Category Archives: Rural

Case study finds rural broadband requires: Alignment, Sustainability and Learning

Posted on by
1

Last summer, the Communities Strategies Group released a case study (Making Broadband Work for Rural Communities and Native Nations) that looked barriers to better broadband in rural areas. They called out three issues:

  • Alignment: Misalignment among people, agencies, and organizations can create barriers to broadband deployment and use at all levels. For example, it makes sense for states and Native nations to align digital equity plans, but the recent timing of funding availability under the Digital Equity Act meant that states’ plans were finalized before Native nations were able to access funding for planning, leading to missed opportunities for alignment and cooperation.
  • Sustainability: The current market-based approach to broadband has not worked for the most remote rural communities and Native nations because they simply do not have enough density of customers to allow private ISPs to make a profit. Acknowledging that broadband is an essential utility, as described above, should allow governments and communities to shift their thinking to find ways to provide affordable, sustainable connectivity to people and businesses. For example, a century ago, communities came together to form rural electric cooperatives to bring electrification to remote communities that private corporations were not likely to serve. This could be a model for broadband connectivity in remote areas today.
  • Learning: The many new broadband and digital inclusion projects currently underway provide fertile ground for learning about what works to bring effective connectivity to rural communities and Native nations—and leverage that connectivity to drive equitable rural prosperity. But without intentional efforts to learn from this experience— and the efforts centered on COVID-19 pandemic response—governments and practitioners may end up repeating mistakes or continuing efforts that need to shift. For example, local practitioners report significant challenges where a single corporation owns broadband infrastructure but lacks the motivation to serve all of a local community or allow other ISPs to use the infrastructure. Learning from this experience could help communities move toward systems of cooperative or public ownership of infrastructure that encourages “coopetition” and ultimately serves the community better. Communities of practice for government entities (e.g., local governments, state and local federal offices like USDA Cooperative Extension), educational institutions (e.g,, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Historically Black Colleges and Universities), and community-based organizations (e.g., libraries and other organizations that provide digital navigation services) could be an important tool to exchange information, document what works, and ultimately increase the effectiveness and impact of efforts to move toward digital equity for rural communities and Native nations.

EVENT Dec 16: MinnPost Social: Rebuilding Local News in Greater Minnesota

Posted on by
Reply

What a great opportunity from MinnPost for folks to talk about broadband and the potential role of technology in helping to rebuild local news in Greater Minnesota…

Registration is now open for our next free virtual event, MinnPost Social: Rebuilding Local News in Greater Minnesota on Monday, December 16, from 5-6 p.m. CT.

Local news has atrophied across the country, but this has been especially true in rural areas, including across Greater Minnesota. Research has shown the absence of local news leads to an increase in corruption and mistrust, while leading to a decrease in civic participation. But there are efforts afoot, including here in Minnesota, to turn the tide and rebuild how local news operates and serves communities.

Join us as we discuss these factors and potential solutions with Nora Hertel, founder and executive director of Project Optimist; Dr. Benjamin Toff, director of the Minnesota Journalism Center at the U of M; and Ava Kian, Greater Minnesota reporter at MinnPost. Tanner Curl, MinnPost’s executive director, will moderate.

This Q&A session is part of our MinnPost Social event series, presented by Darla Kashian — RBC Wealth Management and Great River Energy, in which MinnPost journalists share insights with audience members in a casual atmosphere.

REGISTER NOW. The event is free, but registration is required. You’ll receive the virtual event link and details after you’ve signed up. If you have any questions, please email us at members@minnpost.com.

2024 Rural Telecommunications Benchmark Study results

Posted on by
Reply

The 2024 Rural Telecommunications Benchmark Study looks at the business-side of the industry. The quick take seems to be that there’s potential for growth but a need to keep costs down. Sounds like midsized companies have best weathered the last year because they can be agile. There are a lot of moving pieces for an industry that has changed so dramatically in the past twenty some years…

The biggest takeaways from the 2024 Rural Telecommunications Benchmark Study are that:

  • Twenty-plus years after the rollout of broadband services, internet revenue continues to provide growth opportunities to the rural telecommunications industry

  • Inflation and increasing costs have had an impact on operating profitability

  • The industry continues to grow through broadband services

  • Total revenue growth is anemic

  • Rural companies are financially strong with balance sheets particularly strong

  • Even in the face of increased competition and regulatory and legislative uncertainty, the rural telecommunications industry has succeeded in the growth of broadband services, revenues and operative income.

