of 2003 released in December 2012, found that 26 percent of survey participants identified at least one potentially material error on their consumer reports, and 13 percent experienced a change in their credit score once the error was fixed. (D) Consumer Bureau examiners have identified repeated deficiencies with the nationwide CRAs’ information collection. In the summer 2015 Supervisory Highlights released in June 2015, the Consumer Bureau noted continued weaknesses with CRAs’ methods and processes for assuring maximum possible accuracy in their reports. Examiners also found, with certain exceptions, no quality control policies and procedures in place to test consumer reports for accuracy. (E) In its Credit Reporting Complaint Snapshot released in February 2014, the Consumer Bureau found that consumers were uncertain about the depth and validity of the investigations performed about a disputed item. Consumers also expressed frustration that, even though they provided supporting materials that they believed demonstrated the inaccuracy of the information provided by furnishers, errors continued to remain on their reports. (F) In the winter 2015 Supervisory Highlights released in March 2015, the Consumer Bureau reported that one or more nationwide CRAs failed to adequately fulfill their dispute-handling obligations, including by not forwarding to furnishers all relevant information found in letters and supporting documents supplied by consumers when they submitted disputes failing to notify consumers that they had completed investigations, and not providing consumers with the results of the CRAs’ reviews about their disputes. (G) Consumer Bureau examiners also noted in the fall 2016 Supervisory Highlights released in October 2016 that one or more entities failed to provide adequate guidance and training to staff about how to differentiate FCRA disputes from general customer inquiries, complaints, or debt validation requests. Consumer Bureau supervisors also directed one or more entities to develop and implement