Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NANC Report
Numbering Oversight Working Group(NOWG)
May 16, 2006
Co-Chairs:
Rosemary Emmer, Sprint Nextel
Karen Riepenkroger, Sprint Nextel
Natalie McNamer, T-Mobile
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 2
Contents
• NeuStar Notification of the formation of a Wholly Owned Subsidiary
• Summary - NANPA 2005 Performance Report
• Summary - PA 2005 Performance Report
• Attachments - Tracking Documents - NANPA 2005 Preliminary Performance Evaluation Report- PA 2005 Preliminary Performance Evaluation Report
• Meeting Schedule
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 3
NeuStar Notification of the formation of a Wholly Owned
Subsidiary • On April 20, 2006, NeuStar notified the Wireline Competition Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission via Letter, regarding a recent change in the organizational structure of NeuStar, Inc. Specifically, NeuStar created a wholly-owned subsidiary, UDNS Merger Sub, Inc. (UDNS). UDNS was created primarily to facilitate the acquisition of UltraDNS Corporation which provides domain name systems services. Under the purchase agreement, NeuStar will pay cash for UltraDNS. No transfer of NeuStar equity will be involved. UltraDNS is not a telecommunications service provider (TSP) or TSP affiliate. As discussed in the attached letter, NeuStar’s creation of UDNS and acquisition of UltraDNS do not require prior approval by the FCC and are consistent with the requirements of the Safe Harbor Order.
• Chairman Atkinson directed the Numbering Oversight Working Group (NOWG) to consider this notification on behalf of the NANC the same day. The NOWG was tasked with providing feedback to the NANC during the May, 2006 NANC meeting of any issues or concerns regarding the contents of this notification.
• The NOWG reviewed the NeuStar notification to the FCC that it is forming a subsidiary. The formation of UDNS and the notification process both fall with in the parameters of the Safe Harbor Order. No further action by the WG is required.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 4
Summary 2005 PA Performance Report• Total responses reflect a single survey per entity• Increase volume could be related to number of entities participating in
pooling and customer satisfaction level• The number of respondents to the 2005 PA Survey was down slightly
from 2004 for the industry and there was a very small increase in responses from regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the PA performance survey:
PA Annual Performance Review Volume of Responses 2005
32
71 68
1925 26
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2003 2004 2005
Industry
Regulators
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 5
Summary 2005 PA Performance Report
The NOWG considered, reviewed and analyze the
following data: – 2005 Performance Survey Responses including
comments
– PA Operational Review Presentations
– PA Performance and Reports to the NANC
– PA 2005Annual Report
– PA responses to NOWG clarifying questions
– Other NOWG observations
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 6
Summary 2005 PA Performance Report
Based on the PA’s 2005 performance data, the PA’s rating
for the 2005 performance year was “More than Met”. This rating is defined below:
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.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 7
Summary - NOWG Observations 2005 PA Performance Report
• Pooling Administration (Section A) There were six questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings that fell within the Met
and More than Met ranges. There were over 130 cumulative responses rating PA’s performance as Exceeded, 120 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 150 cumulative responses as Met.
• Implementation Management (Section B) There were three questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in
the Met and More than Met ranges. There were over 30 cumulative responses rating PA’s performance as Exceeded, 10 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 20 cumulative responses as Met.
• Pooling Administration System (PAS) (Section C) There were four questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in the Met and More than Met ranges. There were over 75 cumulative responses rating PA’s performance as Exceeded, 80 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 130 cumulative responses as Met.
.
.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 8
Summary - NOWG Observations 2005 PA Performance Report
• Overall Assessment of Pooling Administrator (PA) (Section D)
There were five questions in this section to which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in the Met and More than Met ranges. There were over 150 cumulative responses rating PA’s performance as Exceeded, more than 110 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 130 cumulative responses as Met.
.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 9
Summary – Survey Comments 2005 PA Performance Report
Samples of the written comments received are provided:
• “I can’t say enough good things-these people are very good at what they do-respectful and pleasant.”
• “There are many rate centers where there isn’t an adequate inventory in the pool.”
• “Only issue we continue to have is the timeout feature – would like to see it increased.”
• “Everyone at NeuStar continues to do an outstanding job of effectively managing resources and lending assistance.”
• “The personnel at the PA are always very professional, helpful courteous and friendly.”