     

How does MN stack up in Broadband Speed Performance ranking? 34th

Posted on by
Reply

Ookla reports…

Using Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence® data, this report identifies the states that are currently delivering the minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds as established by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to the highest percentage of Speedtest users. It also singles out the states that need the most improvement when it comes to delivering the minimum standard for broadband to their residents.

Key takeaways, including Minnesota’s most improved status…

  • Connecticut, North Dakota, Delaware and six other states are the top performing states because they have the highest percentage of Speedtest users that meet the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream. While comparing small, densely populated states with larger, sparsely populated states may seem unfair, we thought it was important to note the current performance of each state so we can track their progress in future reports.
  • New Mexico, Arizona and Minnesota saw the biggest improvement in the percentage of Speedtest users getting the FCC’s minimum standard for fixed broadband speeds (100 Mbps down/20 Mbps up) between the first half of 2023 and the first half of 2024.
  • Washington, Alaska, Illinois and Oregon have the most prominent digital divide of all the 50 states. These four states have the biggest gap between the percentage of rural Speedtest users vs. the percentage of urban Speedtest users that get FCC’s minimum standard of broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream.
  • Not surprisingly, less than 40% of the Speedtest users of Alaska, Montana and Wyoming (which are three of the least densely populated states in the U.S.), are receiving the minimum broadband speeds of 100 Mbps downstream/20 Mbps upstream.

They also look at the digital divide:

Big thanks to Ookla for sharing data with me so that I can see that Minnesota ranks 34 for speedtest takers with access to 100 Mbps down and 20 Mbps up. So while it’s nice to get a “most improved” ranking, we still have a way to go! Here’s the ranking…

State BB percent Rank
New Jersey 66.4 1
Connecticut 65.8 2
North Dakota 65.48 3
Maryland 63.71 4
Delaware 63.32 5
Rhode Island 62.7 6
Tennessee 62.23 7
Utah 61.78 8
New Hampshire 60.46 9
Virginia 60.12 10
District of Columbia 59.51 11
Massachusetts 59.36 12
Indiana 58.76 13
Kansas 58.76 14
Florida 58.41 15
Texas 57.9 16
Nevada 57.41 17
Iowa 57.39 18
South Dakota 57.22 19
Pennsylvania 56.79 20
Mississippi 56.5 21
Georgia 55.74 22
Alabama 55.64 23
Nebraska 55.54 24
New York 55.33 25
Illinois 54.74 26
Oklahoma 54.56 27
Missouri 54.4 28
Arkansas 54.3 29
Colorado 53.86 30
Arizona 53.66 31
California 53.23 32
West Virginia 53.11 33
Minnesota 52.94 34
North Carolina 52.8 35
South Carolina 52.69 36
Kentucky 52.53 37
Oregon 52.27 38
Michigan 52.18 39
Idaho 51.27 40
Hawaii 51.01 41
Washington 50.98 42
Ohio 48.07 43
Vermont 48.04 44
Louisiana 47.79 45
New Mexico 44.39 46
Maine 42.54 47
Wisconsin 42.15 48
Wyoming 39.03 49
Alaska 37.99 50
Montana 31.5 51

Download table in Excel.

Aspen Institute asks what it will take to advance rural digital equity

Posted on by
Reply

The Aspen Institute published a case study on Making Broadband Work for Rural Communities and Native Nations. It’s a post-pandemic look at why and how we need to close the digital equity gap felt in native and rural communities.

They offer a 4-step process to helping close the gap…

Acknowledgment: The first step toward digital equity for rural regions and Native nations is a clear acknowledgment across governments and organizations that broadband is an essential utility that all communities and people need to be able to access. Acknowledging this reality means policymakers at multiple levels of government need to grapple with how to best provide, regulate, and sustain this public good for all community members.

