NANC Report
Numbering Oversight Working Group
(NOWG)
May 17, 2011
Tri-Chairs:
Laura Dalton, Verizon Communications
Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile USA
Gwen Zahn, Verizon Wireless
Contents
•
•
•
•
•
2010 PA Performance Report
2010 NANPA Performance Report
Outstanding PA Change Orders
NOWG Participating Companies
Meeting Schedule
2
Summary
2010 PA Survey Respondents
The number of respondents to the 2010 PA Survey was
slightly down for both service providers and state regulators.
The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since
the inception of the PA performance survey:
05/10/2011
3
Summary
2010 PA Performance Report
The PA’s annual performance assessment is based
upon:
–
–
–
–
2010 Performance Feedback Survey
Written comments and reports
Annual Operational Review
NOWG observations and interactions with the PA
05/10/2011
4
Summary
2010 PA Performance Report
The PA’s rating for the 2010 performance year was
determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than
Met. This rating is defined below:
Satisfaction Rating
MORE THAN
MET
05/10/2011
Used when the NANPA...
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
5
Summary
2010 PA Performance Report
Pooling Administrator (Section A)
There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the
following aggregated response ratings:
– 110 as Exceeded
– 71 as More than Met
– 37 as Met
– 1 as Sometimes Met
Implementation Management (Section B)
There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided the
following aggregated response ratings:
– 27 as Exceeded
– 26 as More than Met
– 14 as Met
05/10/2011
6
Summary
2010 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:
– 87 as Exceeded
– 89 as More than Met
– 56 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:
– 28 as Exceeded
– 39 as More than Met
– 18 as Met
– 1 as Sometimes Met
05/10/2011
7
Summary
2010 PA Performance Report
Miscellaneous Pooling Administration (PA) Functions (Section E)
•
There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the
following aggregated response ratings:
– 99 as Exceeded
– 100 as More than Met
– 48 as Met
– 3 as Sometimes 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:
– 33 as Exceeded
– 44 as More than Met
– 9 as Met
05/10/2011
8
Summary
2010 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:
• Responds to questions quickly and courteously.
• Always very pleasant to work with and extremely
helpful.
• Provides a high level of expertise and professionalism.
• Informative and eager to assist.
.
05/10/2011
9
Summary
2010 PA Performance Report
Comments suggesting improvements were mostly isolated.
Notable comments pertained to:
• PA Help Desk backup support
• Training of the PAs to improve the accuracy of
responses and to increase their understanding of the
pooling administration process
05/10/2011
10
Summary – NOWG Observations
2010 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.
05/10/2011
11
Summary - Suggestions
2010 PA Performance Report
The NOWG recommends that the PA focus on the following improvements:
• Review internal training processes to ensure that consistency in
understanding the processes and responding to service providers is
communicated to the PA personnel.
• Continue the proactive NPAC Scrub project to clean-up the over
contaminated blocks in the PA inventory.
• Ongoing review of the website to ensure accuracy and timeliness of data.
• Work with the NOWG on review and evaluation of current reports
submitted to the NOWG for monthly standing agenda calls.
The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests
the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC.
05/10/2011
12
Summary
2010 NANPA Survey Respondents
The number of respondents to the 2010 NANPA Survey was
up for both service providers and state regulators. The
following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the
inception of the NOWG performance survey:
05/10/2011
13
Summary
2010 NANPA Performance Report
The NANPA’s annual performance assessment is
based upon:
•
•
•
•
2010 Performance Feedback Survey
Written comments and reports
Annual Operational Review
NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA
05/10/2011
14
Summary
2010 NANPA Performance Report
NANPA’s rating for the 2010 performance year was
determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than
Met. This rating is defined below:
Satisfaction Rating
MORE THAN
MET
05/10/2011
Used when the NANPA...
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
15
Summary
2010 NANPA Performance Report
• CO (NXX) Administration (Section A)
– There were four questions in this section to which respondents
provided the following aggregated response ratings:
• 74 as Exceeded
• 57 as More than Met
• 15 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:
• 64 as Exceeded
• 60 as More than Met
• 29 as Met
05/10/2011
16
Summary
2010 NANPA Performance Report
• NRUF (Section C)
– There were four questions in this section to which respondents
provided the following aggregated response ratings:
• 71 as Exceeded
• 49 as More than Met
• 38 as Met
• Other NANP Resources (Section D)
– There was one question in this section to which respondents
provided the following aggregated response ratings:
• 15 as Exceeded
• 4 as More than Met
• 4 as Met
• 1 as Sometimes Met
05/10/2011
17
Summary
2010 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:
• 44 as Exceeded
• 39 as More than Met
• 27 as Met
•
NANPA Website (Section F)
– There were two questions in this section to which respondents provided
the following aggregated response ratings:
• 48 as Exceeded
• 40 as More than Met
• 25 as Met
• 3 as Sometimes Met
• 2 as Not Met
05/10/2011
18
Summary
2010 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:
• 32 as Exceeded
• 26 as More than Met
• 12 as Met
05/10/2011
19
Summary
2010 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:
• Competent, courteous, and customer-focused
• Accurate, efficient, and helpful
• Personable, professional, and conscientious
05/10/2011
20
Summary - NOWG Observations
2010 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.
05/10/2011
21
Summary - NOWG Observations
2010 NANPA Performance Report
As in previous years, the 2010 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.
05/10/2011
22
Summary - Suggestions
2010 NANPA Performance Report
The NOWG recommends the following suggestions be implemented for
continued improvement:
• Continue monitoring Change Order 18 issues relating to DDR and UMR.
• Continue review of the NANPA website for improvements.
• Consider implementing training videos, posted to the NANPA website,
for NRUF, NAS, website and other training in lieu of live training.
• Consider using live meeting for area code relief planning meetings.
The NOWG requests NANC approval of the report and requests
the NANC Chair to transmit to the FCC.
05/10/2011
23
Outstanding PA Change Orders
Change Order
Number
Date Filed
Summary
NOWG Status
20
2/18/2011
Proposed
Enhancements to
PAS
NOWG
recommendation
to APPROVE to
FCC on 03/04/11
19
1/27/2011
Permanent
Routing Number
Administrator
(p-ANI)
NOWG
recommendation
to APPROVE to
FCC on 02/25/11
FCC Action
Scheduled
Implementation
Date
24
NOWG Participating Companies
• AT&T
• CenturyLink
• Cox
Communications
• EarthLink Business
• Sprint Nextel
• T-Mobile USA
• Verizon
Communications /
Verizon Wireless
• Windstream
Communications
• XO Communications
25
NOWG Upcoming Meeting Schedule 2011
Month
Activity
May 19
PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 12 pm Eastern, 1 hr
May 19
NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr *
June 13
PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 1 pm Eastern, 1 hr
June 13
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 *
*
NOWG-Only Monthly Call following Calls with the Administrators
26