NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group NOWG June
NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) June 20, 2013 Co-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Karen Riepenkroger, Sprint Nextel
Contents • • 2012 NANPA Performance Report 2012 PA Performance Report NOWG Leadership Outstanding PA Change Orders Outstanding NANPA Change Orders NOWG Participating Companies Meeting Schedule 06/20/2013 2
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report The NANPA’s annual performance assessment is based upon: • • 2012 Performance Feedback Survey Written comments and reports Annual Operational Review NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA 06/20/2013 3
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report NANPA’s rating for the 2012 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be Exceeded. This rating is defined below: Satisfaction Rating EXCEEDED 06/20/2013 Used when the NANPA. . . Exceeded performance requirement(s) Provided excellence above performance requirements and exceeded expectations Performance was well above requirements Decisions and recommendations exceeded requirements and expectations 4
Summary 2012 NANPA Survey Respondents The total number of respondents to the 2012 NANPA Survey was down from 2011. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the NOWG performance survey: 06/20/2013 5
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report • CO (NXX) Administration (Section A) – There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: • 65 as Exceeded • 53 as More than Met • 14 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: • 57 as Exceeded • 39 as More than Met • 21 as Met 06/20/2013 6
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report • NRUF (Section C) – There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: • 62 as Exceeded • 57 as More than Met • 22 as Met • 1 as Not Met • Other NANP Resources (Section D) – There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: • 13 as Exceeded • 9 as More than Met • 8 as Met 06/20/2013 7
Summary 2012 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: • 45 as Exceeded • 34 as More than Met • 19 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: • 61 as Exceeded • 53 as More than Met • 31 as Met • 1 as Sometimes Met • 2 as Not Met 06/20/2013 8
Summary 2012 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: • 28 as Exceeded • 18 as More than Met • 8 as Met • 1 as Sometimes Met 06/20/2013 9
Summary 2012 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: – Timely, responsive, and professional – Courteous, helpful, and knowledgeable – Excellent, accurate, and dedicated 06/20/2013 10
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report NOWG Observations All comments received from the annual survey 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. 06/20/2013 11
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report NOWG Observations As in previous years, the 2012 survey results continued to reveal 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. 06/20/2013 12
Summary 2012 NANPA Performance Report Suggestions 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. • Continue to develop and produce instructional and training videos, such as “How to Request a Growth Code” on the NANPA website. • On semi-annual CIC report filing, send out a reminder notice similar to the NRUF reminder notice. The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC. 06/20/2013 13
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report The PA’s annual performance assessment is based upon: – 2012 Performance Feedback Surveys for the PA and RNA – Written comments and reports – Annual Operational Review – NOWG observations and interactions with the PA 06/20/2013 14
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report The PA’s rating for the 2012 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be Exceeded. This rating is defined below: Satisfaction Rating EXCEEDED 06/20/2013 Used when the PA. . . Exceeded performance requirement(s) Provided excellence above performance requirements and exceeded expectations Performance was well above requirements Decisions and recommendations exceeded requirements and expectations 15
Summary 2012 PA Survey Respondents The number of respondents to the 2012 PA Survey was up from 2011 with an increase in industry & other and the regulator respondents remained the same as in 2011. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the PA performance survey: 06/20/2013 16
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report PA Survey Pooling Administrator (Section A) • There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 103 as Exceeded – 108 as More than Met – 35 as Met – 2 as Sometimes Met Pooling Administration System (Section B) • There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 103 as Exceeded – 88 as More than Met – 63 as Met – 1 as Sometimes Met 06/20/2013 17
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report PA Survey PA Website (Section C) • There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 60 as Exceeded – 76 as More than Met – 50 as Met – 4 as Sometimes Met Miscellaneous Pooling Administration (PA) Functions (Section D) • There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 87 as Exceeded – 107 as More than Met – 90 as Met – 4 as Sometimes Met 06/20/2013 18
