Q3 2023

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.5, min. 3.1, max 3.8. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.6, min. 4.3, max 4.9. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every contact is now offered the survey (previously 1 in 4). For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate at the end of the phone call (previously offered before connecting to an agent).

Notable for FY23.Q3, question 6 (easiliy understood the response) for the phone channel was down 5% (4.3) vs. FY23.Q2 (4.5). The number of “1” and “2” responses for question 6 were up 65% (1,659) vs. FY23.Q2 (1,010). In contrast, the participation volume for the phone channel was up 22% (14,083) vs. FY23.Q2 (11,603). This feedback will be shared with the TCC leadership.

During FY22.Q1, we made the following changes to the TCC survey processes: 1) increased email survey invitation rate from 25% to 100%, 2) added QA measures to the email survey process to validate outgoing invites, 3) moved phone survey opt-in checkpoint from pre-call to post-call. These changes have increased survey participation during the last 6 quarters (email is averaging 18%, up from 3%; phone is averaging 19%, up from 12%).

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Service details

Q2 2023

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.5, min. 3.0, max 3.8. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.7, min. 4.4, max 5.0. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every contact is now offered the survey (previously 1 in 4). For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate at the end of the phone call (previously offered before connecting to an agent).

Notable for FY23.Q2, question 6 (easiliy understood the response) for the phone channel was up 7% (4.5) vs. FY23.Q1 (4.2) and was up 22% (4.5) vs. FY22.Q4 (3.7). The number of “1” responses for question 6 was down 45% (490) vs. FY23.Q1 (886) and was down 54% (490) vs. FY22.Q4 (1,056). In contrast, the participation volume was down 10% (11,603) vs. FY23.Q1 (12,844) and was up 60% (11,603) vs. FY22.Q4 (7,257). This feedback will be shared with the TCC leadership.

During FY22.Q1, we reviewed the survey process for each channel in order to identify any potential issues. The following changes were implemented based on that review: 1) increased email survey invitation rate from 25% to 100%, 2) added QA measures to the email survey process to validate outgoing invites, 3) moved phone survey opt-in checkpoint from pre-call to post-call. These changes have increased survey participation during the last 5 quarters (email is up 14-17%, max was FY23.Q2; phone is up 3-9%, max was FY23.Q1).

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Service details

Q1 2023

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.4, min. 3.0, max 3.7. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.6, min. 4.2, max 4.9. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every contact is now offered the survey (previously 1 in 4). For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate at the end of the phone call (previously offered before connecting to an agent).

Notable for FY23.Q1, question 6 (easiliy understood the response) for the phone channel was up 14% (4.2) vs. FY22.Q4 (3.7) and was closer to the FY22.Q1-Q3 average (4.4). The number of “1” responses for question 6 (886) was down 17% vs. FY22.Q4 (1,056), but they were still higher than the FY22.Q1-Q3 average (535). In contrast, the participation volume (12,844) was up 77% vs. FY22.Q4 (7,257) and was closer to the FY22.Q2-Q3 average (12,160). This feedback will be shared with the TCC leadership.

During FY22.Q1, we reviewed the survey process for each channel in order to identify any potential issues. The following changes were implemented based on that review: 1) increased email survey invitation rate from 25% to 100%, 2) added QA measures to the email survey process to validate outgoing invites, 3) moved phone survey opt-in checkpoint from pre-call to post-call. These changes have increased survey participation during the last 4 quarters (email up 14-15%; phone up 3-9%).

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Note: We have no phone survey data to report for 10/01/22 through 10/03/22 due to user error (accidental deletion by contractor) (noted on the FY22.Q4 summary).

Service details

Q4 2022

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.4, min. 3.0, max 3.7. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.4, min. 3.7, max 4.9. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every contact is now offered the survey (previously 1 in 4). For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate at the end of the phone call (previously before connecting to an agent).

Notable for Q4, question 6 (easiliy understood the response) for the phone channel was down 16% (3.7) vs. Q3 (4.4) and the average of Q1-Q3 (4.4). The number of “1” responses for question 6 (1,065) were nearly doubled the number for each of the previous three quarters (503, 514, 586). In contrast, the participation volume (7,257) was lower (by 1,000-5,000) than each of the previous three quarters. This feedback will be shared with the TCC leadership.

