1 MTAC Work Group 136 Expanding and Enhancing ACS™ Data November 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Move Update & Compliance Fundamentals M & W Printers and United States Postal Service.
Advertisements

Reduce Your Return Mail by One Third! National Postal Forum Nashville TN March 20–23, 2005 Jan Caldwell, Address Management Sharon Harrison, SBC Liz Weber,
® Address Quality Update MTAC Washington, DC August 11, 2010.
NCOA Link® and ACS ™ — Which is Best? National PCC Day September 10, 2014 Audrey Conley, Address Management, USPS ® 1.
ADDRESS QUALITY Joe Lubenow Lubenow and Associates Chair, PostCom Postal Operations Committee PostCom Letter Mail Summit Presented at MTAC 18 May 2006.
 Each year, 17% of Americans move or change their mailing address 1 out of every 6 families moves each year  Approximately 19% of all businesses move.
Simply Powerful Getting the most out of your mailing lists Are Bad Addresses Sabotaging Your Mailings?
® ACS PROCESSING IMPROVEMENTS IN CFS AND DELIVERY OPERATIONS May 26, 2011.
ACS™ – A Primer July 31, Key Address Components USPS ® delivers to:  Over 126 million street or rural style addresses  Over 20 million PO Box.
Director of Solution Strategies GrayHair Software Essentials of Great Addressing What’s in your toolbox? Paula Stoskopf.
® 11 The ROI of Great Address Quality SANTA ANA DISTRICT PCC Scott Jones: Manager Business Mail United States Postal Service ® Jim Green: Postal Affairs.
Mailer’s Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) Task Team 2 General Session Presentation November 16, 2010.
Keeping it Simple: ACS ™ Services – It’s all in the Service Type ID National Postal Forum May 17 – 20 Kai Fisher – Customer Service Support Analyst, USPS.
® New MTAC User Groups/Work Groups/Task Teams Work Group #167: Solutions for Pieces Excluded from Service Measurement Start date: 1/21/2015 Target Completion.
Leveraging the NCSC RIBBS® Site – Understanding What’s Available to You ribbs.usps.gov Ed Wanta, Product Information Specialist, USPS ®
United States Postal Service ® ANK Link ™ The New Address Quality Tool Intelligent Mail Address Quality WEBCAST Monday August 15, 2005 National Customer.
1 Understand The Differences in the Change-of-Address Programs National Postal Forum March 17 – 20, 2013 Michael Tate, SVP Enterprise Postal Strategy,
Postal Automated Redirection System (PARS) John Keegan Manager, Automation Equipment Engineering Mailers´ Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) November.
Mail Entry and Payment Technology MTAC Pritha Mehra VP Mail Entry & Payment Technology February 17, 2011.
Mail Entry & Payment Technologies Mailing Made Easy for Small Business Intelligent Mail for Small Business (IMsb)
Total Address Quality. Total Address Quality 2 OSV At A Glance OSV produces over 500 Million envelopes every year! OSV processes over 4 Million addresses.
Mail Entry & Payment Technology Agenda  Benefits of IMpb  IMpb Requirements Unique Barcode Shipping Services File (SSF)  Postal Wizard Enhancements.
1 Full Service™ ACS™ and Intelligent Mail® Barcoding Lisa West, USPSApril 13, 2010.
Best Kept Secrets of the NCSC Keeping You in the Know! Speaker US Postal Service Anytown, ST Greater Area PCC, 2010 Anytown, ST.
Electronically approve and create Suppliers in Oracle Financials using a combination of APEX and Oracle Workflow. NZOUG Conference 2010 Brad Sayer Team.
Parcel Endorsement Options and Shipper Paid Forwarding 8/05/08.
1 New Move Update Standards Keeping Track of Your Customers Malaki Gravely Business Mail Entry Unit US Postal Service Baltimore PCC March 24, 2011 Baltimore,
ALBANY DISTRICT BUSINESS MAIL ENRTY Intelligent Mail Barcodes for Small Business CustomersIMsB.
1 MTAC WORKGROUP 111 Status Update Nov 1, Work Group 111 Charter Issue Statement: Identify gaps, define solutions, highlight benefits, and improve.
Best Kept Secrets of the NCSC Keeping You in the Know! Speakers: Adam Avrick – Design Distributors Inc Cosmo Infantolino – USPS.
® TOTAL ADDRESS QUALITY & CASS ™ CYCLE “L” Ed WantaBaltimore PCC Address ManagementJune 1, 2007.