Alignment: Misalignment among people, agencies, and organizations can create barriers to broadband deployment and use at all levels. For example, it makes sense for states and Native nations to align digital equity plans, but the recent timing of funding availability under the Digital Equity Act meant that states’ plans were finalized before Native nations were able to access funding for planning, leading to missed opportunities for alignment and cooperation.

Sustainability: The current market-based approach to broadband has not worked for the most remote rural communities and Native nations because they simply do not have enough density of customers to allow private ISPs to make a profit. Acknowledging that broadband is an essential utility, as described above, should allow governments and communities to shift their thinking to find ways to provide affordable, sustainable connectivity to people and businesses.

Learning: The many new broadband and digital inclusion projects currently underway provide fertile ground for learning about what works to bring effective connectivity to rural communities and Native nations—and leverage that connectivity to drive equitable rural prosperity. But without intentional efforts to learn from this experience—and the efforts centered on COVID-19 pandemic response—governments and practitioners may end up repeating mistakes or continuing efforts that need to shift.

CORI on rural broadband and economic growth featuring Bemidji

Posted on by
Reply

The Center on Rural Innovation looks at the role of broadband in rural economic growth and resilience. Here are some of the high level findings..

Compared to the control group, rural counties in the high broadband utilization group have:

  • Business growth rates that are 213 percent higher
  • Self-employment growth rates that are 10 percent higher
  • Per capita income growth rates that are 18 percent higher
  • GDP growth rates that are 44 percent higher

And charts to back up the data.

They also look specifically at Bemidji, broadband and the impact of cooperatives, Paul Bunyan Communications and Beltrami Electric Cooperative…

Paul Bunyan Communications’ growth from a local telephone cooperative to a leading broadband provider reflects a broader trend of community-driven infrastructure development. The cooperative’s investments, including the $100 million GigaZone project, northern Minnesota’s first high-speed gigabit fiber network, have positioned Bemidji and surrounding areas as innovative, connected communities. To further enhance its services, Paul Bunyan Communications also offers a range of value-added broadband services. For residential areas they provide SmartHome services complete with enhanced parental controls and advanced network security powered by their GigaZone mobile app. To support WiFi roaming they have implemented the SmartTown initiative, providing outdoor WiFi in public spaces and ensuring that residents and businesses stay connected, even in previously underserved areas. Additionally, the SmartBiz program caters to the specific needs of local businesses by offering secure networks, easy-to-manage employee access, and redundancy options to safeguard against power outages — all without the need for extensive IT support. This is particularly beneficial for small businesses that might not otherwise afford these enterprise-level services.

Beltrami County’s cooperatives, Paul Bunyan Communications and Beltrami Electric Cooperative, have a collaborative history characterized by shared ventures and mutual support within their community-focused missions. One of their notable partnerships was the formation of Cooperative Development, LLC in 1996, a joint initiative between the two cooperatives to create Bemidji’s Technology Park. This business park was established to provide a conducive environment for technology-oriented businesses, offering advanced communication and infrastructure services. Supporting new tech businesses is beneficial for the community, as tech jobs are high-paying and high-growth jobs that help ensure that the region remains competitive and resilient in an increasingly digital economy.

And based on Beltrami County’s steady business growth it seems Paul Bunyan Communications’ approach is paying off. Since 2010, the number of businesses in Beltrami County has grown by 12.1% (which amounts to an average annual increase of 1.1%), outperforming both the state and the country as a whole (see Figure 10 above). AirCorps Aviation General Manager Erik Hokuf said that the exceptional broadband services in Bemidji have made it possible to expand their business, generating $4 million in annual revenue instead of an estimated $300,000-$400,000 without fiber. In addition to the growth of new businesses and revenue, the per capita income in Beltrami County also increased by 7% between 2020-2022.

OPPORTUNITY: Beginning Farmer Equipment and Infrastructure Grant Program Deadline Nov 21

Posted on by
Reply

KFGO Radio reports…

 Senator Rob Kupec (DFL-Moorhead) is inviting new farmers to take advantage of the Beginning Farmer Equipment and Infrastructure Grant Program, a program that will provide up to $20,000 in reimbursement for Minnesotans who are just starting out in the agriculture industry.

