May10 NOWG Report
-
Upload
chriscox12 -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of May10 NOWG Report
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
1/28
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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
2/28
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
3/28
05/21/2010 3
2009 Ratings Chart
for
NANPA and PA PerformanceSatisfaction Rating Used when the NANPA and PA...
EXCEEDED
Exceeded performance requirement(s)
yProvided excellence above performance requirements and exceeded expectations
yPerformance was well above requirements
yDecisions and recommendations exceeded requirements and expectations
MORE THAN
MET
Met and often went beyond performance requirement(s)yProvided more than what was required to be successful
yPerformance was more than competent and reliable
yDecisions and recommendations usually exceeded requirements and expectations
MET
Met performance requirement(s)
yMet requirements in order to be considered successful
yPerformance was competent and reliable
yDecisions and recommendations were within requirements and expectations
SOMETIMES MET
Sometimes met performance requirement (s)
yWas inconsistent in meeting performance requirements
yPerformance was sometimes competent and reliableyDecisions and recommendations were sometimes within requirements
NOT MET
Did not meet performance requirement(s).
yAdministrative t asks and objectives were not within requirements in order to be
considered successful
yPerformance was unreliable and commitments were not met
yDecisions and recommendations were inconsistent with requirements
N/A Did not observe activity or does not apply to service provider/regulator
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
4/28
05/21/2010 4
Summary
2009 PA Performance Report
The PAs annual performance assessment is based
upon:
2009 Performance Feedback Survey
Written comments and reports
Annual Operational Review
NOWG observations and interactions with the PA
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
5/28
05/21/2010 5
Summary
2009 PA Performance Report
The PAs rating for the 2009 performance year wasdetermined by the NOWG to be More than Met. Thisrating is defined below:
M RE
MET
et and often went be ond erfor an e re ire ent s
y Provided more than what was required to be successfuly Performance was more than competent and reliable
y Decisions and recommendations usually exceeded
requirements and expectations
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
6/28
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:
32
71 68
55 53 50
65
1925 26 23
17
2532
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
PA Annual Performance ReviewVolume of Responses 2009
Industry &Other
Regulators
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
7/28
05/21/2010 7
Summary
2009 PA Performance ReportPooling 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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
8/28
05/21/2010 8
Summary
2009 PA Performance ReportPooling 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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
9/28
05/21/2010 9
Summary
2009 PA Performance ReportMiscellaneous 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 thefollowing aggregated response ratings:
34 as Exceeded
46 as More than Met
16 as Met
1 as Sometimes Met
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
10/28
05/21/2010 10
Summary
2009PA Performance Report
Following is a summary of written comments that were provided bysurvey 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 areresolved
Always more than willing to help and provide documentation for
different situations Demonstrates professionalism and customer focus
.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
11/28
05/21/2010 11
Summary
2009PA 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.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
12/28
05/21/2010 12
Summary NOWG Observations
2009PA 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.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
13/28
05/21/2010 13
Summary - Suggestions
2009 PA Performance ReportThe 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.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
14/28
05/21/2010 14
Summary
2009 NANPA Performance Report
The NANPAs annual performance assessment is
based upon:
2009 Performance Feedback Survey
Written comments and reports
Annual Operational Review
NOWG observations and interactions with the NANPA
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
15/28
05/21/2010 15
Summary
2009 NANPA Performance Report
NANPAs rating for the 2009 performance year was
determined by consensus of the NOWG to be More than
Met. This rating is defined below:
M
M
et and often went be ond erfor an e re ire ent s
y Provided more than what was required to be successfuly Performance was more than competent and reliabley Decisions and recommendations usually exceeded
requirements and expectations
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
16/28
05/21/2010 16
Summary
2009 NANPA Survey RespondentsThe 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:
68
26
140150
69
4736
15
3426
1914 1626 30 22 20 21 21 20
27 27
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
NANPA Annual Performance ReviewVolume of Responses 2009
Industry
Regulators
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
17/28
05/21/2010 17
Summary
2009 NANPA Performance ReportCO (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 respondentsprovided the following aggregated response ratings:
51 as Exceeded
27 as More than Met
14 as Met
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
18/28
05/21/2010 18
Summary
2009 NANPA Performance ReportNumbering 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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
19/28
05/21/2010 19
Summary
2009 NANPA Performance ReportNANP 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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
20/28
05/21/2010 20
Summary
2009 NANPA Performance ReportOverall 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.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
21/28
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 themethroughout 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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
22/28
05/21/2010 22
Summary - NOWG Observations
2009NANPA 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.
.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
23/28
05/21/2010 23
Summary - NOWG Observations
2009 NANPA Performance Report
The NANPA continued to effectively manage all aspects
of NPA relief activity in2009
.
Throughout 2009, the NANPA personnel continued to
consistently exhibit their professionalism and expertise
while performing NANPA duties.
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
24/28
05/21/2010 24
Summary - Suggestions
2009 NANPA Performance ReportThe NOWG recommends the following suggestions beimplemented for continued improvement:
Continue ongoing enhancements as necessary to NAS and the NANPAwebsite
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 performanceimprovements, and develop an additional document for tracking and
reporting performance activities at the monthly status meetings
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
25/28
05/21/2010 25
PA Change OrdersChange
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 #670Remove
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
of10/1/2010
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
26/28
05/21/2010 26
PA Change Orders(Continued)
Change
Order
Number
Date
Filed Summary NOWG Status FCC Action
Scheduled
Implementation
Date
13 1/14/2010INC Issue #604 - Code
Holder vs. LERG Assignee
NOWG
recommendation
to APPROVE toFCC 1/28/2010
FCC approved
on 2/19/2010
Tentative
implementation dateof10/1/2010
12 1/7/2010
Changes to Trouble Ticket
Reporting
NOWG
recommendation
to APPROVE to
FCC 1/17/2010
FCC approved
on 2/19/2010
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
FCC approved
on 2/19/2010
Tentative
implementation date
of10/1/2010
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
27/28
05/21/2010 27
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
-
8/8/2019 May10 NOWG Report
28/28
05/21/2010 28
NOWG Meeting Schedule
Contact any of the Co-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details
[email protected] or [email protected] orNatalie.McNamer@t-
Mobile.com (Othermeetings forthe NOWGmay bescheduledasneededbeyondwhathas been
identifiedinthislist)
NOWG meeting notes and documents are posted at nanc-chair.org
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 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm Eastern, 2 hrs