Tag Archives: mapping

Local Estimates of Internet Adoption (Project LEIA) percent and ranking by County in MN

Posted on by
Reply

In early December 2024, the NTIA unveiled their Local Estimates of Internet Adoption (Project LEIA) Interactive Map…

This map uses Project LEIA experimental estimates to depict household wired Internet adoption for every county in the United States in 2022. Counties with relatively higher adoption rates are filled with a darker shade of purple, while lighter shades indicate lower adoption rates. The interactive tool supports zooming and panning around the map to focus on areas of interest. Tapping or clicking on a county will open a pop-up box with more information, including the name of the county, the estimated percent of households with wired Internet service, and the margin of error for that estimate. On browsers that support it, a button to toggle full screen mode will also appear under the zoom buttons in the upper left corner.

The first question is – how is this different from the MN ranking I used for the 2024 MN Broadband County Profiles? Two big ways:

  • This map looks at adoption, not access, it looks at how many households subscribe to broadband – not how many have access to subscribe.
  • This map is uses data from 2022.

While having access is required to subscribing, people choose not to subscribe because it’s too expensive (that may include cost of device) for them and/or they don’t see a need for broadband. So looking at adoption rates in your county, consider how adoption compares to access and think about what roadblocks are likely for your neighbors. What could help – access, more community education classes, free computer distribution opportunities or monthly broadband subsidies?

Counties by Rank (download spreadsheet)

county LEIA percentage Rank
Dakota 84.1 1
Washington 82.8 2
Scott 82.3 3
Stevens 82.2 4
Hennepin 82.1 5
Anoka 81.7 6
Carver 81.2 7
Ramsey 80.1 8
Sherburne 79.8 9
Olmsted 79.7 10
Big Stone 79.4 11
Dodge 78.9 12
Winona 77.2 13
Hubbard 77 14
Nicollet 77 15
Houston 76.7 16
Wilkin 76.6 17
Douglas 76.4 18
Pennington 76.4 19
Grant 76.4 20
Beltrami 76.3 21
Cook 76.3 22
Blue Earth 76 23
Lac qui Parle 75.8 24
Stearns 75.6 25
Chisago 75.5 26
Red Lake 75.5 27
Wabasha 75.4 28
Wright 75.4 29
Clearwater 75.3 30
Rock 75.3 31
Lincoln 74.8 32
Crow Wing 74.6 33
Nobles 74.5 34
Lyon 74.3 35
Steele 74.3 36
Clay 74.2 37
Itasca 73.7 38
Faribault 73.6 39
Rice 73.3 40
Mower 73.1 41
Swift 72.6 42
Waseca 72.6 43
Benton 72.5 44
Traverse 71.3 45
Brown 71.1 46
Koochiching 71 47
McLeod 70.9 48
Le Sueur 70.8 49
Roseau 70.5 50
Watonwan 70.5 51
Becker 70.2 52
Polk 69.9 53
Isanti 69.8 54
Cass 69 55
Marshall 69 56
Meeker 69 57
Otter Tail 68.9 58
St. Louis 68.9 59
Pope 68.3 60
Freeborn 67.9 61
Jackson 67.8 62
Fillmore 67.7 63
Kandiyohi 67 64
Pipestone 66.8 65
Lake 66.3 66
Wadena 66.3 67
Cottonwood 66 68
Chippewa 65.8 69
Mille Lacs 65.6 70
Norman 65.6 71
Goodhue 65.5 72
Martin 65.4 73
Morrison 65.4 74
Yellow Medicine 65.2 75
Murray 64.8 76
Lake of the Woods 64.5 77
Redwood 64.4 78
Sibley 64.1 79
Renville 63 80
Carlton 62.3 81
Aitkin 61.9 82
Kittson 59.3 83
Mahnomen 56.7 84
Kanabec 52.7 85
Pine 52.2 86
Todd 47.4 87

New FCC National Broadband Maps: a high-level look at Minnesota

Posted on by
Reply

The new (fifth) version of the National Broadband Map was released earlier this week. I hope to dig deeper soon but for now I wanted to share the highest level look at Minnesota. The Map depicts fixed and mobile broadband availability data as of June 30, 2024, based on data submitted by internet service providers as part of the Commission’s Broadband Data Collection.

