Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) July 16, 2009 Co-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA Karen.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) July 16, 2009 Co-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA Karen."— Presentation transcript:

1 NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) July 16, 2009 Co-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA Karen Riepenkroger, Sprint Nextel

2 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report2 Contents Performance Rating Categories NANPA and PA 2007 Performance Reports NANPA and PA 2008 Performance Reports NANPA Change Orders PA Change Orders 2009 Meeting Schedule

3 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report3 Performance Report Rating Categories Satisfaction Rating Used when the NANPA and PA... EXCEEDED Exceeded performance requirement(s) Provided excellence above performance requirements and exceeded expectations Performance was well above requirements Decisions and recommendations exceeded requirements and expectations MORE THAN MET Met and often went beyond performance requirement(s) Provided more than what was required to be successful Performance was more than competent and reliable Decisions and recommendations usually exceeded requirements and expectations MET Met performance requirement(s) Met requirements in order to be considered successful Performance was competent and reliable Decisions and recommendations were within requirements and expectations SOMETIMES MET Sometimes met performance requirement (s) Was inconsistent in meeting performance requirements Performance was sometimes competent and reliable Decisions and recommendations were sometimes within requirements NOT MET Did not meet performance requirement(s). Administrative tasks and objectives were not within requirements in order to be considered successful Performance was unreliable and commitments were not met Decisions and recommendations were inconsistent with requirements N/A Did not observe activity or does not apply to service provider/regulator

4 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report NANPA and PA Performance Reports 2007 NANPA and PA Performance Reports were approved by the NANC via process in Performance Rating for the NANPA was More than Met 2007 Performance Rating for the PA was More than Met

5 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report5 Summary 2008 PA Performance Report The PAs annual performance assessment is based upon: 2008 Performance Feedback Survey Written comments and reports Annual Operational Review NOWG observations and interactions with the PA

6 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report6 Summary 2008 PA Performance Report The PAs rating for the 2008 performance year was determined by the NOWG to be More than Met. This rating is defined below:

7 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report7 Summary 2008 PA Survey Respondents The number of respondents to the 2008 PA Survey was up from 2007 for the regulators and down slightly from 2007 for the service providers. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the PA performance survey:

8 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report8 Summary 2008 PA Performance Report Pooling Administrator (Section A) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 80 cumulative responses rating PAs performance as Exceeded, 60 cumulative responses as More than Met, 29 cumulative responses as Met, and one response as Sometimes Met. Implementation Management (Section B) There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 14 cumulative responses rating PAs performance as Exceeded, 16 cumulative responses as More than Met, and 13 cumulative responses as Met.

9 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report9 Summary 2008 PA Performance Report Pooling Administration System (PAS) (Section C) There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 63 cumulative responses rating PAs performance as Exceeded, 72 cumulative responses as More than Met, 48 cumulative responses as Met, and three cumulative responses as Sometimes Met. PA Website (Section D) There was one question in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 18 cumulative responses rating PAs performance as Exceeded, 27 cumulative responses as More than Met, and 24 cumulative responses as Met.

10 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report10 Summary 2008 PA Performance Report Miscellaneous Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section E) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 70 cumulative responses rating PAs performance as Exceeded, 70 cumulative responses as More than Met, 57 cumulative responses as Met, and two cumulative responses as Sometimes Met. Overall Assessment of Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section F) There was one question in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 22 responses rating PAs performance as Exceeded, 30 responses as More than Met, and 18 cumulative responses as Met.

11 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report11 Summary 2008 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: Supportive, responsive, prompt, and courteous Extremely helpful, knowledgeable, and professional Always a pleasure to work with Provides exceptional service Possesses a clear understanding of the process Takes extra steps to assist and provide immediate answers to questions.

12 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report12 Summary 2008 PA Performance Report Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated. Notable comments related to difficulties associated with: PA website data and navigation Reclamation process and Part 4 submissions PAS functionality when transitioning to the new enhanced PAS system.

13 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report13 Summary – NOWG Observations 2008 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.

14 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report14 Summary - Suggestions 2008 PA Performance Report The NOWG recommends that the PA focus on the following improvements: Continue to proactively manage rate center inventories to ensure resources are available when needed. Continue to consider process improvement suggestions provided by service providers and/or regulators in the survey comments. Continue customer focus. In addition to the cumulative method of reporting block reclamation, the NOWG recommends the PA provide a incremental block reclamation report. The NOWG recommends the PA prepare a monthly NANC report providing the NANC members with the current status of pooling activity.

15 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report15 Summary 2008 NANPA Performance Report The NANPAs annual performance assessment is based upon: 2008 Performance Feedback Survey Written comments and reports Annual Operational Review NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA

16 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report16 Summary 2008 NANPA Performance Report NANPAs rating for the 2008 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be Exceeded. This rating is defined below:

17 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report17 Summary 2008 NANPA Survey Respondents The number of respondents to the 2008 NANPA Survey was up from 2007 for regulators. The number of respondents from service providers and others was down in 2008 from The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the NOWG performance survey:

18 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report18 Summary 2008 NANPA Performance Report CO (NXX) Administration (Section A) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 67 cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance as Exceeded, 28 cumulative responses as More than Met, 17 cumulative responses as Met, and one response as Sometimes Met. NPA Relief Planning (Section B) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 76 cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance in this section as Exceeded, 28 cumulative responses as More than Met, 14 cumulative responses as Met, and one response as Not Met. Numbering Resource Utilization/Forecast (NRUF) (Section C) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 67 cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance in this section as Exceeded, 40 cumulative responses as More than Met, 23 cumulative responses as Met, and one response as Sometimes Met.

