Category Archives: Digital Divide

“Digital literacy isn’t a luxury. It’s health care access…” Op Ed in Star Tribune

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Star Tribune posts an Op Ed from a technology services coordinator at Senior Community Services, a nonprofit program based in Minnetonka…

Retirement, which should be relaxing, becomes a frustrating tangle of technology to unweave in order to access basic benefits. Unfortunate considering it could be a resource that greatly augments real life.

The hurdles aren’t lack of intelligence or effort. My work has taught me that using technology is a learned skill — sometimes intuitive, sometimes learned through repetition and no logic at all.

Not everyone has broadband access either, or a working device, in addition to the skills to navigate it all. Assuming everyone does is either dangerously optimistic or willfully naive. And yet we’re cutting federal digital equity funding. How are we to ensure these essential systems remain accessible? Technology becomes a barrier, not a benefit.

Digital literacy isn’t a luxury. It’s health care access, financial safety and civic engagement. In Minnesota alone, hundreds of thousands of households lack basic broadband speed to support access to video telehealth.

If the connection is unstable, video calls with a doctor can drop, freeze or lag. To the average tech user, these glitches are minor annoyances. But for someone who isn’t tech-savvy, they’re debilitating. But with the end of programs like the Affordable Connectivity Program and the derailment of the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, low-income and rural households are being cut off from both the infrastructure and the support they need to stay connected.

Even if we solve the infrastructure problem, anyone who has upgraded their cellphone in the past few years could tell you that services and devices are more expensive than ever. I would never recommend a refurbished, low-cost, generic-brand device to an older adult. They’re often buggy and their user experience is the least intuitive and user-friendly interface I’ve seen.

Thankfully, local programs are stepping in to help. Many libraries now offer computer help clinics, and nonprofits, like ours, hold digital literacy sessions at senior centers and community hubs across the metro.

Volunteers and staff are helping older Minnesotans use their smartphone and tablets and build confidence in this new, vulnerable digital landscape.

NTIA tells states not to lower broadband costs or risk BEAD funding

Posted on by
Reply

Ars Technica reports...

The Trump administration is telling states they will be shut out of a $42 billion broadband deployment fund if they set the rates that Internet service providers receiving subsidies are allowed to charge people with low incomes.

The latest version of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) FAQ on the grant program, released today, is a challenge to states considering laws that would force Internet providers to offer cheap plans to people who meet income eligibility guidelines. One state already has such a law: New York requires ISPs with over 20,000 customers in the state to offer $15 broadband plans with download speeds of at least 25Mbps, or $20-per-month service with 200Mbps speeds.

Here are some specifics on the language…

The NTIA rules concern the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, which is distributing $42.45 billion to states for grants that would be given to ISPs that expand broadband access. Although the US law that created BEAD requires Internet providers receiving federal funds to offer at least one “low-cost broadband service option for eligible subscribers,” it also says the NTIA may not “regulate the rates charged for broadband service.”

Broadband advocates urge the FCC to continue assessing broadband affordability and adoption

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

The Federal Communications Commission should still assess broadband affordability and adoption as part of its annual report on deployment, consumer advocates told the agency.

The FCC is set to vote Thursday on a notice of inquiry that would kick off its annual report on whether broadband “is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.” The agency last year under Democratic chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel assessed affordability and adoption as part of the report, which the public draft of the notice would propose to scrap.

The public draft of the inquiry said that section 706 of the Communications Act, which mandates the report, only calls for assessing incremental infrastructure deployment and that the other inquiries, which FCC Chairman Brendan Carr criticized at the time, were unnecessary. Representatives from Public Knowledge, the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, and X-Lab met last week with staff from the offices of commissioners Olivia Trusty and Anna Gomez to urge against the move.