® Angela Lawson Manager, Address Technology, USPS ® Magical Efficiency: The Address Management System National Postal Forum April 1 – 4, 2012.
1 Stephanie Miracle, Sr Product Manager, DST Output Lisa West, Manager Address Quality Programs, USPS ® Diving Deep into NCOA Link® and ACS™ National Postal.
Seamless Acceptance Pilot February 20, Agenda Pilot Status Pilot Findings Business Entity Identifier (BEI) Assessment Approach Feedback Options.
1 MTAC 117 Intelligent Mail Barcodes and Electronic Documentation Workgroup Update.
1 Presentation Topics Agenda  January Release  BMA Channel Strategy –eDropship –Expanded Start-the-Clock  MTAC Workgroups.
Importance of Address Element Correction Jan Caldwell Manager, Address Management MTAC Meeting Washing DC, October 28,
® Intelligent Mail ® Barcodes for Reply Mail (Business & Courtesy) MTAC Workgroup 128 Jody Berenblatt, Industry Co-chair Linda Stewart, Postal Co-chair.
Mike Tate Enterprise Postal Strategy Bank of America 2013 National Postal Forum San Francisco, California What You Need to Know about Unique Address Types.
1 Gary Reblin and Jan Caldwell Intelligent Mail & Address Quality Intelligent MAIL ™ in the U. S. Postal Service MTAC February 5, 2004.
MTAC Workgroup 122 Full Service Implementation May 20, 2010.
Address Element Correction Service Level II (AECII) Jan Caldwell Manager, Address Management Mailers Technical Advisory Committee August 2005 Rick Arvonio.
Session Session 15 FAFSA on the Web - Onward and Upward!
MTAC WG 114 MTAC Workgroup 114 Service Performance Measurement Review and Discussion Full Workgroup Meeting July 31, 2007.
IBM Software Group ® Reseller of Transaction Changes to Reseller of Record May 2006 Release.
1 MTAC Work Group #149 Certification of Mail Service Providers for Full-Service December 10 th, 2012.
1 Added Services and Values Using the Intelligent Mail ® Barcode.
MTAC Work Group #82 Parcel Delivery Performance Measurement Effectiveness.
“In-Home Delivery” Instructions for Standard Mail MTAC Presentation February 05, 2003.
Address Change Service (ACS)™ – A Primer. ACS™ debut  In the mid-1980s, Address Change Service (ACS) was developed to provide an enhancement to the manual.
Complete, Correct, and Current Addresses  Complete the address  Leverage software and data to provide the missing information  ZIP + 4®, street name,
® Address Quality Strategy Update. Transformation Strategies Reduce Costs Increase Delivery Point Sequencing to 95% Improve Service Reduce UAA by 50%
MTAC Work Group 136 Kick-Off Expanding and Enhancing ACS™ Data June 7, 2010.
® MTAC Workgroup 104 List Certification MTAC Meeting May 16, 2007.
® MTAC Workgroup #121 Improving the ACS TM / OneCode ACS ® System MTAC Update – February 19, 2009 Postal Workgroup Leader:Industry Workgroup Leader: Lisa.
MTAC Workgroup 100 Seamless Acceptance for MLOCR Environment Co-chairs Industry – Jay Gillotte USPS – Pritha Mehra.
1 MTAC General Session Intelligent Mail Implementation Workgroup 122 April 29, 2009.
® MTAC Workgroup 116 Great Addressing to Increase the Value of Mail MTAC Update November 7, 2007 Postal Co-chairs:Industry Co-chairs: Charles HuntJody.
ENTER To view the PS Form 3546 tutorial slide show, press the F5 key or click on Slide Show at the top of this window. In the dropdown window, click View.
1 MTAC 117 – Periodicals Subgroup  USPS Co-Chairs: Bob Galaher, Ruth Stock  Industry Co-Chair: John Stark  Objective: Identify any constraints and define.
What Are Bad Addresses – Xactly? 1 What are “Bad” Addresses & What Do You Do With Them – Xactly? National Postal Forum Anaheim, CA May 18 th – 21 th, 2007.
® Move Update MLNA and Closed PO Box Process Flow MTAC May 20, 2010.
Understanding Current MERLIN Process vs Proposed Census Method Process
After the FCC Form 471 E-rate Program Applicant Training
Understanding Current MERLIN Process vs Census Method Process
Move Update Census Method & Green and Secure
Choosing the Best Move Update Method for Your Mail
Reduce Your Return Mail By One Third
HB4034 – Duplicate Batch Process
Pre-MTAC Addressing & Geospatial Technology
Presentation transcript:

