Tag Archives: mapping

Need help challenging the FCC maps to ensure funding comes to MN? ILSR can help.

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve written about the importance the FCC maps. They will be used to determine where funding will be invested for improved broadband. People are invited to visit the maps to check the veracity of their marked level of broadband. If they find inaccuracies, they are asked to report them. Or whole communities can report locations. But the maps have been found to be tricky. TO help, the Institute for Local Self Reliance has come up with a step-by-step guide to help folks…

In an effort to provide a better understanding of the map itself, and the challenge process, we created a short series of instructional videos and a click-through guide. Through the videos we provide:

  • An overview of the map itself, important features to be aware of, and how to navigate the map interface.
  • Walk-through of the location challenge process (The deadline for submitting location challenges is Jan. 13, 2023).
  • Walk-through of the broadband availability challenge process (i.e., issues with claims of availability in the map made by Internet service providers).

The challenge guide is in pdf format and was designed to allow users to click links to navigate to the resources they need. Similar to information shared in the videos (below), this resource includes instructions for both the location and availability challenges, as well as more detailed information about valid reasons for submitting those challenges.

We also include a timeline of the availability challenge process, and links to FCC resources for those interested in submitting a bulk challenge. You can find the challenge guide here.

Criticisms of the new FCC Broadband maps and challenge process

Posted on by
Reply

GNC reports on public reaction to the new FCC broadband maps…

Just days after the Federal Communications Commission released an initial draft of a national map showing the availability of broadband internet, some groups are criticizing what they see as the map’s shortcomings.

A letter from open internet nonprofit Public Knowledge dated Nov. 22 called for various improvements to the FCC’s mapping process, which it said had some “inaccuracies.”

Public Knowledge said the procedures for states, local communities and even individuals to challenge the broadband availability map needs to be clarified, as many stakeholders expressed “confusion” over the challenge process. The group also said that the FCC should better explain how it would use local challenges against speeds, if the reported speed on the map is not actually offered by internet service providers.

The organization questioned the satellite broadband availability data, which it said “misleadingly indicates that the vast majority of the country is served.” Instead, Public Knowledge said the FCC should update its maps to provide a “more realistic picture of broadband availability.” While satellite internet has shown promise, the nonprofit said, in practice satellite providers cannot serve most locations in the country with broadband.

Additionally, community institutions like schools and libraries were left off the FCC’s maps of residential service, Public Knowledge said. The FCC apparently assumed that those buildings receive commercial broadband service, when, in fact, many anchor institutions use residential service and should be included in the map.

These criticisms align with what I’m hearing from folks on the frontlines in Minnesota.

Will BEAD fund unlicensed spectrum? Good question and it will matter in Minnesota!

Posted on by
Reply

So many posts about the FCC maps and funding and details because the details will impact how much money communities will receive for broadband in the next few years. The issue this post – unlicensed spectrum versus licensed spectrum. Telecompetitor reports…

The BEAD program is designed to cover some of the costs of deploying broadband to unserved rural areas. In establishing rules for the program, NTIA omitted fixed wireless service that relies totally on unlicensed spectrum for last mile connectivity from its definition of reliable service – a decision that impacts the BEAD program in two ways.

It makes FWA deployments using unlicensed spectrum ineligible for funding. And it makes areas that have high-speed broadband eligible for overbuilds if the only high-speed broadband available is FWA that relies on unlicensed spectrum.

But some folks want that changed…

Seven U.S. senators sent a letter to Alan Davidson, head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, today urging NTIA to revise its definition of reliable broadband for the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program.

So what’s the difference between licensed and unlicensed spectrums?

Here’s a definition from IotaComm. I was hoping for a less commercial perspective but also high level enough to take in easily.

Most of the radio spectrum is licensed by the FCC to certain users, for example, television and radio broadcasters. Individual companies pay a licensing fee for the exclusive right to transmit on an assigned frequency within a certain geographical area. In exchange, those users can be assured that nothing will interfere with their transmission.

Alternatively, organizations can still use the airwaves to transmit communications without getting permission from the FCC, but they must transmit within those parts of the spectrum that are designated for unlicensed users. The amount of spectrum that is available for public and unlicensed use is very small—only a few bands. Both the size of the area and the lack of exclusivity mean there’s greater potential for interference from other users located nearby. (It’s like the “wild west” of radio communication.)

The Telecompetitor article touches on it a little…

NTIA hasn’t said much about why it defined reliable broadband as it did. But David Zumwalt, CEO of the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA) told Telecompetitor a few months ago that NTIA’s primary concern was the future availability of unlicensed spectrum.