OPPORTUNITY: Universal Service Fund (USF) Working Group – Request for Comment

Posted on by
Reply

Senator Fischer reports on an opportunity for folks to comment on the USF (Universal Service Fund)…

The USF Working Group reorganized in June – led by Senators Deb Fischer (R-NE) and Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Chair and Ranking Member of the Telecommunications and Media Subcommittee, and joined by Senators Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Gary Peters (D-MI), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), and Jackie Rosen (D-NV). Representatives Richard Hudson (R-NC9) and Doris Matsui (D-CA7), Chair and Ranking Member of the Communications and Technology Subcommittee, lead the Group’s efforts in the House. Together, the bipartisan, bicameral USF Working Group invites public input about the future of the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund.

Today, the USF comprises the High-Cost Program, Low-Income (Lifeline) Program, Schools and Libraries (E-Rate) Program, and the Rural Health Care Program. The Working Group aims to provide a bipartisan forum to guide reforms to the USF, ensuring that connectivity reaches Americans in every community across the nation.

The Working Group seeks comments from stakeholders across the country to explore the current state of the Fund, and assess proposals for the Fund’s modernization and reliable support of voice and broadband services into the future – particularly following the Supreme Court’s decision in Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research (consolidated with Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition v. Consumers’ Research).

OPPORTUNITY: Libraries Without Borders US is looking for library partner

Posted on by
Reply

From Libraries Without Borders US…

Library-School Partnership Request for Proposal (RFP)

Enhancing library access for youth and families through their local schools

Libraries Without Borders US (LWB US) is growing its partnership base across the country in order to increase library access and usage for underserved youth and families! This initiative aims to enhance partnerships between local schools, school libraries, and public libraries.

Through this Request for Proposal (RFP), LWB US will select five (5) public libraries or library systems with high levels of community need and a commitment to sustain successful efforts launched through the partnership.

Selected partners will receive technical assistance for community data collection and analysis, strategy and development for school-library partnerships, implementation support, ongoing evaluation, and sustainability planning. To nurture a successful partnership, LWB US will provide supplies and materials up to $5,000 to support the implementation of school-library initiatives. Please note that LWB US is not a grant funder. We partner with public libraries and library systems in order to increase community access to and engagement with resources and offerings.

Application Process

Applications will be accepted July 1, 2025 through August 31, 2025. 

 See Library-School Partnership RFP for more details and submission instructions.

Apply Now

Getting creative in Dakota County’s iLABs

Posted on by
Reply

Dakota County shares…

iLABs offer technology and craft tools to help residents of all ages and interests. iLABs provide technology and equipment that some residents may not have access to due to availability, high costs or other factors.

Using the iLAB

Whether it’s digitizing old family photos, making a dress, creating a 3D object or trying new technology for the first time, the library’s iLAB Creative Spaces offer residents a convenient place to explore, create and learn.

Dakota County residents can make all kinds of projects in an iLAB anytime they want during regular library hours for free. We offer classes and online tutorials to help you get familiar with the equipment as well as one-on-one appointments with staff or volunteers. You can reserve equipment through the library’s online reservation system for up to four hours at a time.

I just love the idea of it. It’s like a makerspace 2.0, where it feels open to everyone in the area.

 

US Senate confirms Arielle Roth to lead the NTIA

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

The Senate confirmed Arielle Roth by a 52-42 vote Wednesday to lead the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

Roth’s confirmation was supported by all present Republicans and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa. All other present Democrats voted against Roth. Her confirmation came a week after Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., teed up her nomination on the Senate floor, and proceeded smoothly despite Sen. Jacky Rosen’s, D-Nev., best efforts to delay the process.

Roth’s confirmation was supported by all present Republicans and Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa. All other present Democrats voted against Roth. Her confirmation came a week after Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., teed up her nomination on the Senate floor, and proceeded smoothly despite Sen. Jacky Rosen’s, D-Nev., best efforts to delay the process.

Will the recent One Big Beautiful Bill Act leave low-income households choosing between food or broadband?