The maps look at fixed broadband and mobile broadband:

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.

National Rural Electric Cooperative Association pushes FCC to focus on symmetrical broadband speeds

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

Closing the digital divide requires collecting accurate data to ensure rural areas receive their fair share of the $42.5 billion in broadband expansion subsidies soon to be released by the Commerce Department, a national trade association said.

The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, representing more than 900 electric cooperatives, warned this week that faulty data from the Federal Communications Commission could cause rural communities to miss out on vital funding.

As the clock ticks toward the release of funds through the Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment program, NRECA pressed the FCC during separate meetings with legal advisors to Commissioners Brendan Carr, Geoffrey Starks and Nathan Simington on Oct. 1, 2 and 3 to address inaccuracies in the agency’s broadband mapping data.

Cooperative.com elaborates that NRECA wants the mapping to look at symmetrical speeds…

On October 7, 2024, NRECA filed in the FCC’s Annual 706 Report on Broadband Availability, stressing our consistent position that the Commission adopt a symmetrical 100/100 Mbps benchmark to adequately reflect true consumer demand and urging that it consider raising the long-term benchmark from 1 Gbps/500 Mbps service to 1Gbps/1 Gbps symmetrical service. We also stressed that mobile services should be viewed as complementary and not a substitute for fixed broadband to determine advanced telecommunications capability.

Minnesota has some great maps, including broadband maps

Posted on by
Reply

Forbes reports…

The state of Minnesota had a series of audacious goals:

To completely eliminate children living in poverty.

To completely eliminate lead service lines in its drinking water.

To make affordable childcare so accessible in Minneapolis that any family could walk to an elementary school or daycare center.

To protect the state’s peat lands, an effective collector of carbon.

To deploy high-speed internet to even the farthest corners of a state that is larger than all New England but has just one-third its population.

That’s a wild array of challenges, and Minnesota tackled all of them with a single technology: Maps.

Although governments at many levels use mapping as an analytical tool, the state of Minnesota has infused mapping into its problem solving in a way few other places have, making high-tech maps and geographic information systems (GIS) technology, a part of the everyday infrastructure of state government.

Broadband maps are hard to maintain, since they change so quickly, but I have used Minnesota maps as the backbone of the MN County Broadband Profiles for years. One frustration right now is that the State maps are not the maps that are being used to determine eligibility for federal broadband funds.

 

FCC issues citations to 11 companies for broadband data reporting violations – none in MN

Posted on by
Reply

The following companies were issued citations from the FCC for broadband data reporting violations. I’ve added location to the list, because I wanted to make sure none were in Minnesota…

  1. A.C.T.S.: docx pdf txt (Illinois)
  2. City Wireless: docx pdf txt (Arkansas)
  3. Community Cable & Broadband : docx pdf txt (Oklahoma)
  4. Crazy Communications: docx pdf txt (Kansas)
  5. FiberSpark Inc.: docx pdf txt (New York)
  6. Gila Broadband: docx pdf txt (Arizona)
  7. Internet Service: docx pdf txt (Michigan)
  8. Lake Linx Inc.: docx pdf txt (California)
  9. Simple Fiber Communications: docx pdf txt (Texas)
  10. Telecast Communications: docx pdf txt (Kentucky)
  11. WIFAST: docx pdf txt (Florida)

 

2023 Federal Broadband funding Report: how does your MN county rank for access?

Posted on by
Reply

NTIA just released their 2023 Federal Broadband Funding Report. It shows fiscal year (FY) 2022 data reported by 13 agencies across 70 programs making investments in broadband.3 As you can see from the county bullet list below, the map tracks a number of factors.