WISPA is particularly concerned about whether areas that already have unlicensed high-speed FWA will be eligible for overbuilding through the BEAD program, as many WISPA members already have made high-speed FWA deployments that rely on unlicensed spectrum.

Folks in Minnesota may have a special interest in this issue. According to the FCC map, LTD Broadband is serving a large portion Southern Minnesota with unlicensed spectrum, as the map below indicates.

According to new FCC map Minnesota has ubiquitous broadband at 25/3 – hmm

Posted on by
Reply

I have good news and bad news. According to new FCC map, Minnesota has ubiquitous broadband at speeds of 25 Mbps down and 3 Mbps up. It’s good news if it’s true. It’s bad news if it’s not true and we lose out on federal broadband funding because the maps were wrong. According to maps from the Office of Broadband Development, the FCC maps are wrong. The areas shown in pink in the map below (on the right) do not have broadband at 25/3.

If you live in one of these areas, check out the map and report a location challenge if you think they FCC map is wrong. Once you look up your address, you’ll see the where to make a location challenge on the website.

If you are a community leader or a (potential?) provider in the area, you might think about how to get your neighbors to report overrepresentation or think about attending the tutorial from the FCC on how to file bulk challenges to the FCC’s broadband map on November 30.

FCC unveils pre-production broadband maps and speed test – try them out!

Posted on by
Reply

According to an FCC press release…

The Federal Communications Commission today released a pre-production draft of its new National Broadband Map.  The map will display specific location-level information about broadband services available throughout the country – a significant step forward from the census block level data previously collected.  This release of the draft map kicks off the public challenge processes that will play a critical role in improving the accuracy of the map.  An accurate map is an important resource for targeting funding and other efforts to bring broadband to unserved and underserved communities.

“Today is an important milestone in our effort to help everyone, everywhere get specific information about what broadband options are available for their homes, and pinpointing places in the country where communities do not have the service they need,” said Chairwoman Rosenworcel.  “Our pre-production draft maps are a first step in a long-term effort to continuously improve our data as consumers, providers and others share information with us.  By painting a more accurate picture of where broadband is and is not, local, state, and federal partners can better work together to ensure no one is left on the wrong side of the digital divide.”

The public will be able to view the maps at broadbandmap.fcc.gov and search for their address to see information about the fixed and mobile services that internet providers report are available there.  If the fixed internet services shown are not available at the user’s location, they may file a challenge with the FCC directly through the map interface to correct the information.  Map users will also be able correct information about their location and add their location to the map if it is missing.  The draft map will also allow users to view the mobile wireless coverage reported by cellular service providers.

The FCC today also announced the launch of an updated version of the FCC Speed Test App that will enable users to quickly compare the performance and coverage of their mobile networks to that reported by their provider.  The app allows users to submit their mobile speed test data in support of a challenge to a wireless service provider’s claimed coverage.  New users can download the FCC Speed Test App in both the Apple App Store and Google Play Store.  Existing app users should update the app to gain these new features.

A video tutorial and more information on how to submit challenges is available at fcc.gov/BroadbandData/consumers.

For more information about the BDC, please visit the Broadband Data Collection website at fcc.gov/BroadbandData.

I found an interesting perspective from Christopher Terry, a professor at the University of Minnesota…

“More than 4,600 days after the Federal Communications Commission launched its National Broadband Plan, the agency is finally trying to correct its shortcomings of the last decade by more accurately mapping broadband deployment. The updated data will be used to make grants intended to resolve the digital divide across Minnesota in urban, rural and even Tribal areas. This is the agency’s last chance to achieve universal broadband deployment, and the success or failure of the FCC will have long term impacts on Minnesota’s economy.”

FCC will unveil draft broadband maps and NTIA clock on BEAD allocation to start

Posted on by
Reply

Something to look forward to next week – new broadband maps – as the FCC reports…

The Federal Communications Commission today announced that it will unveil a pre-production draft of new broadband maps on November 18, 2022. This version is the first release of the map required by the Broadband DATA Act and will begin an ongoing, iterative process that will improve the data submitted by providers by incorporating challenges from individuals and other stakeholders.

Broadband availability will be based on data submitted by providers during the initial Broadband Data Collection filing window and will reflect services available as of June 30, 2022. When published, the draft maps will display location level information on broadband availability throughout the country and will allow people to search for their address, and review and dispute the services reported by providers at their location.

