nanc report numbering oversight working group (nowg)
DESCRIPTION
NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG). May 17, 2011 Tri-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA Gwen Zahn, Verizon Wireless. Contents. 2010 PA Performance Report 2010 NANPA Performance Report Outstanding PA Change Orders - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
NANC Report
Numbering Oversight Working Group(NOWG)
May 17, 2011
Tri-Chairs:Laura Dalton, Verizon CommunicationsNatalie McNamer, T-Mobile USAGwen Zahn, Verizon Wireless
Contents• 2010 PA Performance Report• 2010 NANPA Performance Report• Outstanding PA Change Orders• NOWG Participating Companies• Meeting Schedule
2
Summary 2010 PA Survey Respondents
05/10/2011 3
The number of respondents to the 2010 PA Survey was slightly down for both service providers and state regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the PA performance survey:
05/10/2011 4
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
The PA’s annual performance assessment is based upon:– 2010 Performance Feedback Survey – Written comments and reports – Annual Operational Review – NOWG observations and interactions with the PA
05/10/2011 5
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
The PA’s rating for the 2010 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than Met. This rating is defined below:
Satisfaction Rating Used when the NANPA...
MORE THANMET
Met and often went beyond performance requirement(s)Provided more than what was required to be successfulPerformance was more than competent and reliable Decisions and recommendations usually exceeded requirements and expectations
05/10/2011 6
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
Pooling Administrator (Section A)There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:– 110 as Exceeded– 71 as More than Met– 37 as Met – 1 as Sometimes Met
Implementation Management (Section B)
There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
– 27 as Exceeded– 26 as More than Met– 14 as Met
05/10/2011 7
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
Pooling Administration System (PAS) (Section C)• There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided the following
aggregated response ratings: – 87 as Exceeded– 89 as More than Met– 56 as Met– 2 as Sometimes Met
PA Website (Section D) • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following
aggregated response ratings: – 28 as Exceeded– 39 as More than Met– 18 as Met – 1 as Sometimes Met
05/10/2011 8
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
Miscellaneous Pooling Administration (PA) Functions (Section E)• There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following
aggregated response ratings: – 99 as Exceeded– 100 as More than Met– 48 as Met – 3 as Sometimes Met
Overall Assessment of Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section F) • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following
aggregated response ratings: – 33 as Exceeded– 44 as More than Met– 9 as Met
05/10/2011 9
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
Following is a summary of written comments that were provided by survey respondents:
Outstanding praise for the PA staff was a consistent theme throughout the survey:
• Responds to questions quickly and courteously.• Always very pleasant to work with and extremely
helpful.• Provides a high level of expertise and professionalism.• Informative and eager to assist.
.
05/10/2011 10
Summary 2010 PA Performance Report
Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated. Notable comments pertained to:
• PA Help Desk backup support • Training of the PAs to improve the accuracy of
responses and to increase their understanding of the pooling administration process
05/10/2011 11
Summary – NOWG Observations2010 PA Performance Report
The NOWG concluded that the written comments were not indicative of any consistent performance issues, and in many cases provided significant praise for individual PA staffers.
05/10/2011 12
Summary - Suggestions2010 PA Performance Report
The NOWG recommends that the PA focus on the following improvements:
• Review internal training processes to ensure that consistency in understanding the processes and responding to service providers is communicated to the PA personnel.
• Continue the proactive NPAC Scrub project to clean-up the over contaminated blocks in the PA inventory.
• Ongoing review of the website to ensure accuracy and timeliness of data.• Work with the NOWG on review and evaluation of current reports submitted
to the NOWG for monthly standing agenda calls.
The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC.
Summary 2010 NANPA Survey Respondents
05/10/2011 13
The number of respondents to the 2010 NANPA Survey was up for both service providers and state regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the NOWG performance survey:
05/10/2011 14
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
The NANPA’s annual performance assessment is based upon:
• 2010 Performance Feedback Survey • Written comments and reports • Annual Operational Review • NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA
05/10/2011 15
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
NANPA’s rating for the 2010 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than Met. This rating is defined below:
Satisfaction Rating Used when the NANPA...
