Check a Chinese Supplier’s BSCI Audit

A supplier sends a one-page document headed BSCI and asks you to approve its factory. Before accepting it, establish which production site was audited, which audit activity the document summarizes, and whether you can review the findings and subsequent action. A logo and an overall grade leave those questions open.

BSCI audit evidence

amfori BSCI is a social auditing programme used in supply chains. Its output concerns working conditions and related management practices. TÜV NORD’s explanation distinguishes this verification system from certification and cautions that an audit cannot guarantee full compliance. For a procurement colleague onboarding a Chinese manufacturer, the useful question is therefore what this particular audit says about the factory proposed for the order.

Suppliers may call the attachment a “BSCI certificate.” Ask what the file actually contains before drawing conclusions from that wording. It could be a summary, a report extract or a document prepared by the supplier. A polished presentation is not independent confirmation, but a short document is not automatically fabricated either. amfori’s member guidance describes a one-page summary export. That guidance, dated May 2022, also distinguishes the selected site and different completed monitoring activities. Page count alone cannot tell you whether you have the information needed for approval.

Access to the report

Start with the route available to your business. A forwarded file and a result viewed through an authorized platform account give you different opportunities to confirm provenance and review detail. Record which route you used; do not describe a supplier attachment as independently checked when nobody has compared it with its source.

Through your member account

If your organization has appropriate amfori access and a relationship with the business partner, ask the authorized colleague to locate the relevant site and audit activity. Compare the document with the information available there, including the activity date and the recorded result. Also establish whether a newer activity is present. The dated member instructions describe these distinctions; the precise interface and your permissions must be checked in your current account. Finding the supplier profile is only the starting point. It does not establish that the attached PDF belongs to the proposed factory or that the selected activity is the latest one you need to consider.

Through the supplier

Ask the supplier’s authorized contact to retrieve the relevant material from its own platform account. amfori’s business-partner guidance, dated February 2022, explains that report access is tied to the monitoring activity. Ask for the available detailed findings and follow-up information as well as the summary. Establish what has been omitted or redacted. Keep the original files and the message explaining where they came from; a translation or a slide assembled from several reports should remain separate from the underlying material. Never ask a supplier to hand over its account password.

Unresolved report access

Tell the supplier exactly what is missing: the relevant site, the activity reference, the detailed findings, or the connection to a later follow-up. If authenticity is disputed, contact the named auditing organization using contact details found independently on its own website. Ask whether it can confirm the particular record or explain the appropriate verification route; it may require authorization before sharing details. A delay, restricted access or an unavailable page leaves a question unresolved. It does not establish either a successful check or a false report. The procurement owner then decides whether to wait, obtain other appropriate assurance, or keep the supplier’s approval pending.

The audited production site

The audit needs to relate to the place where your goods will be made. Read the site information before discussing the grade. An exporter, a group company and a factory can have connected commercial roles without being the same audited operation. Ask the supplier to explain those roles in the documents for this order.

Business partner and legal entity

Preserve the names and identifiers actually shown in the report. Ask for the factory’s Chinese legal name and compare it with the business license and order documents. An English trading name is not enough to resolve two similarly named companies. If the seller differs from the audited business, request the relationship and production arrangement rather than silently treating the companies as interchangeable.

Site and address

Compare the physical production address with the address recorded for the audit. A registered office, an older factory or another branch may not be the proposed site. Where English and Chinese addresses differ in formatting, reconcile the location through the original address and supporting documents. Do not reject a harmless translation difference, or overlook a different building or town because the company name matches.

Activity and coverage

Identify the audit activity, date and type from the available record. Read its stated coverage and any limitations. If a supplier presents several attachments, keep each one attached to its own activity. Do not combine a favorable grade from one file with a site address from another to create an apparently complete result that no single record supports.

Production and subcontracting

Ask where the main production and any outsourced operations for your order will take place. A report for the sewing site should not automatically be extended to a separate dyeing or finishing operation. This is an order-specific question for the supplier and your responsible-sourcing team; the presence of a group name does not answer it. Document which proposed operations still need clarification.

A changed factory is a reason to revisit applicability, even when the PDF’s date looks recent. Ask when production moved and whether the material being relied on describes the new location. Similarly, an audit of a proposed subcontractor does not explain who will actually use that subcontractor for your order. Keep the production arrangement and the audit’s scope connected throughout onboarding.

Ratings across audit history

Read the grade in the activity that produced it, then follow the response to its findings. A later document may describe a narrower assessment. The sequence below connects the full audit, corrective action, follow-up and your procurement review; it does not prescribe fixed dates or an automatic approval threshold.