19 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report19 Summary 2008 NANPA Performance Report Other NANP Resources (Section D) There was one question in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were six cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance in this section as Exceeded, five cumulative responses as More than Met, four cumulative responses as Met, and one response as Not Met. NANP Administration System (NAS) (Section E) There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 48 cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance in this section as Exceeded, 26 cumulative responses as More than Met, and 20 cumulative responses as Met.

20 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report20 Summary 2008 NANPA Performance Report NANPA Website (Section F) There was one question in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 26 cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance in this section as Exceeded, 13 cumulative responses as More than Met, 12 cumulative responses as Met, two cumulative responses as Sometimes Met, and one response as Not Met. Overall Assessment of the NANPA (Section G) There was one question in this section to which respondents provided ratings. There were 23 cumulative responses rating NANPAs performance in this section as Exceeded, 21 cumulative responses as More than Met, and 10 cumulative responses as Met.

21 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report21 Summary 2008 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: Very helpful, pleasant, and friendly Knowledgeable, courteous, and patient Responsive, accurate, and professional There were no recurring comments for suggested improvements. 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.

22 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report22 Summary - NOWG Observations 2008 NANPA Performance Report Consistent level of satisfaction revealed: NANPA focuses on Customer Satisfaction Significant praise for NANPA staff was a consistent theme throughout the survey results Cooperation with the NANC, NOWG, FCC and State Regulators NANPA continued to display leadership, initiative, professionalism, and expertise Proactively introduced new INC issues and contributions.

23 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report23 Summary - NOWG Observations 2008 NANPA Performance Report The NANPA continued to effectively manage all aspects of NPA relief activity in Throughout 2008, the NANPA personnel continued to consistently exhibit their professionalism and expertise while performing NANPA duties.

24 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report24 Performance Reports Approval NANC approval of 2008 Performance Reports

25 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report25 NANPA Change Order Recommendations Change Order NumberDate FiledSummaryCostNOWG StatusFCC Action NANPA Implemented Changes (Date) 169/17/2008 INC Issue 591: Change Timeline of Part 1 / Part 3 Processing for NANPA$9, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 9/24/2008 FCC approved on 9/27/2008; NOWG notified on 10/14/200811/17/ /13/2009 INC Issue 613: Notification of a Service Provider Missing the Part 4 Due Date$4, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 3/26/2009 FCC approved on 4/8/2009; NOWG notified on 4/28/20095/15/ /13/2009 INC Issue 611: Augmenting the NRUF Verfication Procedures$29, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 3/26/2009

26 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report26 PA Change Order Recommendations Change Order NumberDate FiledSummaryCostNOWG StatusFCC Action PA Implemented Changes (Date) 26/13/2008 INC Issue # Update TBPAG to Limit Timeframe for Block Reservations12, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 6/30/2008 FCC approved on 7/2/2008; NOWG informed by PA on 7/2/20089/27/ /8/2008 User-Proposed Enhancements to PAS$20, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 9/8/2008 FCC approved on 10/7/2008; NOWG informed by PA on 10/14/20081/16/ /17/2008 INC Issue #591 - Change Timeline of Part 1 / Part 3 Processing for NANPA$9, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 9/24/2008 FCC approved on 10/7/2008; NOWG informed by PA on 10/14/200811/14/ /21/2008 INC Issue #602 - Checking returned block in the NPAC$33, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 12/10/2008 FCC approved on 2/17/2009; NOWG informed by PA on 2/19/2009S/B 7/24/2009

27 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report27 PA Change Order Recommendations (Continued) Change Order NumberDate FiledSummaryCostNOWG StatusFCC Action PA Implemented Changes (Date) 612/18/2008 User-Proposed Enhancements to PAS$18, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 1/12/2009 FCC approved on 2/17/2009; NOWG informed by PA on 2/19/20095/15/ /10/2009 INC Issue # Changes to TBPAG and COCAG for Mass update Modifications$14, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 1/20/2009 FCC approved on 2/17/2009; NOWG informed by PA on 2/19/2009S/B 7/24/ /20/2009 INC Issue #613 - Notification of an SP missing the Part 4 Due Date $6, NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 3/26/2009 FCC approved on 4/9/2009; NOWG informed by PA on 4/20/2009 5/15/2009

28 07/16/2009NOWG NANC Report28 NOWG 2009 Meeting Schedule Contact any of the Co-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details or or Mobile.com (Other meetings for the NOWG may be scheduled as needed beyond what has been identified in this list) Mobile.com MonthActivity July 21 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1pm ET, 1 hr July 21 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm ET, 1 hr August 13 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1pm ET, 1 hr August 25 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm ET, 1 hr September 15 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm ET, 1 hr September 17 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1pm ET, 1 hr


Download ppt "NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) July 16, 2009 Co-Chairs: Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA Karen."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google