The FCC will also accept bulk challenges to the reported availability data from state and Tribal governments and other entities. As a result, this map will continually improve and refine the broadband availability data relied upon by the FCC, other government agencies, and the public. The pre-production draft map release is an important first step forward in building more accurate, more granular broadband maps, which are long overdue and mandated by Congress. Historically, the FCC’s maps have been based on broadband availability data collected at just the census block level rather than the location level, which kept unserved locations hidden if they were in partially served census blocks.

To generate this version of the map, providers’ availability data has been matched to the location information contained in the Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric (Fabric). The Fabric is a common dataset of all locations in the United States where fixed broadband internet access service is or can be installed. To improve the accuracy of the FCC maps, the Commission began accepting challenges to Fabric information from providers, states, local and Tribal governments starting in September. Once the draft maps launch, individuals will also be able to submit challenges, or request corrections, to Fabric locations directly through the map interface. They will also be able to request missing locations be added. Information from those challenges will be incorporated in future versions of the Fabric.

For more information about the BDC, please visit the Broadband Data Collection website at https://www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData.

And once that happens, the NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Association) reports…

Following the Federal Communications Commission’s announcement that on November 18 it will unveil an initial version of new broadband maps and open the mapping challenge process, NTIA expects to communicate Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment allocation levels to eligible entities by June 30th.

“The next eight weeks are critical for our federal efforts to connect the unconnected,” said Alan Davidson, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information. “The FCC’s upcoming challenge process is one of the best chances to ensure that we have accurate maps guiding us as we allocate major Internet for All awards in 2023. I urge every state and community that believes it can offer improvements to be part of this process so that we can deliver on the promise of affordable, reliable high-speed Internet service for everyone in America.”

The Biden-Harris Administration is required by law to allocate Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment funds according to a formula derived from the map data. NTIA coordinates closely with the FCC to ensure that this data is accurate and reliable and will continue to do so. NTIA’s efforts to date include:

  • Calling every single Internet Service Provider (ISP) in the United States to remind them of their obligations relating to the Broadband Data Collection (BDC) process, register any concerns or technical assistance requests, and relay those to the FCC;
  • Engaging in sustained outreach with Governors’ offices, state broadband offices, and stakeholder communities to share technical assistance resources, solicit feedback, and relay major areas of concern; and
  • Producing and sharing materials to break down the process with key dates and deadlines for affected stakeholders.

NTIA will engage in a comprehensive outreach effort to support the FCC in its efforts to ensure that every state that wishes to file a challenge can do so. This effort will include:

  • Technical assistance to state broadband officials and governors’ offices as they prepare challenges;
  • Webinars for members of the public wishing to learn more about how to participate in the challenge process;
  • Regular engagement with state officials to identify and resolve issues.

Internet for All

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law includes a historic $65 billion investment to expand affordable and reliable high-speed Internet access in communities across the U.S. NTIA recently launched a series of new high-speed Internet grant programs funded by the law that will build high-speed Internet infrastructure across the country, create more low-cost high-speed Internet service options, and address the digital equity and inclusion needs in our communities.

Additionally, the Federal Communications Commission’s Affordable Connectivity Program provides a discount of up to $30 per month toward high-speed Internet service for eligible households and up to $75 per month for households on qualifying Tribal lands. Visit getinternet.gov for more information.

For more information on the Biden-Harris Administration’s high-speed Internet programs as well as quotes from the awardees, please visit InternetforAll.gov.

EVENT Sep 7: Webinar on how to Challenge National Broadband maps

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC reports…

By this Public Notice, the Broadband Data Task Force (Task Force), together with the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) and Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA), announce that as of September 12, 2022, state, local, and Tribal governments, service providers, and other entities can begin to file bulk challenges to data in the Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric (Fabric),1 which serves as the foundation for the Broadband Data Collection (BDC) fixed availability maps. We also announce that we will host a webinar on September 7, 2022, at 2 p.m. EDT, to assist state, local, and Tribal governments, service providers, and other entities who intend to submit bulk challenges, or proposed corrections, to the location data in the Fabric. The virtual event will stream on www.fcc.gov/live and the Commission’s YouTube page at www.youtube.com/FCC and will provide an overview of Fabric challenges and a walkthrough of the BDC system’s bulk Fabric challenge submission process.