Posted on by
Reply

The American Prospect published an article from Sean Gonsalves, from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance’s Community Broadband Networks Initiative, demonstrating how cut in the recently passed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA) may leave low-income household having to decide on food versus broadband…

Last year, GOP leaders blocked bipartisan efforts to fund an extension of the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which offered 23 million eligible households a $30-per-month voucher to help pay for internet service. As if letting the ACP die wasn’t a big enough blow, OBBBA not only increases the paperwork burden required to qualify for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, it completely removes internet service costs as an eligible deduction.

In the context of SNAP, the “deduction” refers to how an eligible household’s net income is calculated, which is then used to determine how much households are entitled to receive in SNAP benefits. A lower net income translates into a higher allocation of benefits. Section 10005 of the law prohibits “household internet costs (e.g., monthly subscriber fees)” from being used in the net income calculation. That means that families with internet access will have higher net incomes, and therefore get lower benefits.

“Fundamentally, the SNAP benefit calculation is about calculating what the household has available for food. That’s why rent and utilities are factored in,” explained Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities’ (CBPP) Food Assistance team.

Contrast this change to 2019, when the first Trump administration sought to establish federal “Standard Utility Allowances” across every state. At that time, internet service was considered to be an essential utility—and that was before the COVID lockdowns turned internet access for all into one of the most bipartisan goals in all of politics.

But under OBBBA, and contrary to common sense, internet access is no longer considered essential, at least not for SNAP beneficiaries, despite repeated campaign promises to “make America affordable again” and to bring prices down “starting on Day 1.”

What data is available about broadband access and adoption?

Posted on by
Reply

Pew has assessed and tracked the broadband-related data that is available in the US. They start with framing the importance…

Incomplete information can make it difficult for lawmakers to understand the effects of policy, and for government entities to enforce grant recipients’ program requirements. Because federal data focuses on information like the number of households with subscriptions, it lacks feedback on network quality and reliability, or on how consumers experience a broadband connection. Incomplete data can also make it challenging for researchers to evaluate how specific broadband policy changes affect consumers, and for people involved in broadband deployment and adoption at the state level to monitor whether ongoing and new programs are meeting their goals. Lack of data on broadband’s societal impact—such as effects on the economy, education, and health care—has led states to conduct their own baseline measurements to meet BEAD program requirements, including BEAD’s aim to “grow economic opportunities … provide increases in access to health care services … and enrich education experiences” nationwide. Additionally, NTIA’s BEAD Five-Year Action Plan guidance requires states to evaluate how program implementation affects economic and workforce development, education, health, civic and social engagement, and access to essential services.

Then they assessed the information available…

Pew’s review of broadband literature published from 2008 to 2024 (based on data that, in some cases, dates to the 1990s) showed that researchers had identified the following shortcomings with broadband data:

  • Limitations in geographic and household data: Federal data on broadband access, adoption, and household characteristics is often reported by county, ZIP code, or census tract, rather than by household. And geographic and household characteristics—such as the regions used in data collection or the composition of households—are not standardized across data sources, making it difficult to combine datasets for evaluation. This lack of standardization has led to inaccuracies in measuring the impact of broadband and the gaps in coverage, which is particularly problematic for federally funded projects that rely on accurate mapping data for broadband investment; these projects could misappropriate funds because of the data’s shortcomings.

 

  • Reliability of federal data for evaluation purposes: Federal data relies heavily on information from internet service providers (ISPs), leading to concerns in the literature that data on broadband availability and network performance may be affected by bias and lack of transparency. Also, federal data tends not to include price, making it difficult to assess how much broadband service costs and how affordable it is for customers throughout the country.

  • Inconsistencies in definitions: Several federal sources do not specify which broadband technologies are available to consumers, making it difficult to correlate network performance and household use of the internet. Some sources have also been inconsistent in defining key components, ranging from what qualifies as a broadband connection to the meaning of the phrase “digital equity” to how to measure internet use and digital skills—and how consumers benefit from the connection.

  • Lack of consistent impact assessments: The available data makes it difficult to determine the availability of affordable broadband connections or how to define affordability, and there is no uniform method of tracking broadband adoption patterns over time. Researchers need more information to gauge the value and impact in multiple areas (economic development, health care, education, civic life) of having a broadband internet connection.

