The MSO's billing team recognized the need to accurately identify local usage and separate it from interLATA. It knew the importance of assigning the proper jurisdiction to traffic terminating on its network, but like many service providers, this one struggled to properly separate local from toll calls.

The MSO had several areas within its billing process poised for improvement once a local calling area database was in place. First, the team wanted faster resolution of bills that were in dispute due to jurisdictional issues. Second, it wanted the ability to verify the accuracy of CABS invoices received from other carriers, as well as the percent local usage (PLU) and percent intrastate usage (PIU) factors supplied by other carriers. Finally, the clean-up of some of the usage that was out erroring out of the billing process seemed viable if an accurate local calling area data source could be implemented. Tele-Tech's "Localizer" database enabled these projects to move forward.

Several months after adding the Localizer to its mediation and billing processes, the team was ready to measure the results of its efforts. Analysis showed the company generated an increase in revenue averaging 4% each month during the first seven months. This revenue increase is partly attributed to the ability to accurately identify, and confidently bill for, intrastate toll usage.

The revenue increase was also partly attributed to success in cleaning up its "No BAN" error file. This file contains usage records from carriers with which the company did not have interconnection agreements. Absent an interconnection agreement specifying how local traffic would be billed, the service provider was able only to bill for the toll records. But the team was not confident doing so, because it had no sure fire way of determining which calls were toll and which were local. Running these records against the Localizer enabled the determination of the correct jurisdiction and the team could bill with a higher level of confidence that the invoices would not be disputed.

The overall dispute resolution process also improved significantly after Localizer's implementation. A large percentage of CABS disputes arose from claims that the jurisdiction billed was incorrect. Resolution of these disputes often requires carriers to supply sample records to demonstrate that the jurisdiction reflected in the bill is correct. As an independent, third-party source, "the Localizer provides almost irrefutable proof that our billed jurisdictions are accurate," says the MSO's CABS Analyst. "We have seen a definite decrease in usage disputes since implementing the Localizer."

In fact, the company previously dealt with nearly $900,000 in disputed revenue each month due to jurisdictional issues. Five months after inserting Localizer into the process, this amount dropped to just $250,000 for the month.

Finally, sound financial practices dictate that the accuracy of incoming payables from other carriers be verified. Toward that objective, the Localizer enabled the incorporation of the local calling area tables into a central usage analysis database, streamlining the process of payables verification and improving the accuracy of the results. The additional objective of verifying PLU and PIU also came to fruition, because the MSO was able to automate what was previously a manual process that required a great deal of analysis and time. Since factors supplied by other carriers are not usually verified, nor are they updated often by the supplying carrier, an automated process of verify them leads to more accurate billing.

"All of these enhancements, made possible by the Localizer, greatly improve the analysis tools available to everyone in our company," a CABS Analyst said.