The Fabric is a common dataset of all locations in the United States where fixed broadband Internet access service is or can be installed.2 The Broadband DATA Act3 required the Commission to issue rules establishing the Fabric, which will, among other things, serve as the foundation on which all data relating to the availability of fixed broadband Internet access service will be reported and overlaid.4 The Commission adopted the Fabric and the basic elements required by the Broadband DATA Act in the Second Report and Order5 and further refined key definitions for the Fabric (and established the Fabric challenge process) in the Third Report and Order. 6 Specifically, the Commission adopted a definition of a “location” for purposes of the Fabric, as well as definitions for “residential location” and “business location,” and delegated responsibility to OEA, in consultation with WCB, to ensure that locations reflect broadband serviceability to the extent OEA and WCB are able to make determinations given the data available.7 The Task Force, OEA, and WCB subsequently provided details on the methods for identifying structures that constitute broadband serviceable locations (BSLs) in the Fabric.8 Fixed broadband service providers that report their broadband availability data using a list of locations must report their service availability based on the location data in the Fabric.9 On June 23, 2022, the Task Force, WCB, and OEA made the production version of the Fabric available to fixed broadband service providers and state, local and Tribal government entities.

Starting on September 12, 2022, governmental entities, broadband service providers, and other entities that have obtained Fabric data using the process set forth in prior public notices11 may submit bulk challenges to the Fabric data in the BDC system. These stakeholders are uniquely positioned to provide early feedback on a large number of locations included in the Fabric data, which will help to refine the next version of the Fabric expected to be released in December. The Task Force, OEA, and WCB previously issued detailed data specifications for formatting and submitting bulk Fabric challenges in the BDC system.12 Once the BDC broadband maps are published later this year, members of the public will be able to view the maps and submit online challenges to the Fabric data associated with an individual location using the map interface.

We remind governments, service providers, and other entities and organizations planning to submit challenges that the Fabric is intended to identify BSLs as defined by the Commission,13 which will not necessarily include all structures at a particular location or parcel. We therefore urge potential challengers to familiarize themselves with the Commission’s definition of BSLs and the additional guidance provided in the Bulk Fabric Challenge Specs Public Notice where we describe some of the characteristics of BSLs so that challengers will be able to align their data with the Fabric location data to determine where BSLs may be missing or mischaracterized. We also reiterate that bulk Fabric challenges must conform to the specifications set forth in the Data Specifications for Bulk Fabric Challenge Data. 14 The challenge data must include, among other things, the name and contact information of the submitting entity, the Fabric location subject to challenge, the category of the challenge for each location, and evidence supporting the challenge.15 Each bulk Fabric challenge data file must include records for each location being challenged in a Comma Separated Value (CSV) format, all fields must be included in the file upload, and all values must conform to the descriptions, codes, or formats identified for each field in the Data Specifications for Bulk Fabric Challenge Data. 16 Bulk Fabric challengers also must certify that the information they submit is true and correct (to the best of their actual knowledge, information, and belief) for each location that is part of the bulk challenge.

The September 7 webinar will be streamed live at both www.fcc.gov/live and on the Commission’s YouTube page at www.youtube.com/FCC beginning at 2 p.m. EDT. A recording of the webinar will be posted to the Commission’s BDC webpage at www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData and on the Commission’s YouTube page. The event will include time for questions and answers, and questions may be submitted in advance of or during the workshop at BDCwebinar@fcc.gov.

Reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available on request. Please include a description of the accommodation you will need and tell us how to contact you if we need more information. Make your request as early as possible. Last-minute requests will be accepted, but may not be possible to fulfill. Send an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice).

The Commission also has made available on the BDC Help Center site at www.fcc.gov/BroadbandData/Help additional technical assistance materials for filing challenges to Fabric data, including the Data Specifications for Bulk Fabric Challenge Data (which sets forth the requirements for filing bulk challenges to BSL data in the Fabric), Fabric FAQs, and a bulk Fabric challenge data matrix, among other resources.

EVENT Aug 17 2pm CST: Webinar on Microsoft Airband’s Digital Equity Data Dashboard

Posted on by
Reply

An invitation for a tool I wrote about earlier that I think is fascinating. I hope to attend…

Join the SF Tech Council this Wednesday (8/17), noon-1pm (Pacific) to learn about Microsoft Airband’s Digital Equity Data Dashboard, a public-facing tool that combines Census Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, BroadbandNow, and Microsoft’s broadband usage data (e.g., upload / download speed data) census tract-by-census tract at state and county levels.

 

Here is the Zoom link to the meeting:  https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85258884100?pwd=RHgzdUFEcFBOdUcwMkIvS24rd3Bmdz09

The dashboard’s practical value is that it provides a unified view of data from several different sources that allows policymakers and community organizations to make data-driven decisions to address drivers of digital inequities in communities.

Maile Martinez, Program Manager, Airband US, and Tammy Glazer, Microsoft AI for Good Data Lab, will demo dashboard features to illustrate how local organizations can get best use out of it (e.g., proposals), including what the data tells us about underserved San Francisco neighborhoods. They are also looking for feedback and suggestions for how this tool can serve YOUR organization better in your work to address digital inequities in San Francisco.