1. The full audit establishes the starting point. SGS describes BSCI audits as covering 13 performance areas and producing an A–E rating. The areas include working hours, remuneration, occupational health and safety, and protection against child and forced labour. Identify the site, activity date, overall result and detailed findings. amfori’s rating explanation says individual areas also receive ratings and crucial questions affect the result. Read the issues relevant to your customer’s requirements. Do not invent a percentage score from a letter or assume that a topic absent from a summary was assessed favorably. At this point, you should be able to say which assessment the supplier relies on and which findings still require a response.
2. Corrective action describes the response. Connect each supplier explanation to the finding it addresses. Record the proposed or completed action and the evidence available to the authorized reviewer. Keep an action promised for the future distinct from one already implemented. A supplier statement, a revised policy or a photograph can help explain a response; it does not establish that an auditor has verified implementation. For a finding about working-hour records, for example, an updated blank attendance form alone does not show what happened during later production. Ask what implementation evidence has been reviewed and what remains outstanding. This is a practical reading example, not a new BSCI evidence rule. Avoid requesting unnecessary personal employee information when a suitably protected explanation or authorized review can answer the question.
3. A follow-up adds a defined assessment. Establish which earlier activity it relates to and what it reviewed. SGS distinguishes full audits covering all performance areas from interim follow-ups focused on areas needing further evidence of progress. Read the updated findings within that scope. If the follow-up concentrated on particular areas, avoid reporting that every aspect of the factory was comprehensively rechecked on that date. If several issues appeared in the earlier material, determine which the later record addresses and which remain unclear. A newer file should be read alongside the relevant previous record, not used to discard inconvenient older findings without explanation. Where the relationship between reports is missing, ask for clarification instead of selecting the most reassuring attachment.
4. Your approval uses the current position. At the time of procurement review, check the latest activity and any displayed validity information available through the authorized route. Compare that position with the factory and operations now proposed. SGS gives a two-year full-audit cycle; that is not permission to accept every document for two years without considering findings, intervening activities and customer requirements. Record the date you checked the material. Ask the approval owner to state the applicable threshold, any issue that prevents approval and the evidence required for outstanding action. An internet grading chart is not your customer’s acceptance policy. A saved screenshot of an earlier status cannot answer whether something changed afterward, and even a current record needs to cover the relevant site.

“We have a new report.”

Establish whether it records a new full audit, a follow-up, or merely a newly downloaded copy of an older result. Those events answer different questions. Ask for the activity type and date before describing the factory as recently assessed. A fresh filename or email timestamp does not resolve the audit chronology.

“The problem is fixed.”

Separate the supplier’s account of the action from the evidence of implementation and the result of any subsequent verification. If only a plan has been supplied, record it as a plan. The buyer may decide how to manage that outstanding requirement, but should not change its status to verified solely because the supplier expects a favorable follow-up.

“The grade is good enough.”

Return to the requirement set by your customer or responsible-sourcing team. Check whether its acceptance conditions concern specific issues as well as an overall grade. Even an acceptable social-audit result cannot establish product quality, capacity or willingness to honor a purchase contract. Those are separate questions for onboarding.

Supplier approval conditions

The requirement is met

State the production site, the audit activity relied on and how its source was checked. Record who reviewed the findings against the customer's stated conditions. Keep that conclusion limited to the social-audit requirement it satisfies. Before production proceeds, revisit it if the proposed factory, subcontracting or relevant audit information changes. A colleague should be able to see why this particular material was accepted, rather than finding only a tick beside “BSCI.”

Further material is needed

Identify the missing item and the person who can obtain it: for example, detailed findings behind a summary or a follow-up linked to a specified earlier activity. Name the person in your team responsible for reviewing the answer and when the purchasing decision needs it. If the supplier provides only part of the answer, keep the remaining item open. Do not label the entire review complete because a newer attachment arrived.

Source or site is disputed

Describe the exact mismatch and preserve both versions of the information. Ask the appropriate supplier contact or auditing organization to resolve it through an authorized route. Keep approval pending where that discrepancy prevents you from establishing the required coverage. This records an unresolved condition without accusing a real company of fabrication. Your approval owner decides what further assurance is appropriate; a favorable letter grade cannot resolve a disputed factory identity.

Sources reviewed on 9 September 2026. The linked amfori access instructions are dated 2022 and are used to explain roles and document distinctions, not to claim a live test of a member account. Confirm current account permissions and programme requirements with the relevant authorized party.