“Agriculture is the industry that drives Minnesota’s economy and the economy of communities in every corner of our state, but it can be an expensive endeavor for those just starting out,” said Sen. Kupec, who serves as Vice-Chair of the Senate Agriculture, Broadband, and Rural Development Committee. “This program is a great way for people to get a new farm off the ground by helping reimburse them for some of those big ticket items and upgrades to get started. I encourage anyone interested in farming to apply.”

The Beginning Farmer Equipment and Infrastructure Grant program offers up to $20,000 for beginning farmers in Minnesota to make investments in their farm’s equipment and infrastructure. The intent of this grant program is to support new farmers in Minnesota to access equipment and develop infrastructure that will be crucial to the future of their farm business.

Through this grant, beginning farmers will be able to pay for:

  • Farm equipment
  • Farm infrastructure development such as investments in water access, irrigation, fencing, electricity, walk-in coolers, production-related structures such as livestock buildings and greenhouses, and other farm infrastructure.

Applicants may request funds at two levels:

  • up to $5,000 for a mini-grant or
  • up to $20,000 for a full grant.

The minimum request allowed is $1,000.

Applications for this new program opened on Tuesday, September 24 and will be open until Thursday, November 21.

More information about the program, including eligibility requirements, and details about how to apply are available here:  https://www.mda.state.mn.us/beginning-farmer-grant

Observations on rural/urban migration in Minnesota before, during and after the pandemic

Posted on by
Reply

Kelly Asche is a senior researcher for the Mankato-based Center for Rural Policy and Development. The Minneapolis Star Tribune recently published an editorial from him on migration among rural and urban counties in Minnesota…

Every year, we at the Center for Rural Policy and Development track population, migration and economic trends throughout rural Minnesota. Most of the time, the updates I make are minor. These kinds of trends tend to change slowly. But every once in a while, some large event occurs that knocks these slow-changing trends sideways or intensifies them. The pandemic was one such event.

During the pandemic, net migration to Hennepin and Ramsey counties took a huge hit. In greater Minnesota, though, net migration stayed positive and even accelerated, including in the most rural regions of the state.

Now, it’s important to understand that net migration is the net sum of people leaving and coming into an area. If more people move into an area than leave it, then it’s a positive net migration. So, with this data we can’t actually conclude that people were “fleeing” the inner urban areas for the suburbs and rural areas because of, fill in the blank here: the pandemic, crime, cost of living, etc. Drawing this conclusion only muddies the narrative and ignores two main facts.

First, using data from the New York Fed, the extreme negative net migration that happened in Ramsey and Hennepin counties during the pandemic was driven largely by folks not moving into those counties rather than a significant increase in residents leaving them. Yes, the rate of people moving out compared with previous years did increase slightly during the pandemic, but much more significant was the lower number of people who moved into those counties in 2020 and 2021.

Second, the pandemic only intensified the net migration trends that were already in place. So the question isn’t whether migration trends changed because of the pandemic, but rather if the pandemic just sharpened the direction they were already going for a bit and will they ultimately go back to what they were before: a slow-moving upward trend for greater Minnesota and the suburbs and a modest negative trend for Hennepin and Ramsey counties.

Researchers think of population migration in terms of push-and-pull factors that may “push” a family out of one community or “pull” them toward another. These forces can be different depending on a person’s priorities at that particular time of life. For someone in their 20s, they might feel a strong pull to the location of a college, their first career opportunity, or an exciting, youthful nightlife. As they get older, a house, a school district and day care availability might be more important.

The editorial goes on with examples and more explanation, and it definitely worth reading in its entirety, but I thought the mention of the power of broadband would be interesting…

The investments in broadband across rural Minnesota are paying off, so telecommuting is a real possibility now in most places. Although housing prices have increased in rural areas, they are still significantly lower than in urban areas. For the price of a condo in Minneapolis, you can get a nice home with some acreage in rural Minnesota. The schools are back to normal and continue to be small, an important desire for some parents who feel their children might need extra attention from teachers after “the lost year” of the pandemic. Rural communities continue to be safe while Minneapolis and St. Paul are still plagued with narratives and perceptions, whether accurate or not, of increased violence. Lastly, jobs are actually plentiful, yes, even high-paying professional jobs, in rural regions due to continued economic growth and an aging population leaving the workforce.

