1. NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG)
May 21, 2010
Tri-Chairs:
Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications
Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA
Karen Riepenkroger, Sprint Nextel

2. Contents NANPA and PA 2009 Ratings Chart PA 2009 Performance Report
NANPA 2009 Performance Report
PA Change Orders
NANPA Change Orders
NOWG Participating Companies
Meeting Schedule
05/21/2010

3. 2009 Ratings Chart for NANPA and PA Performance
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 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
05/21/2010

4. Summary 2009 PA Performance Report
The PA’s annual performance assessment is based upon:
2009 Performance Feedback Survey
Written comments and reports
Annual Operational Review
NOWG observations and interactions with the PA
05/21/2010

5. Summary 2009 PA Performance Report
The PA’s rating for the 2009 performance year was determined by the NOWG to be More than Met. This rating is defined below:
05/21/2010

6. Summary 2009 PA Survey Respondents
The number of respondents to the 2009 PA Survey increased from 2008 for the industry and regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the PA performance survey:
05/21/2010

7. Summary 2009 PA Performance Report
Pooling Administrator (Section A)
There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
103 as Exceeded
102 as More than Met
41 as Met
2 as Sometimes Met
Implementation Management (Section B)
There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
13 as Exceeded
10 as More than Met
21 as Met
05/21/2010

8. Summary 2009 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:
90 as Exceeded
82 as More than Met
80 as Met
2 as Sometimes Met
PA Website (Section D)
There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
32 as Exceeded
31 as More than Met
27 as Met
5 as Sometimes Met
05/21/2010

9. Summary 2009 PA Performance Report
Miscellaneous Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section E)
There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
85 as Exceeded
92 as More than Met
77 as Met
6 as Sometimes Met
1 as Not 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
46 as More than Met
16 as Met
1 as Sometimes Met
05/21/2010

10. Summary 2009 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 prompt, courteous, and accurate responses to inquiries
Knowledgeable and supportive in providing expertise
Readily available and go out of their way to ensure issues are resolved
Always more than willing to help and provide documentation for different situations
Demonstrates professionalism and customer focus .
05/21/2010

11. Summary 2009 PA Performance Report
Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated. Notable comments pertained to:
Pool replenishment
Training new Pooling Administrators
Communication to end-users regarding implementation of Change Orders
Suggested PAS enhancements .
05/21/2010

12. Summary – NOWG Observations 2009 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.
05/21/2010

13. Summary - Suggestions 2009 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 the proactive NPAC Scrub project to clean-up the over contaminated blocks in the PA inventory.
Continue customer focus.
05/21/2010

14. Summary 2009 NANPA Performance Report
The NANPA’s annual performance assessment is based upon:
2009 Performance Feedback Survey
Written comments and reports
Annual Operational Review
NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA
05/21/2010

15. Summary 2009 NANPA Performance Report
NANPA’s rating for the 2009 performance year was determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than Met. This rating is defined below:
05/21/2010

16. Summary 2009 NANPA Survey Respondents
The number of respondents to the 2009 NANPA Survey was the same as 2008 for regulators, but was down from 2008 for service providers and others. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the NOWG performance survey:
05/21/2010

17. Summary 2009 NANPA Performance Report
CO (NXX) Administration (Section A)
There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
42 as Exceeded
47 as More than Met
9 as Met
2 as Sometimes Met
NPA Relief Planning (Section B)
51 as Exceeded
27 as More than Met
14 as Met
05/21/2010

18. Summary 2009 NANPA Performance Report
Numbering Resource Utilization/Forecast (NRUF) (Section C)
There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
48 as Exceeded
32 as More than Met
15 as Met
1 as Sometimes Met
Other NANP Resources (Section D)
There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
3 as Exceeded
2 as More than Met
2 as Met
2 as Sometimes Met
05/21/2010

19. Summary 2009 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:
29 as Exceeded
35 as More than Met
11 as Met
NANPA Website (Section F)
There was one question in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings:
15 as Exceeded
23 as More than Met
6 as Met
2 as Sometimes Met
05/21/2010

20. Summary 2009 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:
17 as Exceeded
24 as More than Met
5 as Met.
05/21/2010

21. Summary 2009 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, knowledgeable, and experienced
Proactive, prompt, and efficient
Courteous, professional, and diligent
05/21/2010

22. Summary - NOWG Observations 2009 NANPA Performance Report
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. .
05/21/2010

23. Summary - NOWG Observations 2009 NANPA Performance Report
The NANPA continued to effectively manage all aspects of NPA relief activity in 2009.
Throughout 2009, the NANPA personnel continued to consistently exhibit their professionalism and expertise while performing NANPA duties.
05/21/2010

24. Summary - Suggestions 2009 NANPA Performance Report
The NOWG recommends the following suggestions be implemented for continued improvement:
Continue ongoing enhancements as necessary to NAS and the NANPA website
Conduct training via on-line web conferencing regarding website navigation, search functions and content
Offer refresher training for NAS users as necessary
Utilize the PIP for identifying and tracking performance improvements, and develop an additional document for tracking and reporting performance activities at the monthly status meetings
05/21/2010

25. Scheduled Implementation Date
PA Change Orders
Change Order Number
Date Filed
Summary
NOWG Status
FCC Action
Scheduled Implementation Date 16
5/11/2010
Proposed Enhancements to PAS
Currently under review by the NOWG 15
3/17/2010
INC Issue #670– Remove Attaching Part 2 forms from CO Code
request (Part 1
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 4/5/2010 14
1/15/2010
INC Issue #656 - Update TBPAG Expedite Process for Thousands-Blocks (Section 8.6)
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 1/28/2010
FCC approved on 2/19/2010
Tentative implementation date of 10/1/2010 
05/21/2010

26. PA Change Orders (Continued)
Change Order Number
Date Filed
Summary
NOWG Status
FCC Action
Scheduled Implementation Date 13
1/14/2010
INC Issue #604 - Code Holder vs. LERG Assignee
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 1/28/2010
FCC approved on 2/19/2010 
 Tentative implementation date of 10/1/2010 12
1/7/2010
Changes to Trouble Ticket Reporting
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 1/17/2010
 No implementation date since no changes are being made to PAS 11
1/27/2010
NOWG and Regulator-Proposed Enhancement to PAS
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 2/3/2010
Tentative implementation date of 10/1/2010
05/21/2010

27. Scheduled Implementation Date
NANPA Change Orders
Change Order Number
Date Filed
Summary
NOWG Status
FCC Action
Scheduled Implementation Date 18
3/13/2009
INC Issue 611: Augmenting the NRUF Verification Procedures
NOWG recommendation to APPROVE to FCC 3/26/2009
FCC approved on 2/19/2010 
Implementation is scheduled for Fall 2010 and will use two NRUF cycles to ensure data is correct
05/21/2010

28. NOWG meeting notes and documents are posted at nanc-chair.org
NOWG Meeting Schedule
Month
Activity
May 17
PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1:30pm Eastern, 2 hrs
May 25
NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm Eastern, 2 hrs
June 10
PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1pm Eastern, 2 hr
June 18
Contact any of the Co-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details or or (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 nanc-chair.org
05/21/2010