Metal AM programs reviewed for AS9100D, ITAR, FAI, and production traceability.

2026-07-30 · Jane Smith

The 6-Step Vendor Vetting Checklist I Use Before Placing Any Order (After a $3,000 Mistake)

When This Checklist Saved My Department

In March 2023, a vendor I'd never worked with promised a 10-day turnaround on a $3,000 metal bracket order. They delivered in 12 days. With missing holes. And no invoice that passed our finance audit. I ate the cost out of my department budget—roughly $800 in expedited shipping for rework.

That's when I developed this 6-step checklist. I'm not a metallurgist or a manufacturing engineer. I'm an office administrator who, after 5 years of managing these relationships, processes about 60-80 orders annually across 8 vendors. This checklist is for anyone who needs to verify a supplier without becoming a technical expert themselves.

Here's the list I wish I'd had in March 2023.

Step 1: Verify Their Client List (Not Just Their Claims)

Don't just ask 'who have you worked with?' Ask for specific project references you can verify. When evaluating a metal additive manufacturing supplier like Velo3D—which serves clients like SpaceX and Anduril—the client list isn't just marketing. It's a signal of whether they've passed the rigorous quality audits those customers require.

What to do: Ask for 3 client references in your industry. Call them. Ask about delivery reliability, invoice accuracy, and how the vendor handled a mistake.

Never expected small-company vendors to hide their biggest failures. Turns out most will claim 'confidentiality' when asked for references from their most recent clients. That's a red flag.

Step 2: Confirm Their Equipment Can Do What You Need

This is where I'm not the expert. I can't tell you the difference between a 5-axis CNC and a 3-axis machine for complex geometries. But I can tell you that asking 'can you actually manufacture this design without support structures?' is a valid question.

For complex parts—especially those with internal channels or overhangs—some additive manufacturing systems (like Velo3D's Sapphire series) are designed to handle these geometries without additional support removal. Standard systems often require time-intensive post-processing.

What to do: Send them your CAD file and ask for a manufacturing feasibility review. A reputable vendor will flag potential issues before quoting. A bad one will promise anything to get the order.

Step 3: Get a Written Quote With All Line Items

Hidden costs add up fast (like setup fees, revision charges, shipping). I had a vendor quote me $450 for a part. After revisions, it was $680. The original quote didn't include 'engineering review' or 'revision processing.'

What to check in every quote:

  • Material cost: for 316L stainless steel powder vs. Titanium Ti-6Al-4V, for example
  • Setup fee (if any)
  • Per-unit price at different quantities
  • Shipping (FOB or delivered)
  • Payment terms (Net 30, 60?)

Based on quotes I've received in Q4 2024 from three different additive manufacturing vendors, pricing for a small production run (10-20 parts) in Ti-6Al-4V ranged from $120 to $190 per part. Verify current pricing—rates change fast. (I really should update my vendor list quarterly.)

Step 4: Check Their Invoicing & Compliance Process

This step cost me $800 in March 2023. A vendor with great parts but terrible paperwork can cost you real money in rejected expense reports.

What to ask:

  • 'Do you provide invoices that comply with standard accounting requirements?'
  • 'Can you provide proof of origin for materials (especially for defense or aerospace applications)?'
  • 'Do you have ISO 9001 (or AS9100 for aerospace) certification?'

According to the International Aerospace Quality Group (IAQG, iaqg.org), AS9100 certification is often mandatory for aerospace suppliers. If you're buying parts for aircraft or satellite applications, verify this before ordering.

Note to self: The vendor who passed my parts test but failed my invoice test cost me 6 hours of accounting team time. 5 minutes of verification beats 5 days of correction.

Step 5: Test Their Communication Speed

I've found that a vendor's responsiveness before you place an order is a reliable indicator of their responsiveness when something goes wrong. If they take 3 days to reply to a simple question, imagine how long you'll wait for a rush revision request.

What to test: Send an email on a Friday afternoon asking a specific technical question (e.g., 'Can you add a clearance note to Revision B?'). If they reply by Monday morning, that's a good sign. If they reply Wednesday, proceed with caution.

Step 6: Start With a Small Test Order

Never scale up until you've verified the first batch. I ordered 50 of a critical bracket from a new vendor. The first 5 looked perfect. The next 45 had defects—micro-porosity in the metal that wasn't visible until we did CT scanning.

What to do: Place an order for 5-10% of your expected volume. Inspect every part. Check dimensions, surface finish, and (if possible) internal quality. If they pass, scale up. If not, you've only lost a small investment.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Mistake 1: Skipping Step 2 because 'they sound experienced.' I've had vendors claim they could handle complex geometries when their equipment couldn't. The result: a two-week delay and a part that looked fine but failed under load.

Mistake 2: Assuming the cheapest quote is the best deal. Part of me wants to save money by going with the low bid. Another part knows that a too-good-to-be-true price often comes with hidden costs (revisions, rework, rush shipping). I reconcile this by getting quotes from 3 vendors and looking for the middle range, not the lowest.

Mistake 3: Not documenting your process. This gets into standardized operating procedure territory, which isn't my expertise. What I can tell you from a procurement perspective is that a documented checklist (like this one) saves you from making the same mistake twice.

Final thought: The 6-step checklist I created after my March 2023 mistake has saved my department an estimated $5,000 in potential rework over the last 18 months. It's not perfect, but it's practical. That's the point.

PreviousNext