Microsoft makes searchable digital equity map available online

Posted on by
Reply

Microsoft on the Issues reports…

We often say that you can’t fix a problem you don’t understand. Today, Microsoft is releasing a new Digital Equity Data Dashboard to help create better understanding of the economic opportunity gaps in towns, cities and neighborhoods across the United States. The new tool was developed by our Chief Data Science Officer Juan Lavista Ferres and the Microsoft AI for Good Lab, and aggregates public data from the Census Bureau, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), BroadbandNow and Microsoft’s own Broadband Usage Data. It goes census tract-by-census tract, examining 20 different indicators of digital equity – such as broadband access, usage, education and poverty rates – to create one of the most complete pictures of digital equity in these areas to date.

Access the dashboard here

Oct 2021 MN County Ranking for gig speeds. How does your county rank?

Posted on by
Reply

The Office of Broadband Development has released the county broadband maps and numbers; the data was collected by October 2021. For archival reasons, I’ll do three different posting looking at:

Turns out the gig ranking is where all of the excitement is in terms of change in ranking. I’ll paste the numbers below but they’re available in a spreadsheet too. It’s worth nothing that the top county shows 99.59 percent of households have access to Gig access; the bottom 10 counties have less than 1 percent coverage.

Top Ten Gig Counties

County Percent ranking last year
Ranking
Clearwater 99.59 1 5
Beltrami 99.23 2 1
Stevens 96.79 3 2
Cook 94.5 4 3
Red Lake 93.85 5 6
Lake 93.23 6 4
Pennington 92.86 7 46
Lincoln 88.88 8 45
Steele 86.73 9 11
Olmsted 80.56 10 33

Worth noting that all of these are rural counties! Big congrats to the new counties on this short list, especially to Pennington, Lincoln and Olmsted.

I hear policy makers talking about ways to use public funding to build networks only required to get to speeds of 25/3 and I think about the deepening divide between those areas and these counties. These counties, especially given rural standing, make the case that we can aim higher.

Bottom Ten Counties

County Percent ranking Last year Ranking
Benton 0.79 78 73
Anoka 0.13 79 75
Faribault 0.09 80 80
Isanti 0.06 81 79
Pine 0.01 82 86
Kanabec 0 83 82
Martin 0 84 84
Mille Lacs 0 85 85
Ramsey 0 86 81
Washington 0 87 76

There’s not much change in the bottom list. Harder to go lower than 1 percent. But it’s interesting to look at the counties on the list. Ramsey County ranks third for access to 100/20 and lands 86 for Gig access. Anoka is number 11 with access to 25/3 and number 79 here.

Looking at these reports for several years, I’ve seen the leap-frogging that can happen when a community is focused on (or limited or funded) to a specific speed. Usually I’ve seen it with access to 25/3. A community aims and succeeds and they are top of the game for a limited time. More recently we’ve seen that those “successful” communities become ineligible for funding for improvement. The thirst for broadband is ever increasing with new applications and post pandemic reliance on remote access. The once successful communities get left behind like the Little League baseball player who stops practicing. I think the top of the Gig chart are the communities that are ready.

County Percent ranking
Clearwater 99.59 1
Beltrami 99.23 2
Stevens 96.79 3
Cook 94.5 4
Red Lake 93.85 5
Lake 93.23 6
Pennington 92.86 7
Lincoln 88.88 8
Steele 86.73 9
Olmsted 80.56 10
Kittson 80.13 11
Lac qui Parle 79.23 12
Winona 76.09 13
Wadena 75.89 14
Grant 71.99 15
Jackson 68.84 16
Itasca 67.64 17
Dodge 65.96 18
Wabasha 65.86 19
Freeborn 65.15 20
Marshall 55.33 21
Goodhue 54.73 22
Hubbard 54.15 23
Big Stone 52.94 24
Cottonwood 50.2 25
Houston 49.76 26
Mahnomen 49.14 27
Rock 47.94 28
Rice 47.52 29
Swift 47.52 30
Morrison 44.24 31
Sibley 43.92 32
Crow Wing 42.54 33
Polk 40.95 34
Norman 40.7 35
Pope 39.91 36
Scott 39.06 37
Roseau 36.59 38
Todd 36.06 39
Carver 34.8 40
Becker 33.9 41
Douglas 32.35 42
Cass 31.28 43
Fillmore 26.94 44
Renville 26.93 45
Waseca 26.12 46
Wilkin 26.04 47
Mower 25.1 48
Lake of the Woods 22.81 49
Otter Tail 20.76 50
Watonwan 18.58 51
Hennepin 17.62 52
Nicollet 17.47 53
Clay 17.12 54
Chippewa 15.86 55
Aiktin 15.58 56
Nobles 14.96 57
Traverse 14.57 58
Pipestone 12.85 59
Stearns 12.31 60
Meeker 10.72 61
Wright 9.59 62
McLeod 8.81 63
Chisago 7.7 64
Koochiching 7.51 65
Lyon 7.11 66
St. Louis 6.97 67
Redwood 6.47 68
Le Sueur 5.16 69
Dakota 4.96 70
Murray 4.66 71
Brown 4.01 72
Carlton 4.01 73
Sherburne 3.6 74
Blue Earth 2.79 75
Kandiyohi 1.73 76
Yellow Medicine 1.25 77
Benton 0.79 78
Anoka 0.13 79
Faribault 0.09 80
Isanti 0.06 81
Pine 0.01 82
Kanabec 0 83
Martin 0 84
Mille Lacs 0 85
Ramsey 0 86
Washington 0 87