1 MTAC Work Group 136 Expanding and Enhancing ACS™ Data November 2010

2 MTAC 136 Issue Statement* ACS (Traditional, One Code and Full Service) is an important tool for complying with Move Update requirements as well as best practices for address quality. In order to fully and effectively leverage these essential services, industry seeks to expand and enhance the data returned via ACS. * Developed from MTAC WG 121 Issues List

3 Issue: Enhance the value and understanding of the NIXIE return codes, including understanding the process, data elements, business rules, and final disposition of ACS and NIXIE records. Recommendation:  Synchronize CFS with PARS to provide more consistent data between the two solutions. CFS and PARS should use the same NIXIE Codes, except for “Deceased” which can only be provided by CFS and “Temporarily Away” as a Nixie which can only be provided by PARS. (Expected Release Feb 2011)

4 Issue: Enhance mapping of ACS data usage and its application for keeping source name and address data current. Recommendation:  Recommend that ACS record provide the made-available date as well as the move-effective date.  Recommend that if the move effective date is older than the Made available date, use the made available date. Use this as the start forward  Recommendation from USPS on what to do w/ multiple notifications for the same mailpiece (enhancement to AMEE White Paper and publish in an ACS document).

5 Issue: Evaluate Non-delivery point validated addresses and identify barriers of getting a completed address. Recommendation:  Provide a final (DPV confirmed) new address to the mailer after the COA has been corrected and a DPV is available.  Provide as an optional service to ACS mailers.  Format and content of these notifications TBD.  Continue to drive incentive to send customers to submit their COA online with eventual elimination of hardcopy COA  Flag ACS Record to indicate when new address does not DPV. i.e.“Y” if DPV, “N” if not, or provide codes from:  AME API Footnote Codes  NCOAlink codes  Discount or free for non DPV new address (non-Y)

6 Issue: Understand the difference between ACS and NCOALink data to ensure consistent application and use of data, as appropriate. Recommendation:  Perform a COA lookup in PARS and CFS for ALL mail that is processed as a Nixie, in the same way that PARS is able to do a COA lookup for mail that is processed as “UTF” (Q) and “ANK” (A).

7 Issue: Evaluate fiscal impacts and usefulness to mailing industry of various ACS records, for example, Temporary-Away notices, duplicate COA notices, etc. Recommendation:  Ideally, mailers would like an option to NOT receive “W” (Temporarily Away) ACS notices.  If necessary to provide the notice (i.e. mail is not forwarded), do not charge.  Periodicals ACS COA notices for Employee Generated COA actions (Moved, Left No Address/Box Closed No Order) should be provided in the same manner as ACS Nixie notices (record created for each piece), not according to the ACS Periodical Notification Option.

8 Issue: Enhance the consistency and timeliness of data from all of the ACS solutions Recommendation:  To expand the 45 day period for unique IMb for Full Service ACS to allow for those “later arriving ACS records” to be fulfilled via Full Service.  Develop a process to catch and correct mail class issues prior to billing.  Revisit or redefine management QC of Throwback case mail and MLNA/BCNO hold mail review  Provide a decision tree for how a delivery employee determines the UAA Reason (Nixie)

9 Issue: Periodical ACS Notification options that include hardcopy follow-up will no longer be available Recommendation:  Notification Option 1 will be replaced by: ACS notice at first appearance of periodical after the move effective date with a follow-up ACS notice no sooner than 60 days after the first notice is provided.  Notification Option 3 will be replaced by the “Full Service ACS Notification Option”: ACS notice at first appearance of Periodical after the move effective date, with a follow- up notice provided at each appearance up to 60 days after the first notice, then no further ACS notices will be provided.

10 Contact Information  Kai Fisher:  Barry Russell:  Stephanie Miracle:  Craig Bjork: