1 / 28

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG)

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. Contents. NANPA and PA 2009 Ratings Chart

huela
Télécharger la présentation

NANC Report Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NANC ReportNumbering 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

  3. 2009 Ratings ChartforNANPA and PA Performance

  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

  5. Summary2009 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:

  6. Summary2009 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:

  7. Summary2009 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

  8. Summary2009 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

  9. Summary2009 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

  10. Summary2009 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 .

  11. Summary2009 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 .

  12. Summary – NOWG Observations2009 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.

  13. Summary - Suggestions2009 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.

  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

  15. Summary2009 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:

  16. Summary2009 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:

  17. Summary2009 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) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided the following aggregated response ratings: • 51 as Exceeded • 27 as More than Met • 14 as Met

  18. Summary2009 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

  19. Summary2009 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

  20. Summary2009 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.

  21. Summary2009 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

  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. .

  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.

  24. Summary - Suggestions2009 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

  25. PA Change Orders

  26. PA Change Orders(Continued)

  27. NANPA Change Orders

  28. NOWG Meeting Schedule Contact any of the Co-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details Karen.S.Riepenkroger@sprint.com or Laura.R.Dalton@Verizon.com or Natalie.McNamer@t-Mobile.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 nanc-chair.org

More Related