Source: Connected Nation, Oct. 2021.

Oct 2021 MN County Ranking at speeds of 100/20. How does your county rank?

Posted on by
Reply

The Office of Broadband Development has released the county broadband maps and numbers; the data was collected by October 2021. For archival reasons, I’ll do three different posting looking at:

The speed goal for 2026 is ubiquitous access to speeds of 100 Mbps down and 20 up. Rankings are posted below but also available as a spreadsheet.

Top 10 Counties include: 

County percent Ranking last year ranking
Rock 99.93 1 1
Lac qui Parle 99.83 2 3
Ramsey 99.74 3 2
Clearwater 99.59 4 4
Beltrami 99.24 5 6
Lincoln 99.03 6 7
Hennepin 98.51 7 8
Pennington 98.19 8 10
Big Stone 98.05 9 9
Swift 97.45 10 5

As you can see the competition is holding it’s own. There’s some movement within the top 10 as a few gain incremental increases but they hold down the fort. Rock County is still at top! And while I live in Ramsey myself, I’m pleased to see a more rural county eke in for number two spot.

Bottom 10 Counties include:

County percent Ranking last year ranking
Murray 54.37 78 77
Aitkin 52.77 79 78
Carlton 52.04 80 79
Traverse 50.97 81 80
Isanti 50.43 82 81
Todd 48.38 83 82
Yellow Medicine 48.07 84 83
Redwood 45.21 85 85
Pine 39.72 86 86
Kanabec 25.81 87 87

Again this is very little change. Except for Faribault; percentage of access in Faribault went from 43.95 (rank 84) to 65.51 (rank 72). Congrats to them! That left one space one for Murray County, they dropped from 77 to 78 this year.

Big Changers

The Most Improved award this year goes to McLeod. They went from 58.09 (rank 74) to 77.65 (rank 49). Brown County moved up 16 spots and Houston moved up 15. I’m saddened to see Le Sueur and Kandiyohi Counties lose ground. Le Sueur went from 76 percent (rank 49) to 71.32 (rank 62) as a result of new data reported by MetroNet (that differed from what Jaguar had previously reported).

Kandiyohi went from 74.82 (rank 53) to 69.86 (rank 66). This reflects a change from census block data to more granular data from Charter/Spectrum. So they counties haven’t lost ground, there’s just been some correction happening. Other counties may have also seen changes due to the more granular reporting from CenturyLink and Charter/Spectrum.

County percent Ranking
Rock 99.93 1
Lac qui Parle 99.83 2
Ramsey 99.74 3
Clearwater 99.59 4
Beltrami 99.24 5
Lincoln 99.03 6
Hennepin 98.51 7
Pennington 98.19 8
Big Stone 98.05 9
Swift 97.45 10
Anoka 96.92 11
Dakota 96.89 12
Stevens 96.79 13
Wadena 95.7 14
Cook 94.5 15
Washington 94.28 16
Red Lake 93.85 17
Lake 93.32 18
Olmsted 92.98 19
Scott 91.92 20
Polk 91.71 21
Carver 91.16 22
Hubbard 90.85 23
Clay 88.83 24
Benton 88.66 25
Sherburne 88.12 26
Steele 87.77 27
Itasca 86.65 28
Freeborn 85.6 29
Roseau 85.23 30
Winona 85.13 31
Crow Wing 84.24 32
Rice 84.06 33
Brown 83.27 34
Stearns 83.22 35
Houston 83.16 36
Mower 82.47 37
Wright 81.79 38
Lyon 81.45 39
Nobles 81.24 40
Dodge 80.59 41
Chippewa 80.27 42
Kittson 80.13 43
Pipestone 80.11 44
Blue Earth 79.01 45
St. Louis 78.28 46
Nicollet 78.07 47
Goodhue 77.84 48
McLeod 77.65 49
Marshall 77.39 50
Wilkin 76.73 51
Lake of the Woods 74.31 52
Pope 74 53
Becker 73.6 54
Waseca 73.55 55
Koochiching 72.85 56
Chisago 72.55 57
Morrison 72.47 58
Grant 71.99 59
Douglas 71.94 60
Mahnomen 71.73 61
Le Sueur 71.32 62
Renville 71.01 63
Meeker 70.73 64
Wabasha 70.35 65
Kandiyohi 69.86 66
Watonwan 69.78 67
Jackson 68.84 68
Otter Tail 67.6 69
Cottonwood 67.44 70
Martin 66.66 71
Faribault 65.51 72
Sibley 63.8 73
Cass 61.04 74
Mille Lacs 60.44 75
Fillmore 56.36 76
Norman 55 77
Murray 54.37 78
Aiktin 52.77 79
Carlton 52.04 80
Traverse 50.97 81
Isanti 50.43 82
Todd 48.38 83
Yellow Medicine 48.07 84
Redwood 45.21 85
Pine 39.72 86
Kanabec 25.81 87

Source: Connected Nation, Oct. 2021.

Oct 2021 MN County Ranking at speeds of 25/3. How does your county rank?

Posted on by
Reply

The Office of Broadband Development has released the county broadband maps and numbers; the data was collected by October 2021. For archival reasons, I’ll do three different posting looking at:

Top 10 Commentary

The speed goal for 2022 is ubiquitous access to speeds of 25 Mbps down and 3 up. Rankings are posted below but also available as a spreadsheet. The good news is that the top 9 counties have more than 99 percent covered. There has been little change in the top 10 counties since last reporting.

Bottom 10 Commentary

The bad news is that the bottom 10 have less than 70 percent coverage. The bottom ranking is also pretty similar with one exception: Isanti went from 78.8 percent coverage to 59.75 coverage this year, which drops them from 66 to 84 ranking. This is because of a change from census block data to more granular data from CenturyLink. (Both CenturyLink and Charter/Spectrum went with more granular reporting and that has had an impact on numbers.)

Biggest Changers

A couple of counties saw big movement. Faribault went from 35 to 17 rank – although the percentage of coverage didn’t increase much, the competition for those with over 90 percent coverage is close. That’s a good sign! Redwood went from 73 to 62. Again, a little percentage gain can mean a lot. Like Isanti mentioned above, a few counties lost percentage and ranking – possibly due to the change from census block to location reporting. Those counties with greatest change in rank include: Rice, Sherburne, St Louis, Wright, Stearns and Swift. It’s worth noting that this doesn’t reflection a change in coverage as much as a correction/change in reporting.

County percent ranking
Red Lake 99.99 1
Ramsey 99.95 2
Rock 99.93 3
Lac qui Parle 99.84 4
Clearwater 99.72 5
Beltrami 99.43 6
Lincoln 99.33 7
Pennington 99.24 8
Stevens 99.22 9
Hennepin 98.97 10
Anoka 98.23 11
Big Stone 98.22 12
Swift 97.72 13
Dakota 97.48 14
Washington 96.45 15
Hubbard 96.36 16
Faribault 96.32 17
Wadena 95.88 18
Grant 95.35 19
Cook 94.50 20
Olmsted 94.48 21
Clay 93.80 22
Lake 93.34 23
Scott 93.29 24
Houston 92.65 25
Polk 92.55 26
Cass 92.48 27
Itasca 92.38 28
Sherburne 92.25 29
Carver 92.11 30
Otter Tail 91.50 31
Becker 90.29 32
Benton 89.74 33
Rice 89.58 34
Stearns 89.10 35
Winona 88.59 36
Steele 88.22 37
Douglas 88.20 38
Mower 87.51 39
Wright 86.72 40
Crow Wing 86.68 41
Freeborn 86.62 42
Kandiyohi 86.54 43
Roseau 85.84 44
Dodge 84.84 45
Brown 84.66 46
Nobles 83.74 47
Lyon 83.57 48
Nicollet 83.40 49
Mahnomen 83.24 50
Wilkin 83.02 51
Chippewa 82.93 52
Pope 82.73 53
Blue Earth 82.48 54
St. Louis 81.95 55
Pipestone 81.52 56
Martin 81.45 57
McLeod 80.56 58
Goodhue 80.32 59
Kittson 80.20 60
Norman 79.43 61
Redwood 78.90 62
Marshall 77.90 63
Watonwan 77.17 64
Waseca 76.36 65
Koochiching 75.94 66
Chisago 75.86 67
Le Sueur 75.59 68
Lake of the Woods 75.18 69
Morrison 74.67 70
Meeker 74.42 71
Wabasha 73.90 72
Cottonwood 73.80 73
Renville 73.48 74
Todd 72.94 75
Mille Lacs 70.53 76
Fillmore 70.35 77
Jackson 69.33 78
Traverse 67.87 79
Aitkin 62.36 81
Sibley 67.32 80
Carlton 62.07 82
Yellow Medicine 61.90 83
Isanti 59.75 84
Murray 57.83 85
Pine 46.01 86
Kanabec 36.41 87
Source: Connected Nation, Oct. 2021.