I like that they look at broadband access and subscription. I wish the data were up to date; I wish their definition of broadband was 100 Mbps down and 20 up (100/20) or faster. They track access to 25/3. With those factors in mind, I pulled out the Minnesota information by county to look at a few things:

Because it’s a lot of info, I will do three separate posts. (Access table of rankings.)

How does your county rank for broadband access?

Again, we’re looking at 25 Mbps down and 3 up, which isn’t the Minnesota goal speed for broadband but it’s something. (MN speed goal was 25/3 by 2022 and 100/20 by 2026.) These numbers are different from my usual Broadband County Profiles but especially now I think it’s important to pay attention to multiple maps.

 

Pop with access to broadband 25/3+ Mbps Rank
Hennepin 100 1
Dodge 100 1
Lyon 100 1
Steele 100 1
Rock 100 1
Kandiyohi 100 1
Jackson 100 1
Waseca 100 1
Yellow Medicine 100 1
Freeborn 100 1
Pipestone 100 1
Chippewa 100 1
Clearwater 100 1
Nobles 100 1
Cottonwood 100 1
Lincoln 100 1
Redwood 100 1
Murray 100 1
Red Lake 100 1
Renville 100 1
Carver 99.9 21
Dakota 99.9 21
Ramsey 99.9 21
Winona 99.9 21
Olmsted 99.9 21
Mower 99.9 21
Swift 99.9 21
Goodhue 99.7 28
Le Sueur 99.7 28
Douglas 99.7 28
Watonwan 99.6 31
Wilkin 99.6 31
Polk 99.5 33
Pope 99.5 33
Martin 99.4 35
Wabasha 99.4 35
Lac qui Parle 99.4 35
Sibley 99.4 35
Scott 99.3 39
Beltrami 99.3 39
Anoka 99.2 41
Blue Earth 99.2 41
Rice 99 43
Stevens 99 43
Grant 99 43
Pennington 98.7 46
Otter Tail 98.7 46
Cook 98.5 48
Clay 98.5 48
Faribault 98.5 48
McLeod 98.4 51
Washington 98.3 52
Hubbard 98.1 53
Brown 97.8 54
Norman 97.6 55
Traverse 97.6 55
Wadena 97.1 57
Fillmore 96.6 58
Meeker 96.5 59
Wright 96.2 60
Stearns 96.2 61
Nicollet 95.3 62
Crow Wing 95.1 63
Itasca 94.4 64
Becker 94.2 65
Sherburne 94 66
Big Stone 93.5 67
Mahnomen 92.8 68
Benton 92.6 69
Chisago 92.1 70
Lake 91.7 71
Morrison 91.3 72
Houston 90.7 73
Cass 89.7 74
St. Louis 89 75
Koochiching 82.3 76
Isanti 81.3 77
Marshall 81.1 78
Todd 79.9 79
Roseau 78.9 80
Carlton 77.3 81
Mille Lacs 76.9 82
Aitkin 72.2 83
Kittson 71.8 84
Pine 67.6 85
Kanabec 63.2 86
Lake of the Woods 60.7 87

Below is more info on the state and individual counties. I will include this info on each post related to this topic. (Just because I hope it make the info more accessible and usable.)

Continue reading →

Scott County urges residents to take speed tests to qualify for $652 Million broadband funding

Posted on by
Reply

Hoodline reports on broadband advocacy in Scott County. It is as if the folks in Scott County were at the same Office of Broadband Development meeting I was yesterday. It’s a call for Scott County folks and maybe a model for other MN counties…

For residents and local business owners in Scott County, Minnesota, the countdown has begun to speak up about their internet service, or the lack thereof. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has flung open a 30-day window, starting now, for individuals and companies to report inaccuracies in their listed internet coverage. This step could be a game-changer for those in dire need of a digital boost, navigating a landscape where high-speed internet is rapidly transitioning from luxury to necessity.

Under the microscope is the sprawling Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, with its hefty $42 billion purse provided by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It’s all about bridging the digital divide, working towards an “Internet for All” mantra. It’s no small chunk of change for the Land of 10,000 Lakes – Minnesota is looking at a hefty injection of nearly $652 million to connect its disconnected, according to county officials.

Why the urgency? BEAD zeroes in on the underserved and the unserved – places where the internet crawls below 25/3 Mbps or simply doesn’t exist. Minnesota’s own Office of Broadband Development (OBD) is spearheading the charge, equipped with an FCC-provided, interactive map that lays bare who’s got speed, who doesn’t, and who gets a slice of the BEAD funding pie.

Accuracy is paramount; the map’s revelations determine who rides the internet fast lane, and who remains in the pits, waiting for service. And it’s serious business – the OBD has implored constituents to use the map, ensure its precision, and essentially, chart their own path toward a more connected future. The map can be found on the OBD’s website, a crucial tool in an era where internet access is as critical as electricity and running water, once was.

Unreliable maps may cost rural and urban communities federal funding

Posted on by
Reply

The story below from LAist will sound familiar to folks in rural areas if you replace apartment buildings with zip codes or census tracts. The granularity for rural areas is better now, but it is still worth checking your address and the map to make sure you are adequately counted…

California is getting more than $1.8 billion in federal grant money to expand high-speed broadband service in areas where residents have little to no access.

But advocates say the state is undercounting the true number of residents who lack internet, especially those living in apartment buildings.

That could mean dense cities like Los Angeles not getting their fair share.

To identify underserved areas, the state uses broadband maps, which are based on self-reported data from internet companies.

But that data has some significant flaws. For example, an entire 20-unit apartment building can count as “served” if even one household — or just the leasing office — is able to get connected.

The rest of the building’s residents may not have service, either because they can’t afford it or because their units don’t have the necessary wiring or infrastructure to make it possible.

Without a proper headcount, L.A. appears to have a smaller share of unserved or underserved residents — and that could stop the billions of dollars from the federal Broadband, Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program from reaching the people it’s supposed to help.

Cautionary tale of Ohio broadband provider who lied to the FCC

Posted on by
Reply

Ars Technica reports…

An Internet service provider that admitted lying to the Federal Communications Commission about where it offers broadband will pay a $10,000 fine and implement a compliance plan to prevent future violations.

Jefferson County Cable (JCC), a small ISP in Toronto, Ohio, admitted that it falsely claimed to offer fiber service in an area that it hadn’t expanded to yet. A company executive also admitted that the firm submitted false coverage data to prevent other ISPs from obtaining government grants to serve the area. Ars helped expose the incident in a February 2023 article.

The FCC announced the outcome of its investigation on March 15, saying that Jefferson County Cable violated the Broadband Data Collection program requirements and the Broadband DATA Act, a US law, “in connection with reporting inaccurate information or data with respect to the Company’s ability to provide broadband Internet access service.”

“To settle this matter, Jefferson County Cable agrees to pay a $10,000 civil penalty to the United States Treasury,” the FCC said. “Jefferson County Cable also agrees to implement enhanced compliance measures. This action will help further the Commission’s efforts to bridge the digital divide by having accurate data of locations where broadband service is available.”

Minnesota alone is about to get $650 million in federal funding to expand broadband. It’s a good time to make sure money is going to the right areas and to the providers who are best able to serve those communities.

What are Illinois and Washington States doing for the challenge process?

Posted on by
Reply

As regular readers will know Minnesota is getting $651 million in BEAD funding from the federal government to get broadband to everyone in the state. It’s a regimented and slower-than-we’d-like process for Minnesota to get that money. Part of the process is the opportunity for folks in Minnesota to challenge the map. The challenges will be used to help determine areas of specific need. (It won’t increase the $651M but will determine how much each county/town/region gets.)

The Office of Broadband Development has hired a vendor (Sanborn Geospatial) that will create a portal to facilitate (maybe manage?) the challenge process, but we don’t know a lot about the tool yet. The challenge process won’t start until the NTIA approves the Initial proposals, but it is helpful to prepare. It seems like one way we can prepare is to look at the two states that have unveiled their tools and/or processes – Illinois and Washington. As a reminder, individuals cannot submit challenges. Nonprofits, local governments and broadband providers can submit challenges.

Yesterday I attended a webinar hosted by Illinois Extension that showcased the Illinois portal. I think a key detail is the partnership with Illinois Extension. They have the expertise and capacity to support a challenge process. They have a Challenge Process User Guide that outlines aspects of the process and I won’t get into the details but at a high level I noticed a few things. First there are three types/ways to submit a challenge: bulk challenges, challenge via form and challenge via map. Individuals are welcome to submit challenges even if their local government isn’t. That challenge will be matched to an appropriate nonprofit or Illinois Extension will work with it. Sounds like challenging organizations will have access to the interactive and updated maps.

I also took some time to check out the Washington State portal by watching their Feb 1, 2024 webinar. (Minnesota will be working with the same vendor for their portal.) At that time, they were looking for a way to submit challenges from individuals but didn’t have a specific plan but it sounds like they will be tracking potential challengers is a way that seems to make it possible to match make. They did have a checklist of things potential challengers could do to prepare. First, was get a free NTIA license from CostQuest. (Get more info on that process.) The webinar goes on to list specific needs subgrantees (grant applicants) could line up now to prepare to apply for funding. Minnesota may do things differently. Minnesota has the advantage of years of grant management but Minnesota is using the same vendor and much of the process is likely mandated by federal requirements – so this may be helpful. (Starts about 30 minutes into the video.)

It does sound like the Washinton map doesn’t allow bulk challenges by uploading data – but only by indicating an area on a map.

It feels like these states are just a few pages ahead of Minnesota in this process. It also feels like the process is not linear so being pages ahead doesn’t mean these states are “winning” but just that checking out what they are doing could be useful.

Le Sueur County asks FCC to put burden of proof of broadband maps on broadband providers

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

Le Sueur County, Minnesota, is urging the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a more proactive and regulatory role in the BEAD challenge process, contending the challenge process currently places the burden of proof on local units of government, when it should be on internet service providers.

In comments submitted to the commission on Monday, Le Sueur County officials call for the FCC to provide grants or resources to local government units to hire professional vendors to work on addressing challenges submitted to the FCC’s national broadband map.

A look at who owns the broadband mapping data from Doug Dawson

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve had several questions about broadband mapping and BEAD challenges lately, especially since the Minnesota Broadband Task Force meeting last week. A quick reminder, or framing for new folks, broadband mapping is important because it determines eligibility for funding. There are a lot of moving pieces to how to best correct (challenge) the maps if you feel your location is misrepresented if you have the time and talent to do it.

Leave it to my smarter friend Doug Dawson (POTS and PANS) to take a step back and ask, who is creating the maps and how is the data made available…

My biggest current pet peeve about the FCC mapping is that the agency made the decision to give power over the mapping and map challenge process to CostQuest, an outside commercial vendor.

The FCC originally awarded CostQuest $44.9 million to create the broadband maps. Everybody I know who works with mapping thinks this is an exorbitant amount, but if this was the end of the mapping story, then congratulations to CostQuest for landing a lucrative federal contract – lots of other companies have made hay doing so over the years.

Unfortunately, this is only the beginning of the mapping story because the FCC gave CostQuest the ability to own the rights to the mapping fabric, which is the database that shows the location of every home and business in the country that is a potential broadband customer. This is a big deal because it means that CostQuest, a private company, controls the portal for data needed by the public to understand who has or doesn’t have broadband.

A case in point is that soon after CostQuest created the first FCC map, the company was hired by the NTIA to provide the databases and maps for the BEAD grant process for a price tag of $49.9 million – more than the FCC paid to create the maps. CostQuest will also sell access to the mapping fabric to others for a fee. I have to imagine that the FCC is also paying CostQuest a big fee twice a year to update the FCC maps and to process map challenges.

I’m just flabbergasted that there is a private company that holds the reins to the database of broadband availability and which only makes it available for a fee.

Again, Doug hits the nail on the head with the frustration level in the field…

Our industry is full of data geeks who could work wonders if they had free access to the mapping fabric database. There are citizen broadband committees and retired folks in every community who are willing to sift through the mapping data to understand broadband trends and to identify locations where ISPs have exaggerated coverage claims. But citizens willing to do this research are not going to pay the fees to get access to the data – and shouldn’t have to.

The FCC says that getting broadband to everybody is its most important mission. However, restricting access to mapping data doesn’t support that sentiment. It almost feels more like the FCC doesn’t want folks pointing out the many errors in the data, which is a shame. Nobody expected mapping data that is reported by ISPs to be accurate since ISPs all have their own agendas. When the new maps were created. I had high hopes that an army of volunteers could challenge the ISPs and set the record straight. It seems like the FCC went out of its way to make sure that doesn’t happen by giving a gatekeeper the ownership of the data.

OPPORTUNITY: FCC seeks public comment on broadband data collection challenge process

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC is seeking public comment on broadband data collection challenge process…

Comment Date: February 19, 2024

Reply Comment Date: March 5, 2024

 By this Public Notice, the Broadband Data Task Force, in coordination with the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), Wireline Competition Bureau, and Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA) (collectively BDTF), seeks public comment on its Broadband Data Collection (BDC) challenge processes.  The BDC is the most granular, detailed collection of broadband availability data the FCC has ever gathered or released, depicting location-level information on mass-market fixed broadband internet access services available across the United States as well as standardized coverage maps of 3G, 4G, and 5G mobile wireless services.  Importantly, the BDC—for the first time ever—also provides opportunities for consumers, State, local, and Tribal governmental entities, and other stakeholders to challenge the coverage and broadband availability information reported to the FCC and depicted in the new maps.

Pursuant to section 802(b)(5)(D) of the Communications Act, as amended by Pub. L. No. 116-130, the Commission is required to submit a report to Congress that evaluates the challenge processes and considers whether the Commission should commence an inquiry on the need for other tools to help identify potential inaccuracies in BDC data and improve the accuracy of those data.[1]  Comments received in response to this Public Notice will inform this report.  To this end, we request input on the extent to which stakeholders are participating in the challenge processes, whether they find the challenge processes to be “user-friendly”, and, if not, what improvements the Commission can make to its processes to make participation more user-friendly, and the effectiveness of the challenge processes in improving the quality and accuracy of our broadband availability data.

[1] See 47 U.S.C. § 642(b)(5)(D);  Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act, Pub. L. No. 116-130, 134 Stat. 228 (2020) (codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 641-646) (Broadband DATA Act or BDA), 47 U.S.C. § 642(a)(1)(A).  The report must be submitted to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce.  47 U.S.C. § 642(b)(5)(D).

Using mapping to better understand BEAD allocation

Posted on by
Reply

We’ve spoken with Glenn Fishbine about mapping in the past. He is now with Breaking Point Solutions doing the same work. He and his colleague, Nancy DeGidio, along with community broadband Champion Barbara Droher Kline, joined me for a chat and demonstration about how maps can change the way we think of BEAD. (Broadband Equity Access and Deployment is the $650 million of federal funds coming into Minnesota for broadband deployment.) I was glad to have Barbara join because she’s a practitioner of broadband development and had some great practical question.

The maps are proprietary but getting the overview really helped me better understand opportunities we might have with BEAD. For example, providers can find areas that qualify for BEAD funding and are adjacent or near areas they already serve – or maybe areas in their exiting footprint. Communities can find out what areas will qualify for BEAD funding – those are areas where more than 80 percent are not unserved or underserved. You can also see areas that are un/underserved but not at the same percentage. (Because you’ll want those homes to get service too.) You can see who serves these areas or provides service nearby. You can even find areas that have not been counted in BEAD (served and unserved) and area where you may believe connectivity has been overestimated. In either case, that might spur a challenge to the FCC.

Glenn did a quick scan of how much it would cost to serve the areas that had 80 percent of more of un/underserved households and found that if that was the only qualifier for BEAD funding, Minnesota might be in danger of leaving $100 million of the $650 million on the table and households left unserved.