MORE THANMET
Met and often went beyond performance requirement(s)Provided more than what was required to be successfulPerformance was more than competent and reliable Decisions and recommendations usually exceeded requirements and expectations
05/10/2011 16
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
• CO (NXX) Administration (Section A)– There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the
following aggregated response ratings: • 74 as Exceeded• 57 as More than Met• 15 as Met• 2 as Sometimes Met
• NPA Relief Planning (Section B)
– There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
• 64 as Exceeded• 60 as More than Met • 29 as Met
05/10/2011 17
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
• NRUF (Section C) – There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided
the following aggregated response ratings: • 71 as Exceeded • 49 as More than Met• 38 as Met
• Other NANP Resources (Section D)
– There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
• 15 as Exceeded• 4 as More than Met• 4 as Met• 1 as Sometimes Met
05/10/2011 18
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
• NANP Administration System (NAS) (Section E) – There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following
aggregated response ratings: • 44 as Exceeded• 39 as More than Met • 27 as Met
• NANPA Website (Section F) – There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following
aggregated response ratings: • 48 as Exceeded • 40 as More than Met • 25 as Met• 3 as Sometimes Met• 2 as Not Met
05/10/2011 19
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
• Overall Assessment of the NANPA (Section G) – There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the
following aggregated response ratings: • 32 as Exceeded • 26 as More than Met • 12 as Met
05/10/2011 20
Summary 2010 NANPA Performance Report
The following is a summary of written comments that were provided by survey respondents:
Significant praise for NANPA staff was a consistent theme throughout the survey. In many cases, the comments provided praise for individual staff members. The following recurring adjectives were used by multiple respondents to describe their experiences in working with the NANPA staff:
• Competent, courteous, and customer-focused• Accurate, efficient, and helpful• Personable, professional, and conscientious
05/10/2011 21
Summary - NOWG Observations 2010 NANPA Performance Report
Due to the vast majority of positive comments received, the NOWG concluded that the written comments indicated a high level of satisfaction experienced by those who interacted with the NANPA.
05/10/2011 22
Summary - NOWG Observations 2010 NANPA Performance Report
As in previous years, the 2010 survey results revealed a high level of client satisfaction with the continued perseverance, professionalism, and expertise exhibited by NANPA personnel when performing their NANPA duties. The NANPA continued to consistently and effectively demonstrate their expertise as the custodian of numbering resources in all areas in which they were involved.
05/10/2011 23
Summary - Suggestions2010 NANPA Performance Report
The NOWG recommends the following suggestions be implemented for continued improvement:
• Continue monitoring Change Order 18 issues relating to DDR and UMR.• Continue review of the NANPA website for improvements.• Consider implementing training videos, posted to the NANPA website,
for NRUF, NAS, website and other training in lieu of live training.• Consider using live meeting for area code relief planning meetings.
The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC.
Outstanding PA Change Orders
Change Order Number
Date Filed Summary NOWG Status FCC Action Scheduled Implementation
Date20 2/18/2011 Proposed
Enhancements to PAS
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC on 03/04/11
19 1/27/2011 Permanent Routing Number
Administrator(p-ANI)
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC on 02/25/11
24
NOWG Participating Companies
• AT&T• CenturyLink• Cox
Communications• EarthLink Business• Sprint Nextel
• T-Mobile USA• Verizon
Communications / Verizon Wireless
• Windstream Communications
• XO Communications
25
NOWG Upcoming Meeting Schedule - 2011
Month Activity
May 19 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 12 pm Eastern, 1 hr
May 19 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr *
June 13 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr
June 13 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2 pm Eastern, 1 hr *
July 14 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr
July 14 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2 pm Eastern, 1 hr *
* NOWG-Only Monthly Call following Calls with the Administrators
26