MTAC Focus Group Sessions

Updated: ______

MTAC Focus Group Session Notes Wednesday, August 23, 2017

ENTERPRISE ANALYTICS/DATA USAGE Isaac Cronkhite, USPS VP- Enterprise Analytics Angelo Anagnostopoulos, MTAC Industry Leader, Enterprise Analytics and Data Usage

Session 1: FIRST-CLASS (TATE, MTAC Industry Leader)

DISCUSSION TOPIC Informed Visibility (IV) Data migration is under way - running data on IV and IMb tracing, secure FTP has been a challenge and extended cutover for IMb tracing to November 30, transparency issue – known and published issues list (Steve is committed to supplying this), have a fix going in place today to address the latency (firewalls) of data Sharon Harrison: better visibility in UAA mail? – industry is concerned about visibility of why mail isn’t being delivered/misdelivered, not as interested in having visibility throughout mail delivery process, can Enterprise Analytics (EA) package information in a way that is meaningful, so you can see patterns, Jim Wilson suggests moving to user group 5 Long trend analysis? Have issues where industry doesn’t get data until 6 months later and then they cleanse it and send to Kai Fisher and she can’t go back that far in her data to assist (Steve will discuss w Jim and see what we can do) Can carriers leverage MDDs to capture UAA scans on the spot (affects carrier contracts – rural, discussion for ops, Enterprise Analytics, etc) IV Insights Newsletters – every 2 weeks In September will have a scorecard for IV 43 customers piloting IV and IMb tracing data validation Secure FTP: 3 step process to convert to secure FTP, took Angelo about 3 seconds, it’s just changing a port to secure IV tracking and reporting: 95% rule – if edoc submitter full-service they get visibility, if they have a non full-service piece, if they give us data 95 of time we’ll continue to provide data Addressing Military wants to change some addressing structures, would be a challenge for industry customers so we need a CASS cycle, USPS/industry to evaluate rolling update of CASS cycle updates instead of fixed, Review potential for more frequent updates of AMS data. 2 Full Service STIDS generating over 140 million hardcopy notices ($82M/yr opp) – industry thinks Jim Wilson should initiate communication to these customers, electronic address corrections – need to discuss w industry

ACTION ITEMS  Investigate leveraging logical delivery events for UAA analysis Enterprise Analytics and Data Usage– August 2017 Page 1 Updated: ______

Session 2: MARKETING MAIL (FLANAGAN, MTAC Industry Leader)

DISCUSSION TOPIC IV Value of visibility – free of charge, measurement, intelligence to keep mail relevant, insight from entry to mailbox IV - open to anyone who wants to onboard (43 right now) Data validation – am I getting what I am expecting from IMb to IV, how can we help industry understand what is IV vs IMb (legacy) – we run the data and run a comparison, the data matches 100 but challenge how to make it match when we provide data to customers (99.36%) Latency – implemented fix, published IV issues log and now available Non full-service mailing but want visibility, concept of 95% business rule, if you’re in full-service for 95% of the time we’re going to continue to give you visibility for non full-service mailings, if you’re falling out of tolerance we may send a notice Need to know entry point, unique barcodes and accurate routing zip – e-doc lite?? If we have those 3 measurements we can measure the mail/get visibility Manual bullpen – pilot going into effect Sept timeframe, visibility on scans Mail visibility application – measure volume on origin entry mail when transportation goes further than plants (long haul) - detached mail unit Bundle breakage – provision data through IV, leverage intelligence to help improvement IMb planning tool – fixed browser issue, should be able to use Chrome again

ACTION ITEMS  Determine how long legacy scorecard data will be available through BCG and help desk when it goes live through IV platform. Check with TT25  Provide IV Container scan stats

Enterprise Analytics and Data Usage– August 2017 Page 2 Updated: ______

Session 3: PACKAGES (MEDEIROS, MTAC Industry Leader)

DISCUSSION TOPIC IMpb dashboard in que for PTR advancements, provided PC Postage vendors list of customers who are using FTP files, have been messaging customers about the change

New WG 185 to look at addressing issues affecting pkg industry, address quality rules for 2018

Wendy asked: What % are UAA parcels, can we see a trend, are there pockets geographically

Group E – citizen entitled to one free delivery method, free PO Box, trying to build relationship between customer physical address and PO Box, working to get those addresses out of webbats (180,000 improvement over 1M), released data set with those addresses and can be used now, PO Box throwback table – eligible for street delivery but chose PO box

Concern with secondary address assessments. Package mailers said the operations group told them secondary is only needed for 1% of pkgs, 99% of time could get charged secondary fee when the secondary wasn’t needed, think punitive component should be there if it costs USPS but if there is no cost just let them know there is a mismatch

Jim asked: What technology solutions is industry using to address secondary issues, might be other things to look at to provide intelligence not being leveraged

Secure FTP for PTR– shut down at the end of this month, will offer extended timeframe for some customers, making calls to those who have not moved over

Changing look and feel of emails for usps.com

ACTION ITEMS

 Provide UAA parcel trend data: event code, geographic, day of week, request to form a TaskTeam

 Provide an update on timeline for providing industry customers access to package data

 Telecom with package mailers to advise how to use the products related to Group E

Enterprise Analytics and Data Usage– August 2017 Page 3 Updated: ______

Session 4: PERIODICALS (STUMBO, MTAC Industry Leader)

DISCUSSION TOPIC Mailer scorecard data through IV in September

Disposition of mailpiece - based on contents of the barcode, one disposition event you can get manual address correction (dynamic service type DSTID). When FPARS rolled out the STID present in DSTID table if piece undeliverable generated a manual ACS record, not happening consistently when rolling through CFS, sometimes it caused it to generate. When we turned on FPARS that handling of that STID became more consistent, when UAA hit CFS, started doing manual ACS correctly, was an OMG moment, amount of manual ACS coming back shot up significantly. UAA does warrant a deeper dive, look at all UAA across all classes of mail across all slices and dices of mail, any intelligence of pieces handled properly or handled differently, where is this happening – geographic, or just me

Jim asked periodical mailers: Why manual ACS?? 264, 274 400% increase in # of manuals as part of full- service, impact by using wrong STID is $82M a year for First-Class mail, for periodical mailers: 6M notifications a year = $3M a year

Manual ACS were a function of the 80s, Jim posed sending manual ACS in an electronic file to periodical mailers and they (periodical mailer) can send the manual ACS to their customers, will save USPS paper costs

Jim asked: Why are STIDs so complex? Look at eliminating/simplifying some outdated STIDs

Maybe increase in manual ACS is from software some of the binderies were using that have a logic that could be generating manual ACS

Manual bullpen: op codes for mail worked in manual bullpens, gain the nesting intelligence, software changes in the next 30 days, then want to go back and pilot in plants, may see manual scan events associated with your bundles

ACTION ITEMS  Look at a Periodical Task Team on ACS and UAA handling  Visibility on flat volume on entry point discount and mail make up

Enterprise Analytics and Data Usage– August 2017 Page 4