FPC Program Ideas/Suggestions

Currently, Microsoft Teams Usage and User Activity report are available for last 7 days, 30 days and 90 days. My suggestion is, much more better if we have daily data/report to be available for customer.

It would be great to add information about the update cycles and the last updated timestamp to the reporting - especially with regards to data health. 

It is sometimes hard to figure out how up to date the reporting data is.

Boopityboopityboop. The cat went up the boop. He booped his boop and when he booped he went boopity boopity boop. BOOP!

https://m365-specialty-partner.powerappsportals.com/knowledgebase/article/KB-01262/en-us This new incentive mentioned in this article above does not apply to CSP customers. Microsoft has been pushing partners to leverage the CSP program for customers under 1500 seats. This program assumes that customer will be provided ServiceDesk and some managed services for the M365 Platform. It does not mean the CSP partner will provide professional services for the various deployments in the M365 Suite. This is outside the scope of traditional ServiceDesk or managed services for CSP Direct/Indirect partners. These funds would help expand usage/consumption of their licensing suite. By excluding CSP customers it leaves a lot of customers out of the incentive for FRP Deployment funds. From Microsoft's view, the CSP program is seen to be a managed service. It also is a way for partners to make some money off subscriptions. Instead of them going direct to MSFT or through an EA (which the threshold for being eligible is changing). Microsoft pushes CSP for partners to do, but then if someone is on CSP they are not eligible for Workshop funding, or deployment funds. Deployment is not managed services.

As per my knowledge on November 2021 "Overall Status" was not required to be updated anymore. Could you take it out from Data Health indicator so that it wont reflected on the overall equation of data health compliance score?

Requesting early access to the tools and reporting within Partner Center as FTOP makes the transition to Partner Center. Looking to be apart of a pilot, leveraging the portal before any go live dates.

Background: After watching the FRP Community segment on FY22 Partner Center and other tool changes and bringing AI to help evaluate OSU/Partner of Record claims faster, I wanted to suggest an alternative approach. My assumption is that it would be possible to have passive approvals for what I also assume are the majority of claims by changing the process. AI could still be used for what remains.
 
To truly streamline, having a hosted "request website" at Microsoft would be best as the OSU claims team would significantly reduce the need to manually evaluate claim forms. This saves whatever global quantity of FRPs there are from maintaining similar, but separate processes. The Microsoft program can pre-approve each FRP SOW for standard items at the beginning of the annual program period and implement required changes, like the public sector requirements on the fly or with minimal intervention. The team handling the claims approval would then have more time to process those with custom SOWs, that may include special offers or value-added services.
 
The customer and partner experience would improve significantly. Some customers have adversity to a document-based form that is routed via email versus a webform. There would be better reporting for all parties involved in the process.  Lost claims forms situations should go to zero. Target dates could be captured from the customer, when submitting the request. The partners would have better visibility to the status of claims and reduce manual input as well. The "chain of custody" problem with some claims would be eliminated. With some common sense guidelines determined programmatically, there could be a reduction of erroneous disassociations, which will reduce disputes. When disputes arise, more specific data in a single repository would exist, thus streamlining the ability to respond appropriately and more timely. There is potential that this process could also support short-term or specific programs like we saw with Edge or Teams Rooms. The limitations about the number of claims submitted could either be identified upon submission or be eliminated.
 
The workflow I envision is as follows (with my knowledge of the process):

1. The FRP provides the customer one of 2 ways to engage with the claims/partner of record process:
   1. The customer could receive a custom URL for a specific FRP
   2. The FRP would have a code to provide to the customer, that identifies the specific FRP
   3. For custom SOWs, the FRP could pre-enter much of the data and upload the SOW that is outside of the preapproved items for that FRP. Then a custom URL for that document could be provided to the customer and they would login and approve.
2. When the customer logs in, they complete the necessary fields. There may need to be an interim step as a Tenant Administrator (or even the FRP) may need to complete some fields and then save it as a draft or send it onto the designated approver at the organization.
   1. Want: The page could have both logos so it is visible this is a Microsoft program, delivered by a Partner
   2. Want: The customer could define the appropriate contact for surveys, indicating a single POC for all services or individual for each
3. The completed webform routes a notification as it moves to the FRP-confirmation stage, to the FRP for confirmation and once they confirm, it goes for approval to the OSU claims team
   1. The FRP should have the right to send it back to the customer for corrections
4. With a preapproved SOW list, any services at this stage that are defined as "standard" for the FRP, would have a passive approval, if no existing claims exist.
   1. Want: Process improvement to reduce erroneous partner dissociations.
      1. When a customer logs in for approval in step 2, they would see what is claimed by which FRPs and if they are below a certain percentage with no growth over a certain time period (TBD), they would be eligible to change.
      2. If they don't meet that criteria, there can be an exception form the FRP can walk through with the customer to determine if disassociation would be appropriate.
5. It is likely a significant portion of these would be auto-approved at this point, with confirmation emails sent to the Customer and Partner. Exceptions, customer SOWs, and disputes would become the majority of the work for the approval team as they can shift the volume out of their queue.
6. In the backend, this process could be linked to the Partner Center portal interface and simply loaded automatically at some interval, improving the speed of seeing the claims from the current process.

 
 

Is there a way to automate the eligible workloads in the Customer Contact section w/i FTOP for CPOR approved workloads? 
To update the Customer Contact field in FTOP FRPs have to manually add the workloads eligible for survey.  Is it possible to have automation put in place that would auto-populate these workloads based upon approved CPOR? 
OR...... can the survey team pull the workloads from the CPOR Partner Information field (the FRP stamp) found w/i each workload under the Services tab of FTOP?  The query could look for fields not null & add those workloads to the survey eligibility report.

When submitting SOW/POE for CPOR association, customers sometimes feel uncomfortable to sign several SOW/POE with same contents with the only differences in the ticked workloads. Is it necessary to have the maximum of four workloads for per SOW/POE, any possibilities to remove this limit? 

FRP referral emails are supposed to be a valid, temporary PoE; however, the emails do not contain the required PSD.  Thus, making the referral emails NOT a valid PoE and they get rejected by OCP.  Almost all of our referrals are EDU and sometimes it takes weeks for the PoEs to go through all the proper approval channels (legal, compliance, etc.) before they are signed by the customer.  Since we live by the Golden Rule and start assisting our customers immediately.  We don't make them wait for the red tape, but we often face missing the threshold for incentives b/c of this.  
How is FRP going to address this?  Will there be a new option?