 

Broadband is top economic issue says Heartland Forward

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

“Think about electricity — we just turn it off and on. Broadband should be the same way.”

That’s what Heartland Forward’s Executive Vice President Angie Cooper told Telecompetitor in an interview last week. Heartland Forward describes itself as a “think and do tank” focused on 20 states it defines as the heartland: Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. …

According to Heartland Forward and Cooper, as its representative, access to broadband is the single most important economic issue facing the United States heartland today.

They offer as proof…

As proof of the claim that access to broadband is a leading economic issue, Cooper cited a 2021 Deloitte study that found that “a 10-percentage-point increase of broadband penetration in 2016 would have resulted in more than 806,000 additional jobs in 2019, or an average annual increase of 269,000 jobs.”

While Heartland Forward’s focus was initially on the “three A’s” — availability, affordability, and adoptability — they have, more recently, focused on affordability and adoptability.

 

 

Rural broadband in Indiana has some parallels with rural broadband in Minnesota

Posted on by
Reply

The Daily Yonder recently posted a story about unreliable and inadequate broadband in Indiana…

Luke Dwenger checks his assignments over the public Wi-Fi connection at the Greensburg Decatur County Public Library while his dad Todd waits with him in the parking lot.

The library closed four hours ago, but the Dwengers’ internet is down again.

That Wednesday night isn’t the only night the Dwengers have had to leave their home in search of stable internet. The family has visited the library, local parks and the McDonald’s parking lot to make sure the kids can do their homework.

Many places in rural Minnesota have great broadband, but I know this will sound familiar to some. Here are the stats in Indiana…

According to the consumer data monitor BroadbandNow, a third of Decatur County residents lack download speeds over 25 megabits, the amount considered fast enough to support streaming high definition video, loading webpages, and sending emails across one to three devices at the same time.

Daily Yonder outlines past investment…

The U.S. government has attempted to remedy this divide for over 16 years — and has thrown increasing amounts of money at the project of broadband access.

Since 2009, federal programs have dedicated at least $92 billion to fixing this issue for families like the Dwengers. Reporters at the Arnolt Center for Investigative Journalism at Indiana University looked at three federal laws funding major broadband programs.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 allocated $20.4 billion toward broadband development, while the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund of 2020 put $7.2 billion toward the cause.

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 dedicated a mammoth $65 billion to access, mostly through the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program. Indiana got a whopping $868 million out of the program.

The state is also using funding from the federal American Rescue Plan to invest more than $350 million in constructing new broadband infrastructure. In March, $500,000 was approved for underserved areas like Decatur County to improve service.

In addition to these big-ticket bills, dozens of smaller programs across 15 federal agencies have poured millions more into improving digital equity, according to the Government Accountability Office.

With some criticism…

But some critique the funding structure.

“Historically speaking the approach has been: let’s give money to the big ISPs,” Chao Jun Liu, a legislative associate at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told the Arnolt Center. “It sort of disappears into that black box.”

Indiana’s broadband office said the BEAD program requires states to award funds through subgrants to ISPs.

“Non-profits and local governments are eligible, but only after the state can reach every address with appropriate broadband infrastructure,” Sibley, the office’s spokeswoman wrote in comments to the Capital Chronicle.

The article mentions Frontier, who also has issues in Minnesota…

Frontier’s website did not list connection speeds when enrolling new customers, despite pushing service add-ons to its basic internet package with flashy marketing images that some of their users might struggle to load.

Indiana joined the FTC and five other states in a 2021 complaint against Frontier. In the complaint, Indiana’s Office of the Attorney General (OAG) wrote that Frontier “committed unfair, abusive or deceptive acts” by leading consumers to believe Frontier offered service quality it could not actually live up to.

