nanc report numbering oversight working group (nowg)

NANC Report

Numbering Oversight Working Group(NOWG)

June 7, 2012

Tri-Chairs:Laura Dalton, Verizon CommunicationsNatalie McNamer, T-Mobile USAGwen Zahn, Verizon Wireless

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

2

Summary 2011 PA Survey Respondents

32

7168

55 5350

65

56

40

1925 26

2317

2532 31 30

0

20

40

60

80

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Industry & Other

Regulators

06/07/2012 3

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:

06/07/2012 4

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

06/07/2012 5


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:

Satisfaction Rating Used when the PA...

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

06/07/2012 6


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

06/07/2012 7


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

06/07/2012 8


Miscellaneous Pooling Administration (PA) Functions (Section E)• There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the


Overall Assessment of Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section F) • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the


06/07/2012 9


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

.

06/07/2012 10


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

06/07/2012 11

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.

06/07/2012 12

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

5068

26

140150

69

4736

1534

26 19

4537

17 14 1626 30

22 20 21 21 20 27 27 29 25

0

50

100

150

200

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

IndustryRegulators

06/07/2012 13

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:

06/07/2012 14

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

06/07/2012 15


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

Satisfaction Rating Used when the NANPA...

EXCEEDEDExceeded performance requirement(s) Provided excellence above performance requirements and exceeded expectationsPerformance was well above requirements Decisions and recommendations exceeded requirements and expectations

06/07/2012 16


• 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

06/07/2012 17


• 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

06/07/2012 18


• 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

06/07/2012 19


• 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

06/07/2012 20


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

06/07/2012 21

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.

06/07/2012 22

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.

06/07/2012 23

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• 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.

2406/07/2012

Outstanding PA Change OrdersChange Order

NumberDate Filed Summary NOWG Status FCC Action Scheduled

Implementation Date

22 8/5/2011 INC Issue #698– Auto-Populate Total

Numbering Resources on

TBPAG MTE Form

NOWG Recommendation to Approve to FCC

on 09/07/11

FCC Approved on 12/14/2011

TBD

21 Initially filed on 8/5/2011. Re-

filed on 11/11/2011

INC Issue #710– NANC Action Item “Multi-OCN” Issue


11/30/2011


TBD

20 2/18/2011 Proposed Enhancements

to PAS


on 03/04/11

FCC Approved on

6/17/2011

Tentatively scheduled for

6/29/2012

2506/07/2012

26

Outstanding NANPA Change Orders

Change Order Number

Date Filed Summary NOWG Status FCC Action Scheduled Implementation

Date22 8/05/2011 INC Issue 698:

Auto-Populate Total Numbering

Resources on TBPAG MTE

Form

NOWG Recommendation to APPROVE to FCC on 09/07/11


TBD

21 Initially filed on 8/5/2011. Re-

filed on 11/11/2011

INC Issue 710: NANC Action

Item “Multi-OCN” Issue

NOWG Recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 11/30/2011


TBD

06/07/2012

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.

2706/07/2012

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

2806/07/2012

NOWG Upcoming Meeting Schedule - 2012

Month Activity

June 15 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr

June 15 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 *

August 21 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr

August 21 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2 pm Eastern, 1 hr *

* NOWG-Only Monthly Call following Calls with the Administrators

29

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

06/07/2012 30

nanc report numbering oversight working group (nowg)

Documents

pa performance survey

pa performance reportfollowing

pa performance reportcomments

pa survey respondents

pa representatives

performance year

pa website section dthere

pa contract consolidationnowg