During Q1, we reviewed the survey process for each channel in order to identify any potential issues. The following changes were implemented based on that review: 1) increased email survey invitation rate from 25% to 100%, 2) added QA measures to the email survey process to validate outgoing invites, 3) moved phone survey opt-in checkpoint from pre-call to post-call. These changes have increased survey participation during the last 2 quarters (email up 15%; phone up 3-8%).

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our new TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Note: We have no phone survey data to report for 07/01/22 through 07/13/22 due to server outages that started during the previous quarter (noted on the Q3 summary). In addition, we have no phone survey data to report for 09/14/22 through 09/30/22 due to user error (accidental deletion by contractor).

Service details

Q3 2022

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.3, min. 2.9, max 3.7. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.6, min. 4.4, max 4.9. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every contact is now offered the survey (previously 1 in 4). For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate at the end of the phone call (previously before connecting to an agent).

During Q1, we reviewed the survey process for each channel in order to identify any potential issues. The following changes were implemented based on that review: 1) increased email survey invitation rate from 25% to 100%, 2) added QA measures to the email survey process to validate outgoing invites, 3) moved phone survey opt-in checkpoint from pre-call to post-call. These changes have increased survey participation during the last 2 quarters (email up 15%; phone up 5-8%).

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our new TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Note: We have no phone survey data to report for 06/05/22 through 06/30/22 due to a series of outages. Outage #1 involved the TCC’s phone data system. Outage #1 commenced on 05/11/22 and was fully resolved on 06/08/22. No data was lost during Outage #1. However, the resolution of the Outage #1 caused Outage #2, which involved the TCC phone survey and directly led to the no data being collected. Outage #2 was resolved in early July 2022.

Service details

Q2 2022

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. The survey is the same for both channels.

We previously reviewed the survey process for each channel in order to identify any issues. The following changes were implemented based on that review: 1) increased email survey invitation rate from 25% to 100%, 2) added QA measures to the email survey process to validate outgoing invites, 3) moved phone survey opt-in checkpoint to post-call. Since these changes, participation has increased (email up 15%; phone up 8%).

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our new TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Service details

Q1 2022

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 2.9, min. 2.4, max 3.4. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.6, min. 4.3, max 4.9. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every 4th contact is offered the survey. For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate prior to entering the wait queue.

We reviewed the survey process for each channel in order to identify any issues that could explain the discrepancies noted above. No definitive issues were identified; however, the following changes are being worked on: 1) increase email survey invitation rate, 2) implement QA measures to the email survey process, 3) move phone survey opt-in checkpoint to post-call.

For email, the top performing questions were “easily understood the response” (Q6; 3.3) and “professional, courteous, friendly” (Q7; 3.4). The lowest performing questions were “satisfaction w/ TCC” (Q1; 2.7), “confidence in TSA” (Q2; 2.6), and “response resolved inquiry” (Q3; 2.4). Our email channel is seen as professional, courteous, and friendly, but our responses are not consistently answering our customer’s inquiry.

For phone, the top performing question was “professional, courteous, friendly” (Q7; 4.9). The lowest performing questions were “response resolved inquiry” (Q3; 4.3) and “easily understood the response” (Q6; 4.3). Our phone channel is seen as highly effective by our customers based on these results; however, we continue to strive towards providing clear, accurate, and thorough responses to 100% of our customers.

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our new TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Service details

Q4 2021

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We continue to see a large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.1, min. 2.5, max 3.5. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.6, min. 4.3, max 5.0. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every 4th contact is offered the survey. For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate prior to entering the wait queue.

For email, the top performing questions were “easily understood the response” (Q6; 3.4) and “professional, courteous, friendly” (Q7; 3.5). The lowest performing questions were “satisfaction w/ TCC” (Q1; 2.8), “confidence in TSA” (Q2; 2.8), and “response resolved inquiry” (Q3; 2.5). Our email channel is seen as professional, courteous, and friendly, but our responses are not consistently answering our customer’s inquiry.