 

RAMS to sponsor MN statewide speed test

Posted on by
Reply

Big news for folks who like crowd source mapping – Range Association of Municipalities and Schools (RAMS) is picking up the Statewide speed test mapping project. RAMS reports…

Today we are pleased to announce that the Range Association of Municipalities and Schools (RAMS) will be the new host of the Minnesota statewide speedtest project. This map and initiative was previously hosted by the MN Rural Broadband Coalition. This crowdsourcing speed test will allow local governments, area partners, communities and providers to better identify underserved and unserved areas as well as help consumers see for themselves if they are actually getting the service (broadband speed) that they are playing for. RAMS is able to host this test with the help of one of our corporate members, GEO Partners, LLC who will be helping analyze the data and create usable maps and information. RAMS is also pleased that retired director, Steve Giorgi, has remained on Minnesota’s state broadband task force and is continuing to volunteer and help Minnesota communities gain access to affordable, high-speed internet. RAMS helped to start this testing process in April of 2020 and the information gathered directly from the end users (you) will be used is extremely important to further the development of high school internet for citizens of Minnesota.

Check your speed!

MN Tribal broadband maps are out – compare 2019 to 2020 coverage

Posted on by
Reply

I recently finished the MN County Broadband profiles – 87 mini reports on what’s happening in each county. I’ve been keep an eye out for an opportunity to update the profiles for MN tribal communities as well. The maps from the Office of Broadband Development are out, which show the coverage (served/underserved/unserved) but the numbers aren’t. From a macro level it’s hard to compare progress or gauge success without the numbers. When the numbers come out I’ll do a deeper dive, in the meantime I thought it might be interesting to at least see the maps from 2019 and 2020 for each tribal area. Side by side we can make some assessments in each community.

Key:

  • Served: Green
  • Underserved: Purple
  • Unserved: Pink

Bois Forte Reservation
(get 2020 map)

Fond du Lac
(get 2020 map)

Grand Portage Reservation
(get 2020 map)

Leech Lake Reservation
(get 2020 map)

Lower Sioux Indian Community
(get 2020 map)

Mille Lacs Reservation
(get 2020 map)

Prairie Island Indian Community
(get 2020 map)

Red Lake Reservation
(get 2020 map)

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community
(get 2020 map)

Upper Sioux Community
(get 2020 map)

White Earth Reservation
(get 2020 map)

Which providers in MN can get voice-only lifeline service support? CNS has a map!

Posted on by
Reply

Back in June (2021), the FCC announced the census blocks where providers could still receive financial support for voice-only lifeline services…

Today, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) announces those Census blocks where Lifeline support for voice-only service will continue at $5.25 per month from December 1, 2021 through November 30, 2022. These Census blocks can be found on the Universal Service Administrative Company’s (USAC) website here: https://www.usac.org/wpcontent/uploads/lifeline/documents/Data/voice_CB_blocks.zip.

In the 2016 Lifeline Order, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) outlined a shift in the Lifeline program towards a greater focus on supporting broadband services for Lifeline eligible consumers.1 As part of that effort, the Commission adopted a transition period to phase down support for voice-only Lifeline services before reimbursement for such services would decrease to $0 on December 1, 2021.2 The Commission also adopted an exception to this complete phase-down in voice-only support and continued Lifeline support, in the amount of $5.25 per subscriber per month, for qualifying voice-only services provided to Lifeline eligible subscribers in Census blocks where there is only one Lifeline provider.3 The Commission directed the Bureau to identify Census blocks where there is only one Lifeline provider and to announce those Census blocks by June 1 of each year.

CNS has mapped out the areas, which is always a good way to take in this information, especially for policymakers. I have a screenshot here, the CNS map is interactive.