The include a table of data sets and tools…

Agency Data set Description
FCC Form 477 (2000-22)
  • Number of internet providers, household adoption, technology type, availability at the census tract and block level
National Broadband Map (2022-present)
  • Number of internet providers, technology type, highest available speeds
Urban Rate Survey (2014-present)
  • Technology type, speed tiers, and prices from sampled ISPs in urban census tracts
Broadband Consumer Labels

(2024-present)
  • Publicly available pricing and speed tiers
USAC USF Fund (1997-present)
  • Funding disbursements for E-Rate, Rural Healthcare, High Cost, and Lifeline programs
NTIA Public GIS Map
  • Funding type and award amount
Federal Broadband Funding (2020-present)
  • Displays all federal funding awarded across multiple agencies
Internet Use Survey (1994-present)
  • Survey data on internet adoption and use
National Broadband Map Datasets (2010-14)
  • Number of providers, technology type, and speeds
U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (2013-present)
  • Household broadband internet subscription rates, households with a computer
Current Population Survey (1997-2012)
  • Household internet use
Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index
  • Average internet service costs for urban consumers
Bureau of Economic Analysis Key economic indicators
  • Used to demonstrate the interaction of broadband connectivity with key economic indicators, including gross domestic product, consumer spending, employment, prices and inflation, and industry
USDA Economic Research Service

 

Technology Use (Farm Computer Usage and Ownership) Survey
  • Routine evaluation of broadband deployment programs from USDA

 

  • Farm computer use and internet access

 

T-Mobile ends DEI programs as it seeks regulatory approval from the FCC

Posted on by
Reply

Fierce Network reports…

Just like that, T-Mobile is ending its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs to get two big deals OK’d by regulators.

In a letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr on Tuesday, T-Mobile said it will end its DEI programs as it seeks regulatory approval for its UScellular and MetroNet transactions.

“We have conducted a comprehensive review of T-Mobile’s policies, program, and activities, and pursuant to this review, T-Mobile is ending its DEI-related policies … not just in name, but in substance,” T-Mobile EVP and General Counsel Mark Nelson told the chairman in the letter made public Wednesday.

What are the costs to families that lost access to Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) broadband subsidies?

Posted on by
Reply

Benton Institute for Broadband & Society report…

The end of the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) created costs and tensions for beneficiaries that went beyond their losing the $30-per-month service subsidy. In a series of in-depth interviews from the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society and conducted by SSRS, Inc., participants lamented the program’s end while also expressing frustration with increased monthly internet costs and a dearth of low-cost options in the market.

Their reactions fell into three categories:

  1. Frustration over lack of choice in service providers that limited their ability to find budget-friendly alternatives once their ACP subsidies ended. There is a sense that society is effectively telling people they must have service, yet does not give them adequate service options that are both affordable and of sufficient quality.
  2. Contending with lower quality of service that was the result of having to switch to a different plan. This has limited students’ ability to do homework and caused problems in carrying out telehealth visits for patients with limited mobility.
  3. Cutting back on other expenditures as part of a difficult balancing act to maintain connectivity. This includes forgoing visits to the doctor or picking up side jobs to keep internet service on at home. The balancing act is precarious and not always successful, as the ACP’s end has led to service disconnections for some.

Participants in the interviews were members of low-income households that had used the ACP benefit to help defray monthly service costs. They were well attuned to societal changes that have made at-home internet service essential. These changes were not just about the pandemic but also included changes in their children’s educational experiences and how people interact with health care providers. This made the ACP a real aid to manage a tight household budget in the midst of having to do more things online. When the ACP ended, the question for most people was not whether to keep service but how to keep it while juggling other household needs.