For phone, the top performing question was “professional, courteous, friendly” (Q7; 5.0). The lowest performing questions were “response resolved inquiry” (Q3; 4.4) and “easily understood the response” (Q6; 4.3). Our phone channel is seen as highly effective by our customers based on these results; however, we continue to strive towards providing clear, accurate, and thorough responses to 100% of our customers.

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our new TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand), as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Service details

Q3 2021

What we learned from this quarter's data:

We are still working to understand the large discrepancy between our email and phone channel survey results. For phone, the question stats were: avg. 4.6, min. 4.3, max 5.0. For email, the question stats were: avg. 3.3, min. 2.6, max 3.7. The survey is the same for both channels. For email, every 4th contact is offered the survey. For phone, every contact is offered the opportunity to participate prior to entering the wait queue.

For email, the top performing questions were “easy to contact (Q4),” “easily understood (Q6)” and “aware that information was available via other channels (Q9)” at 3.7. The lowest performing question was “resolved my inquiry (Q3)” at 2.6. Our email channel is clearly quick, easy, and convenient for our customers to utilize, but we still have work to do in providing quality responses that answer our customer’s inquiry.

For phone, the top performing question was “professionalism (Q7)” at 5.0. The lowest performing question was “easily understood (Q6)” at 4.3. While still high, it is not surprising that “easy to contact (Q4) was 4.6, as wait times on our phone channel have been steadily increasing over the past few months. We are continuing to work every angle (staffing, operational efficiencies, etc.) to meet the rising demand for information.

We are continuing to work closely (continual, daily oversight/ support) with our new TSA Contact Center (TCC) vendor, as we work in partnership to bring their operation to a mature state that meets their service level agreements on a routine basis. Their pain points remain staffing from both an overall perspective (enough to meet the demand) as well as a quality perspective (seasoned, knowledgeable).

Service details

Q2 2021

What we learned from this quarter's data:

Looking Back

The Q1 email survey results were the last assessment of our old contact center vendor/ agents, as the contract switched from the old vendor to the new vendor on 11/29/2020 (email contacts from 09/2020 through 11/2020, who responded from 10/2020 through 12/2020).

Due to transition, we had to reduce our normal business hours in 11/2020. In addition, the old vendor experienced significant staffing issues during the same month. We can see the negative results of both of these facts in our Process / Efficiency score.

The Q1 email survey results were the first assessment using our newly approved PRA survey. With this survey, we added a Trust / Confidence question and made a few other minor adjustments to the questions asked. We are interested to see how the new Trust / Confidence question trends over the next few quarters.

Looking Forward

The Q2 email survey results will be the first assessment of our new contact center vendor/ agents (email contacts from 12/2020 through 02/2021, who responded from 01/2021 through 03/2021). With the new vendor, we returned to our normal business hours; however, we also brought onboard nearly 100 new agents. We expect the results to reflect these facts.

Finally, a major goal for FY21 is to complete a second Passenger Experience Survey (last conducted in FY19), to collect valuable feedback at a much more direct touchpoint: the screening checkpoint.

Service details

Q1 2021

What we learned from this quarter's data:

Looking Back

The Q1 email survey results were the last assessment of our old contact center vendor/ agents, as the contract switched from the old vendor to the new vendor on 11/29/2020 (email contacts from 09/2020 through 11/2020, who responded from 10/2020 through 12/2020).

Due to transition, we had to reduce our normal business hours in 11/2020. In addition, the old vendor experienced significant staffing issues during the same month. We can see the negative results of both of these facts in our Process / Efficiency score.

The Q1 email survey results were the first assessment using our newly approved PRA survey. With this survey, we added a Trust / Confidence question and made a few other minor adjustments to the questions asked. We are interested to see how the new Trust / Confidence question trends over the next few quarters.

Looking Forward

The Q2 email survey results will be the first assessment of our new contact center vendor/ agents (email contacts from 12/2020 through 02/2021, who responded from 01/2021 through 03/2021). With the new vendor, we returned to our normal business hours; however, we also brought onboard nearly 100 new agents. We expect the results to reflect these facts.

Finally, a major goal for FY21 is to complete a second Passenger Experience Survey (last conducted in FY19), to collect valuable feedback at a much more direct touchpoint: the screening checkpoint.

Service details