Indiana’s claims weren’t heard in court. Attorney General Todd Rokita and Frontier reached a $15 million settlement which requires Frontier to “change their advertising efforts to accurately represent to Indiana consumers both the availability and reliability of their internet service” according to an OAG news release.

The settlement required Frontier to invest in internet infrastructure throughout Indiana over four years. The company has until September 2024 to spend the $7.5 million; it’s spent $7, 045,658 to date, the OAG said Friday.

Frontier was also required to credit — from September 2023 to September 2025 — customers who pay for internet that doesn’t live up to advertised speeds. So far, for September 2023, that’s meant $6,153 in credits to 214 customers, per the OAG.

EVENT Jul 30: Farm Bill Panel: 101 and More

Posted on by
Reply

100 Rural Women is hosting an interesting event…

Jul 30, 2024 12:00 PM
We hope you can join us for this interactive discussion and real-time update on policymaking that significantly impacts rural America. In this fast hour, four rural women will join our panel to share their knowledge and on-the-ground experience, discuss key issues in the rural development, conservation and food assistance sections of the Farm Bill.
Register online

Better broadband helps boosts agritourism

Posted on by
Reply

A recent report (Broadband access and agritourism operations in the United States) looks at the impact of broadband on agrotourism…

The underlying hypothesis of this paper is that operators offering agritourism activities on their farms require broadband to connect with potential customers, promote their business and services through social media and other online channels, and process payments and bookings online. Broadband access is also important for small business marketing, online visibility, and rural tourism (Federal Communications Commission [FCC], 2018; Salemink et al., 2017).

They found…

Our results show that broadband speed adopted in 2012 was significantly associated with the number of agritourism operations in 2017 nationally, after controlling for other covariates. This supports the hypothesis that adoption of fast broadband internet helps farmers to connect with potential customers in offering agritourism services. Counties with a higher number of agritourism operations and farm proprietors in 2012 also had a higher number of agritourism operations in 2017, and local wealth was more significantly associated than local income with the growth of agritourism operations as discretionary spending matters in this context. Additionally, natural amenities were positively associated with the number of agritourism operations, while environmental pollution had a negative association, as expected. The results also show that proximity to metropolitan areas plays a vital role in the success of agritourism operations. Importantly, however, the association between broadband adoption and agritourism success does not exist in rural areas when they are considered separately, for reasons described above.

This study thus sheds light on the association between broadband adoption and agritourism operations, demonstrating that improved adoption can lead to additional income-generating opportunities for farmers in counties with large metropolitan populations, but this is not the case for smaller and more remote counties. It remains to be seen if this result still holds with the next Agricultural Census, which will allow a panel data analysis. We acknowledge the limitations of this analysis, as we used broadband data from 2012. This means that the absolute speed thresholds may now be outdated. However, we suggest that the associations between higher broadband penetration and agritourism success remain relevant. Future work could address the impact of Land Grant University-based extension and other outreach educational programs on broadband utilization and the costs of broadband expansion in rural areas, compared to the benefits. These studies will benefit from using more recent broadband data in conjunction with more up-to-date agritourism numbers.

Reimagine Rural looks at rural broadband: not in MN but similar stories

Posted on by
Reply

Reimagine Rural is a podcast from the Brookings Institute that …

visits rural towns across the United States that are experiencing positive change and explores how public investment in rural people and places can lead to increased prosperity. Hosted by Tony Pipa, a scholar in the Center for Sustainable Development at the Brookings Institution and a product of rural America, each episode will feature local voices telling the story of progress in their community and consider the intersection with policy and public resources.

I listened to their show on rural broadband. They focused on Macon County Alabama. But aside from the accent, I could have been listening to stories from the Minnesota rural frontlines. Not because each rural town is the same but because many of the broadband barriers are. The one barrier we have overcome, especially during the pandemic, is selling the idea of need. People know they need it. They are willing to pay (a reasonable amount) for it. Here’s a quick take on some of the other barriers:

  • Funding. Federal funding is record-breaking right now, but communities need more. That means pursuing state, local, foundation or other funding.
  • Staff time. Getting funding takes grant writers and broadband expertise. Some communities or even large counties with few people, often do not have dedicated staff, never mind staff with those skills. Managing broadband projects require yet another set of skills.
  • Broadband partners. Trust is a big issue. You want a provider who can do the job and you hope providers who aren’t going to do it keep away.
  • Policies. Sounds like Minnesota isn’t the only place where state and federal grant may conflict. And there are a host of rules around permitting and rights of ways!