FCC extends (again) pause of Lifeline Mobile data increase and voice phase-out

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC reports…

  1. In this Order, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) extends, for a year, the waiver pausing both the phase-out of Lifeline support for voice-only services and the increase in the Lifeline minimum service standard for mobile broadband data capacity. Without this decision, support for services that meet only the voice minimum service standard, which currently stands at $5.25 per month, would be eliminated in most areas on December 1, 2025.[1]  Additionally, absent a pause, the minimum service standard for mobile broadband data capacity would rise from 4.5 GB to 29 GB per month beginning December 1, 2025.
  2. As discussed below, we find good cause to pause these changes for an additional year. Absent this action, the minimum service standard for mobile broadband data capacity would have experienced its largest increase since Lifeline minimum service standards were established.  This action will avoid changes that could potentially result in the disruption of communications for Lifeline subscribers as the Commission establishes and evaluates the record in the Delete, Delete, Delete proceeding, a wide-ranging deregulatory review.[2]  Maintaining Lifeline program stability through this action will limit burdens on providers and low-income households while the Commission considers future activity regarding Lifeline voice-only service and setting minimum service standards.

[1] See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., WC Docket No. 11-42, Third Report and Order, Further Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration, 31 FCC Rcd 3962, 3989-97, paras. 73-98 (2016) (2016 Lifeline Order); 47 CFR §§ 54.403(a)(2)(iv)-(v).

[2] See In Re: Delete, Delete, Delete, GN Docket No. 25-133, Public Notice, DA 25-219 (rel. Mar, 12, 2025) (Delete, Delete, Delete Public Notice) (seeking public input on identifying FCC rules for the purpose of alleviating unnecessary regulatory burdens).

Hear is some of their reasoning…

  1. Our decision to extend this waiver stems from careful consideration of how to continue to support a stable and robust affordable communications market through the Lifeline program. This waiver also allows the Commission time to consider the recommendations found in the Future of USF Report and options for deregulatory initiatives in the Delete, Delete, Delete[1]  These factors, in addition to ongoing subscribership to voice-only plans despite their lower support rate, lead us to find good cause to pause, until December 1, 2026, both the elimination of voice-only support and the increase in minimum service standards for mobile broadband data capacity.
  2. Voice Support Phase-Out. In each of the last two years, the Bureau paused the scheduled phase-out in Lifeline support for voice-only services due in large part to a continued reliance on voice service.[2]  Extending the waiver of the voice-only services phase-out ensures that voice-only subscribers are not required to subscribe to broadband bundled plans to maintain their access to a Lifeline-supported service.  It further permits these households to maintain access to voice service that bridges a gap in the pursuit of universal service.[3]
  3. We further find that it is in the public interest to continue to pause the complete phase-out of voice-only support to allow the Commission to fully consider the Lifeline program’s objectives and processes, consistent with the Delete, Delete, Delete Public Notice’s stated purpose of identifying FCC rules for the purpose of alleviating unnecessary regulatory burdens.[4] Pausing the phase-out of voice-only support allows the Commission additional time to consider how voice service fits into a modern Lifeline program.  For all of these reasons, we find good cause to pause the phase-out in Lifeline support for voice-only services.
  4. Mobile Broadband Data Capacity Minimum Service Standard. In each of the last two years, the Bureau paused the increase to the minimum service standard for mobile broadband data capacity, primarily due to potential cost barriers that an increase would bring and data showing that Lifeline subscribers may not benefit from an increase in the usage allowance.[5]  In addition, the pause was needed to allow time for the Commission to consider recommendations to revise Lifeline minimum service standards in the Future of USF Report.[6]  The dual needs to consider future changes to this mechanism and to prevent increased capacity requirements that make service potentially more robust than needed, but prohibitively expensive, continues to support maintaining a minimum mobile broadband data capacity of 4.5 GB.

[1] See Future of USF Report, 37 FCC Rcd 10041; Delete, Delete, Delete Public Notice.

[2] 2023 Waiver Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 6100, para. 12; 2024 Waiver Order, 39 FCC Rcd at 7004, para. 12.

