Nanc report numbering oversight working group nowg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 30

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 99 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG). June 7, 2012 Tri-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA Gwen Zahn, Verizon Wireless. Contents. 2011 PA Performance Report 2011 NANPA Performance Report Tri-Chair Election

Download Presentation

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Nanc report numbering oversight working group nowg

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group(NOWG)

June 7, 2012

Tri-Chairs:

Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications

Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA

Gwen Zahn, Verizon Wireless


Contents

Contents

  • 2011 PA Performance Report

  • 2011 NANPA Performance Report

  • Tri-Chair Election

  • Outstanding PA Change Orders

  • Outstanding NANPA Change Orders

  • NANPA and PA Contract Consolidation

  • NOWG Participating Companies

  • Meeting Schedule


Summary 2011 pa survey respondents

Summary2011 PA Survey Respondents

The number of respondents to the 2011 PA Survey was slightly down from 2010 for both service providers and state regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the PA performance survey:


Summary 2011 pa performance report

Summary 2011 PA Performance Report

The PA’s annual performance assessment is based upon:

  • 2011 Performance Feedback Survey

  • Written comments and reports

  • Annual Operational Review

  • NOWG observations and interactions with the PA


Summary 2011 pa performance report1

Summary2011 PA Performance Report

The PA’s rating for the 2011 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than Met. This rating is defined below:


Summary 2011 pa performance report2

Summary2011 PA Performance Report

Pooling Administrator (Section A)

  • There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

    • 92 as Exceeded

    • 71 as More than Met

    • 20 as Met

    • 3 as Sometimes Met

      Implementation Management (Section B) 

  • There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

    • 16 as Exceeded

    • 23 as More than Met

    • 15 as Met

    • 2 as Sometimes Met


Summary 2011 pa performance report3

Summary2011 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:

    • 68 as Exceeded

    • 76 as More than Met

    • 25 as Met

    • 1 as Sometimes Met

       PA Website (Section D) 

  • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

    • 29 as Exceeded

    • 31 as More than Met

    • 8 as Met


Summary 2011 pa performance report4

Summary2011 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:

    • 79 as Exceeded

    • 102 as More than Met

    • 35 as 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:

    • 34 as Exceeded

    • 32 as More than Met

    • 3 as Met


Summary 2011 pa performance report5

Summary2011 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:

    • Provides a high level of support, assistance, and guidance

    • Always professional, informed, and courteous

    • Responsive, helpful, and thorough

    • Goes above and beyond to satisfy their customers

      .


Summary 2011 pa performance report6

Summary2011 PA Performance Report

Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated.

Comments pertained to:

  • Some inconsistencies among PA representatives in accuracy and timeliness of information provided

  • PAS limitations and suggestions for system augmentations


Summary nowg observations 2011 pa performance report

Summary – NOWG Observations2011 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.


Summary suggestions 2011 pa performance report

Summary - Suggestions2011 PA Performance Report

The NOWG makes the following recommendations for the PA’s consideration:

  • Continue to review internal training processes to ensure that consistency in understanding the processes and responding to service providers is communicated to the PA personnel

  • Ongoing review of the website to ensure accuracy and timeliness of data

  • Work with the NOWG on determining the feasibility of automating Telcordia BIRRDS entries of BCD screen data elements (new entries, disconnects, modifications, etc…)

    The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC.


Summary 2011 nanpa survey respondents

Summary2011 NANPA Survey Respondents

The number of respondents to the 2011 NANPA Survey was slightly down from 2010 for both service providers and state regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the NOWG performance survey:


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report

Summary 2011 NANPA Performance Report

The NANPA’s annual performance assessment is based upon:

  • 2011 Performance Feedback Survey

  • Written comments and reports

  • Annual Operational Review

  • NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report1

Summary2011 NANPA Performance Report

NANPA’s rating for the 2011 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be Exceeded. This rating is defined below:


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report2

Summary2011 NANPA Performance Report

  • CO Code (NXX) Administration (Section A)

    • There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

      • 67 as Exceeded

      • 56 as More than Met

      • 15 as Met

  • NPA Relief Planning (Section B) 

    • There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

      • 67 as Exceeded

      • 60 as More than Met

      • 17 as Met


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report3

Summary2011 NANPA Performance Report

  • NRUF (Section C) 

    • There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

      • 74 as Exceeded

      • 68 as More than Met

      • 19 as Met

      • 3 as Not Met

  • Other NANP Resources (Section D) 

    • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

      • 11 as Exceeded

      • 7 as More than Met

      • 4 as Met


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report4

Summary2011 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:

      • 40 as Exceeded

      • 39 as More than Met

      • 21 as Met

  • NANPA Website, Reports, and Industry Activities (Section F) 

    • There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:

      • 58 as Exceeded

      • 72 as More than Met

      • 33 as Met

      • 1 as Sometimes Met


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report5

Summary2011 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:

      • 27 as Exceeded

      • 31 as More than Met

      • 3 as Met


Summary 2011 nanpa performance report6

Summary2011 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:

  • Friendly, helpful, and knowledgeable

  • Professional, prompt, and courteous

  • Competent, diligent, and informative


Summary nowg observations 2011 nanpa performance report

Summary - NOWG Observations 2011 NANPA Performance Report

All comments received were positive, and none suggested any areas needing improvement. After thoroughly reviewing the comments received, the NOWG concluded that the written comments indicated a very high level of satisfaction experienced by those who interacted with the NANPA.


Summary nowg observations 2011 nanpa performance report1

Summary- NOWG Observations 2011 NANPA Performance Report

As in previous years, the 2011 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.


Summary suggestions 2011 nanpa performance report

Summary - Suggestions2011 NANPA Performance Report

The NOWG makes the following recommendations for NANPA’s consideration:

  • Continue to proactively search for ways to improve processes, educate customers, and enhance system functionality

  • Work with the NOWG on determining the feasibility of automating Telcordia BIRRDS entries of ACD screen data elements (new entries, disconnects, modifications, etc…)

  • Implement training videos that will be posted to the NANPA website for NRUF, NAS, Website, and other training, in lieu of live training

    The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC.


Tri chair position

Tri-Chair Position

  • Gwen Zahn (Verizon Wireless) has accepted a new position within her company and has resigned from her position as a Tri-Chair of the NOWG.

  • Karen Riepenkroger (Sprint/Nextel) was nominated and elected by acclamation to serve as Tri-Chair with her term ending at the end of 2013.

  • The NOWG respectfully requests the NANC’s concurrence on the election.


Outstanding pa change orders

Outstanding PA Change Orders


Outstanding nanpa change orders

Outstanding NANPA Change Orders


Nanpa and pa administrator contract consolidation

NANPA and PA Administrator Contract Consolidation

  • The NOWG respectfully requests the NANC’s approval to proceed with an in-depth evaluation of some of the benefits or risks of a consolidation of the NANPA and PA Administrator contracts.


Nowg participating companies

NOWG Participating Companies

  • AT&T

  • CenturyLink

  • Cox Communications

  • EarthLink Business

  • Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission

  • Sprint Nextel

  • T-Mobile USA

  • Verizon Communications / Verizon Wireless

  • Windstream Communications

  • XO Communications


Nowg upcoming meeting schedule 2012

NOWG Upcoming Meeting Schedule - 2012


Nowg meetings

NOWG Meetings

  • Contact any of the Tri-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details:

    • [email protected]

    • [email protected]

    • [email protected]

  • Other meetings for the NOWG may be scheduled as needed beyond what has been identified in this list.

  • NOWG meeting notes and documents are posted at www.nanc-chair.org


  • Login