President Biden talks about rural investment on his visit to Southern MN

Posted on by
Reply

MSN reports…

President Joe Biden was in southern Minnesota yesterday to highlight federal investments for rural America.

Biden visited a farm near Northfield to discuss funding from recent packages such as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, with the latter focusing on climate projects and health care assistance.

For agriculture, the administration said there is new funding for farmers to take advantage of climate-friendly practices, such as nutrient management, with other provisions designed to create market fairness.

Investment is being made in rural broadband…

Meanwhile, $65 billion has been set aside within the infrastructure law to boost access to high-speed internet, with the hopes of enhancing efforts to close broadband gaps in rural areas.

Common complaints about BEAD in Broadband Breakfast

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast posts an article from Lori Adams, cu vice president of broadband policy and funding strategy for Nokia, on whether/how rural providers can prepare to apply for BEAD. With years of MN State Broadband funds, I feel like Minnesota providers are in a little different position than providers in other states. (Although BEAD will certainly be different.) Yet, I found the section on complaints about BEAD to be interesting…

Common complaints about BEAD

The first is that the states have already made up their mind who they want to partner with for BEAD. To put it bluntly, this is completely false.

The money is not predetermined to go to a single carrier or group of providers. This will be a competitive process in every state. Scoring will determine which applicants are successful. The higher an applicant scores, the more likely it is an applicant will win. How a state defines the project areas to be “bid on” for BEAD may favor certain types of providers, but nothing is pre-determined. In fact, states are actively looking for rural providers to engage and participate in the process.

The next complaint is centered on the BEAD rules. Often we hear – “well, it depends on what the rules are in the states.” At this juncture, most of the rules are determined and there is more than enough information available to help inform decisions.

For example, The National Telecommunications and Information Administration first released their Notice of Funding Opportunity in May of 2022, and nearly 90% of the program rules are the same in every state.

Additionally, every state has released its Initial Proposal Volume 2, outlining the specific program rules for that state. Almost all the states are now moving into the mapping challenge processes. This means that almost all the critical details are available to help providers start preparing an application now.

Others believe that BEAD is too complex, and it is too early to think about it. Yes, BEAD is complex. It is arguably the most complicated broadband funding program we have ever seen. But it’s complex for everyone, and the longer an applicant waits to prepare, the more complex it will become.

In most cases, providers will need at least three to four months to prepare an application. For example, it’s a requirement in every state that a professional engineer (PE) stamps the network designs, budgets and other documentation that must be submitted as part of a BEAD application.

Finding and contracting with a PE takes time, as does the preparation of the necessary the documentation. Once a grant window opens, it will most likely be too late to find a PE and have this work completed.

There is also the belief that BEAD costs too much and that matching funds are too high. Yes, there is a minimum match requirement of 25%, and an applicant may very well need to put in more money to be competitive. However, other federal grant and loan programs including those through USDA’s Rural Utilities Service range from a 50% to 100% subsidy.

State and federal programs such as the Capital Projects Fund (CPF) programs contain a 20-50% matching requirement, and we are hearing from states that these programs are up to five times oversubscribed, with matching funds exceeding 50% in some cases.

For BEAD, states will consider waiving the match for the highest cost area, and private equity is clamoring at the bit to assist with financing. While cost is a factor, someone will figure out how to make this work.

The final excuse repeated is that other funding programs are preferred. Well, if the mandate of BEAD to reach every single unserved and underserved location is achieved, those future funding programs may very well disappear. As it is, ReConnect through USDA is funding a fraction of the money that is available for BEAD. Further, it’s a risk to hedge your bet that there will be future unserved locations in your service area qualified to be funded through these other programs.