[3] See also 2021 Waiver Order, 36 FCC Rcd at 15546, para. 16 (finding that “retail rates for bundled broadband plans that would meet the Lifeline program’s current minimum service standards for broadband data capacity far exceed the cost of plans that would qualify as Lifeline voice-only plans,” which could require some Lifeline subscribers “to either move to a more expensive bundled broadband plan, or forego voice service altogether.”).

[4] See Delete, Delete, Delete Public Notice, at 1.

[5] See 2023 Waiver Order, 38 FCC Rcd at 6101-02, paras. 14-17; 2024 Waiver Order, 39 FCC Rcd at 7005-06, paras. 15-16.

[6] See id.

EVENT July 1: Wired for Freedom: Digital Access and the American Dream

Posted on by
Reply

Looks like an interesting event...

Days before Independence Day, the virtual gathering – slated for July 1 from 3 to 4:15 pm ET – will be centered around the theme: “Wired for Freedom: Digital Access and the American Dream.”
The agenda is shaped up to offer attendees new battlefield intelligence and how community-centered organizations and coalitions are carrying on in the face of vital funding and programming cuts. Speakers include Amy Huffman, Monica Gonzalez, Tony Batalla, Alisa Valentin, Ph.D., Autumn Evans, Patrick Messac, and more!

You can register for the event above.

As with the previous #B4DE events, the March live stream will once again be sponsored by UTOPIA Fiber and co-hosted by NDIA and ILSR’s Community Broadband Networks Initiative.

Don’t miss out on this exciting opportunity to learn, connect, and make a difference as digital equity advocates across the nation are leveraging historic federal investments in the expansion of broadband access and adoption.

The livestream will be available (and later archived) on Facebook, YouTube, and LinkedIn with live viewer questions answered by the invited speakers and presenters, which is still being finalized. We will also be live posting from the Community Broadband Networks Bluesky page.

Supreme Court finds Universal Service Fund contribution scheme and management were Constitutional

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports...

The Supreme Court on Friday overturned a Fifth Circuit decision that found the $9 billion-per-year Universal Service Fund unconstitutional.

The Federal Communications Commission program supports rural broadband networks, plus internet discounts for low-income households, schools and libraries and healthcare centers. It’s been funded since the 1990s by fees on interstate voice revenue, with the accounting work delegated to the Universal Service Administrative Company, which the FCC set up for the purpose.

Conservative nonprofit Consumers’ Research had alleged the fund was unconstitutional, arguing Congress didn’t put enough guardrails on the FCC’s ability to collect fees as part of the fund, and that the agency improperly delegated authority to USAC. The Fifth Circuit had ruled the combination of the two illegally took taxing power away from the legislature.

Benton Institute for Broadband & Society on the impact of policy and broadband adoption

Posted on by
Reply

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society talks about the impact of policy and broadband adoption…

To improve broadband adoption, future growth will have to come from the same population segments that experienced adoption growth upon the pandemic’s onset. They are the segments where significant connectivity gaps remain—and thus are the most promising for attracting new subscriptions.

The takeaways for policymakers and other stakeholders are:

  • Non-deployment issues loom large in rural broadband adoption. Sizable rural broadband gaps across all income categories show how network availability gaps depress rural adoption. But low-income rural residents are far less likely to subscribe to broadband than upper-income rural households. Addressing nondeployment considerations, such as service affordability and the availability of digital skills training, needs to be part of any solution for rural broadband adoption.
  • Older adults are a promising source of future growth. More than one in five adults in the United States are over the age of 65. That age group—and, especially, the 75-and-older subgroup—has experienced strong growth in home wireline adoption in recent years, as well as large increases in subscriptions to wireless data plans. Maintaining these patterns will require not just addressing affordability but also ensuring that this population has access to digital skills training programs and community “help desks” for troubleshooting online challenges.
  • The ACP’s fingerprints are evident in recent broadband trends. This report’s analysis of ACS data shows positive changes in broadband adoption in the same places and economic groups in which recent Benton Institute research found the largest impact, namely in rural areas and among low-income households.