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report PA Survey Overall Assessment of Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section E) • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 37 as Exceeded – 43 as More than Met – 16 as Met 06/20/2013 19
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report PA Survey 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 excellent support, assistance, and technical expertise – Always prompt, helpful, and courteous – Professional, friendly, and responsive – Willing to go the extra mile to provide top notch service to their customers. 06/20/2013 20
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report PA Survey Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated. Comments pertained to: • Process clarification questions • Suggestions for PAS and website enhancements 06/20/2013 21
Summary 2012 RNA Survey Respondents 2012 is the first year for the RNA Survey and the following chart represents the number of Industry & Other and Regulators that participated in this year’s survey. In subsequent years, the chart will reflect the trend of respondents with previous years. 06/20/2013 22
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report RNA Survey Routing Number Administrator (Section A) • There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – – 18 as Exceeded 1 as More than Met 2 as Not Met Routing Number Administration System (RNAS) (Section B) • There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – – 17 as Exceeded 3 as More than Met 6 as Met 3 as Not Met 06/20/2013 23
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report RNA Survey RNA Website (Section C) • There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 8 as Exceeded – 7 as More than Met – 4 as Met – 1 as Not Met Miscellaneous RNA Functions (Section D) • There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 14 as Exceeded – 2 as More than Met – 3 as Not Met 06/20/2013 24
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report RNA Survey Overall Assessment of the RNA (Section E) • There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: – 7 as Exceeded – 2 as Met – 1 as Not Met 06/20/2013 25
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report RNA Survey Following is a summary of written comments that were provided by survey respondents: • Outstanding praise for the RNA staff was a consistent theme throughout the survey: – Efficient, organized, and helpful – Polite and responsive. 06/20/2013 26
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report RNA Survey Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated. Comments pertained to: • Suggestions for RNAS and website enhancements • Ability to upload or attach documents rather than sending an email. 06/20/2013 27
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report NOWG Observations The NOWG concluded that the written comments were not indicative of any consistent performance issues for the PA and RNA, and in many cases provided significant praise for individual PA and RNA staffers. 06/20/2013 28
Summary 2012 PA Performance Report NOWG Suggestions 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 and RNA personnel. • Ongoing review of the PA and RNA websites to ensure accuracy and timeliness of data. • Continue to consider process or systems enhancements suggested by regulators and service providers. The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC. 06/20/2013 29
NOWG Leadership • The NOWG Tri-Chair position formerly held by Natalie Mc. Namer is now vacant. • The current and future workload was reviewed by the two other tri-chairs. • On an interim basis, the vacant tri-chair position will not be filled. 06/20/2013 30
Outstanding NANPA Change Orders Change Order Number Date Filed Summary NOWG Status FCC Action Scheduled Implementation Date 1 9/24/2012 INC Issue 692: Update the 5 YY Requirements for Resources and INC Issue 702: Update Service Description for Use of 5 YY Resources NOWG Recommendation to Approve sent to FCC on 10/15/2012 Approved 12/5/2012 Estimated Implementation 3 Q 13 06/20/2013 31
Outstanding PA Change Orders Change Order Number Date Filed Summary NOWG Status FCC Action Scheduled Implementation Date 24 11/6/2012 Enhancement of the FTP Interface with the Pooling Administration System NOWG Recommendation to Approve sent to FCC on 11/16/2012 12/5/12 End of June 2013 23 6/1/2012 INC Issue #715 Update TBPAG for Retrieving a Block Donated/Returned in Error NOWG Recommendation to Approve sent to FCC on 6/12/2012 06/20/2013 FCC Approved Implemented on 4/5/13 on 8/14/2012 32
NOWG Participating Companies • • • AT&T Century. Link Cox Communications Earth. Link Business Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission • Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission 06/20/2013 • Sprint Nextel • Verizon Communications / Verizon Wireless • Windstream Communications • XO Communications 33
NOWG Upcoming Meeting Schedule – 2013 Month Activity June 25 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2 pm Eastern, 1 hr * July 16 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2 pm Eastern, 1 hr * August 27 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2 pm Eastern, 1 hr * * 06/20/2013 NOWG-Only Monthly Call following Calls with the Administrators 34
NOWG Meetings • Contact the Co-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details: – laura. r. dalton@verizon. com – karen. s. riepenkroger@sprint. com • 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 06/20/2013 35
- Slides: 35