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 10
Summary - NOWG Observations 2005 PA Performance Report
Level of satisfaction revealed: • Significant praise for PA staff was a consistent
theme throughout the survey results• Responsive to challenges• Cooperation with State Regulators, FCC and
NANC.• Proactively introduced new INC issues and
contributions
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 11
Summary - Suggestions2005 PA Performance Report
Suggested areas for the PA’s continuous improvement were identified:
– PA to develop an Issue Tracking Document (IT as a formal tracking document – suggested ITD items are:
1. Monthly meetings with the NOWG2. Proactively manage rate center inventories to ensure resources are
available when needed3. PA should initiate new ideas and processes for keeping pools replenished4. Customer focus vs. contractual focus5. Pass through capability from PAS to NAS
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 12
Summary - Suggestions2005 PA Performance Report
Suggested areas for the PA’s continuous improvement were identified:
– PA to develop an Issue Tracking Document (IT as a formal tracking document – suggested ITD items are:
1. Monthly meetings with the NOWG2. Proactively manage rate center inventories to ensure resources are
available when needed3. PA should initiate new ideas and processes for keeping pools replenished4. Customer focus vs. contractual focus5. Pass through capability from PAS to NAS
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 13
Summary 2005 NANPA Performance Report
• Total responses reflect a single survey per entity• Reduced volume could be related to PA Survey and high Customer
satisfaction level• The number of respondents to the 2005 NANPA Survey was down
slightly from 2004 for the industry and there was a very small increase in responses from regulators. The following chart reflects the trend of respondents since the inception of the NOWG performance survey:
NANPA Annual Performance Review Volume of Responses 2005
5068
26
140150
69
4736
17 14 1626 30
22 20 21
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Industry
Regulators
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 14
Summary 2005 NANPA Performance Report
The NOWG considered, reviewed and analyzed the following data: – 2005 Performance Survey Responses and Comments– NANPA Operational Review Presentations– Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) results– NANPA responses to NOWG clarifying questions– NANPA 2005 Annual Report– NOWG Observations– NANPA Performance and Reports at the NANC– NANPA/NOWG Monthly Standing Agenda Meeting
Materials
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 15
Summary 2005 NANPA Performance Report
Based on the NANPA’s 2005 performance data, the NANPA’s rating for the 2005 performance year was “Exceeded”. This rating is defined below:
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.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 16
Summary - NOWG Observations 2005 NANPA Performance Report
• CO Code Administration (Section A) There were 8 questions in this section, which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in the Met and More than Met range. There were over 98 cumulative responses rating NANPA’s performance as Exceeded, 70 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 110 cumulative responses as Met.
• NPA Relief Planning (Section B) There were 9 questions in this section, which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in the Met and More than Met range. There were over 50 cumulative responses rating NANPA’s performance in this section as Exceeded, over 55 cumulative responses as More than Met, and over 70 cumulative responses as Met .
• Numbering Resource Utilization and Forecast (NRUF) (Section C) There were 7 questions in this section, which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in the Met and More than Met range. There were over 70 cumulative responses rating NANPA’s performance in this section as Exceeded, over 70 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 70 cumulative responses as Met.
.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 17
Summary - NOWG Observations 2005 NANPA Performance Report
• Other NANP Resources (Section D) There were 8 questions in this section, which respondents provided ratings that were weighted in the Met range. There were over 5 cumulative responses rating NANPA’s performance in this section as Exceeded, over 10 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 15 cumulative responses as Met.
• Overall Assessment of the NANPA (Section E) There were 7 questions in this section, which respondents provided ratings. There were over 110 cumulative responses rating NANPA’s performance in this section as Exceeded, over 100 cumulative responses as More than Met and over 90 cumulative responses as Met.
.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 18
Summary – Survey Comments 2005 NANPA Performance Report
The NOWG concluded that the written comments were not indicative of any NANPA performance issues and in some cases provided significant praise for individual NANPA staffers. Samples of the written comments received are provided below:
• “NANPA is very organized and efficient and a pleasure to work with.”
• “Web site is difficult to navigate and not user friendly. Information is buried deep within the web site and the search function is not effective.”
• “The personnel at the NANPA have always been responsive and helpful.”
• “There really needs to be a mechanized pass through of the Part 1 from the PA to NANPA. Manual forms are not as efficient.”
• “NeuStar continues to do an outstanding job of efficiently, effectively and professionally managing the NANPA function.”.
• All individual comments can be found in the appendix.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 19
Summary – NOWG Observations 2005 NANPA Performance Report
High level of satisfaction revealed: • Significant praise for NANPA staff was a consistent
theme throughout the survey results• Cooperation with the NANC, NOWG, the FCC and State
Regulators has been exceptional• Displayed leadership, initiative, outstanding
professionalism and expertise • Proactively introduced new INC issues and contributions.
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 20
Summary – Suggestions 2005 NANPA Performance Report
Two suggested Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) additions for 2006:
• Pass through capability from NAS to PAS
• Advanced search capabilities and user friendly web access
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 21
NOWG Time Estimate
The following is a rough estimate of the total amount of time the NOWG collectively and NOWG members individually spent to complete the various NANPA and PA 2005 performance evaluation steps:
NANPA 395 hrs PA 608 hrs
Total hours spent on these projects: 1,003
05/16/2006 NOWG NANC Report 22
NOWG May - July 2006 Meeting Schedule
Contact any of the Co-Chairs for complete meeting or conference call details [email protected] or [email protected] or [email protected] (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
Month Activity
May 17 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm Eastern, 2 hrs
May 25 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm Eastern, 2 hrs
June 27 NANPA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm Eastern, 2 hrs
June 29 PA Standing Agenda Call with NOWG - Conference Call 2pm Eastern, 2 hrs
July 10 Pre-NANC NOWG Conference Call 1:00pm Eastern, 1 hr
