed at kickoff.
Before, the QA workbench
The QA team had it running. They had it running because one quality engineer knew every part family, every supplier, and every exception. These were the patterns we found in discovery.
The QA team pulled CofAs and PPAPs from MasterControl, mapped them back to part numbers, supplier codes, and control plans, and built the audit pack by hand. Gaps surfaced late. Any CofA that did not link cleanly to its receipt line meant an hour of backtracking.
Pre-build baseline: 2 business weeks of QA engineer time per ISO audit cycle on linking alone.
Supplier CofAs carried a stamped "accepted by QA" signature on the warehouse copy. That stamp did not reach MasterControl; the typed CofA did. Auditors occasionally asked for the stamped version, which meant pulling the physical folder from receiving.
Pre-build baseline: up to 12% of records needed a physical pull during audit.
Which CofA goes with which receipt, which PPAP revision matches which control plan version, which supplier code on the paperwork maps to which row in the supplier master. The senior quality engineer carried most of it. When he took vacation during audit week once, two people spent three days reconstructing his decisions.
Pre-build baseline: key-person dependency, no written playbook.
What we built
The pipeline follows the same five stages we run on every manufacturing quality engagement. The audit-thread logic is the part we tuned specifically against the client's MasterControl schema.
Supplier mailbox polled on a 10-minute cadence. Supplier portals polled on a 15-minute cadence. Receiving scanner drops to SFTP. Every document assigned a QA ingestion ID before any MasterControl action.
Document type tagged on ingest. CofA, PPAP packet, first-article inspection, control plan, each routed separately. Handwritten and stamped pages routed to the LandingAI model, typed pages to LlamaParse.
Part number, supplier code, revision, lot and heat where present, and any stamped acceptance signature. Revision is the join key for PPAP-to-control-plan linking.
Part resolved against the part master. Supplier resolved against the supplier master. CofA linked to the receipt line. PPAP linked to the control-plan revision. Below 0.95 confidence on any link, the record holds for QA review.
Clean records posted to MasterControl with every link populated. Source attached. Exceptions routed to a named QA queue with the flag in plain English and the specific link named.
After, the numbers the QA lead signs off
Same QA team, same MasterControl instance, same supplier base, same ISO auditor. The pipeline built the audit pack during receipt, record by record, link by link.
The QA lead still owns the exception queue. She still signs off any record where the PPAP revision lags the active part revision. The difference is that the audit pack she used to build in the two weeks before the auditor arrived is now a view, ready on request.
From the QA floor
The audit pack used to be a project. Now it is a view, and my engineers actually get to do quality engineering again.
Quality directorPrecision fabricator, Michigan
Handover
The engagement ends at a clean handover. The QA team runs the pipeline; Hexaa stays on call for a fixed retention period, then steps back.
Related cases
Each links to a named client, a named document, and the system the clean data lands in. We publish only what the client signed off to publish.
Non-conformance reports triaged and routed inside an hour, 93% correct-routing rate. Built on LlamaParse and AWS Textract, integrated with ETQ Reliance.
→Construction · 2025Commercial GC · Submittal queue against the primeSubmittal log reconciliation against the prime contract spec. 1,200 submittals per project, Procore as the system of record.
→Logistics · 2025Global forwarder · Customs packets reconciled28,000 customs packets a month, four-hour clearance window, HTS validated against the product master. Built on LlamaParse and CargoWise.
→Free 30-minute call
You'll leave with a clear next step.
The CofA carries a part number, a revision, and a supplier. The part master carries the active revision. The control plan carries the revision it was qualified against. When all three agree, the record posts with every link set. When the PPAP revision lags the part master, the record holds and names the gap.
