Tag Archives: mapping

Broadband coverage in Mendota Heights varies drastically by zip code – how about your area?

Posted on by
Reply

Patch reports…

Microsoft estimates that about 157.3 million people in the United States cannot or do not connect to the internet at broadband speeds, which is defined by the Federal Communications Commission as download speeds of 25 megabits per second and three megabits per second upload speeds.

The company gathered data by ZIP code on the connection speed of devices when they used a Microsoft service in October 2020.

In the Mendota Heights area, Microsoft provided the following information on the percent of residents who use the internet at broadband speeds at each ZIP Code.

  • ZIP code 55118: 94.9 percent

  • ZIP code 55120: 60.2 percent

Not in Mendota Heights, you can still track your coverage…

Didn’t see your ZIP code above? Search by ZIP code and distance here.

Areas in MN without access to 100Mbps and NO apparent potential for federal funding

Posted on by
Reply

CNS has created an interactive map that highlights areas that do not have access to 100Mbps (download) and are not in areas that are eligible for federal funding. These are areas that are going to need to hustle to get broadband deployed. These are area that might be in a good position for state grants if/when they are available.

Here’s their press release…

In light of increasing discussions of additional funding for rural broadband, Cooperative Network Service (CNS) has recently created an interactive map to help stakeholders understand which areas of the country that currently do not have access to 100Mbps download speeds.

The map shows areas that (according to the most recently released 477 data) do not currently have 100Mb download speeds AND are not within areas where federal funding mechanisms are currently funding broadband deployment (ACAM I, ACAM II, CAF II Auction, RDOF, USDA ReConnect and Community Connect).

“The goal is to have a visual to use as a starting point (knowing it’s not perfect) for the industry and various stakeholder groups to use when considering rules for upcoming broadband funding programs,” said Paul Solsrud, CNS Product Manager. “We’re seeing many new funding mechanisms to support rural broadband upgrades as a result of the pandemic, at the Federal, State, and Local levels. “If we continue to use 25Mb as the speed threshold for determining which areas get funding, we may find ourselves with excess funding.”

Acting FCC Chair has long been a proponent of higher minimum speeds, saying “We need to set audacious goals if we want to do big things. With many of our nation’s providers offering gigabit service, it’s time for the FCC to adjust its baseline upward, too. We need to reset it to at least 100 megabits per second. While we’re at it we need to revisit our thinking about upload speeds. At present, our standard is 3 megabits per second. But this asymmetrical approach is dated,” in her August 19, 2020 statement regarding the findings of the 16th Broadband Deployment Report and Order. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-20-112A1.pdf

Additionally, four Senators, in a March 4th, 2021 bipartisan letter, urge the Biden administration to invest in networks that provide symmetrical 100Mb speeds. https://www.bennet.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?id=2C769043-69ED-426B-B30A%5B1%5D57981A4BA333

Included for reference in the interactive map is a layer of areas that are currently unserved by 25Mbps. There are many considerations and variables in creating a map like this, and this does not consider state and local planned projects, and we all know that the available datasets have drawbacks, but the “Overview and Methodology” section in the map explains what’s included and what’s not. Further, layers comparing census blocks with 0 households are included to show unserved areas that did not have at least one housing unit in the 2010 census. Click here to access the map: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/0dfe06e58ec04e6db9c73c767ca8132b

My annoyance is that because federal funding doesn’t always require 100Mbps, this map is hiding areas that are getting federal funding but are not actually in line for getting an upgrade that will make a difference for long.

Doug Dawson asks FCC to track aspiration and actual broadband speeds

Posted on by
Reply

Doug Dawson has a great idea that would change how we look at broadband maps. In short, ask the ISPs to provide the range of speeds a customer can expect rather than report the best that anyone is going to see. He writes…

 An ISP that may be delivering 3 Mbps download will continue to be able to report broadband speeds of 25/3 Mbps as long as that is marketed to the public. This practice of allowing marketing speeds that are far faster than actual speeds has resulted in a massive overstatement of broadband availability. This is the number one reason why the FCC badly undercounts the number of homes that can’t get broadband. The FCC literally encourages ISPs to overstate the broadband product being delivered.

In my Twitter feed for this blog, Deb posted a brilliant suggestion, “ISPs need to identify the floor instead of the potential ceiling. Instead of ‘up to’ speeds, how about we say ‘at least’”.

There are reasons that different customers get different speeds…

It’s a real challenge for an ISPs using any of these technologies to pick a representative speed to advertise to customers – but customers want to know a speed number. DSL may be able to deliver 25/3 Mbps for a home that’s within a quarter-mile of a rural DSLAM. But a customer eight miles away might be lucky to see 1 Mbps. A WISP might be able to deliver 100 Mbps download speeds within the first mile from a tower, but the WISP might be willing to sell to a home that’s 10 miles away and deliver 3 Mbps for the same price. The same is true for the fixed cellular data plans recently being pushed by A&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile. Customers who live close to a cell tower might see 50 Mbps broadband, but customers further away are going to see a tiny fraction of that number.

We need a way to track both ends, the best and worst case scenario…

I suggest they report both the minimum “at least” speed and the maximum “up to” speed. Those two numbers will tell the right story to the public because together they provide the range of speeds being delivered in a given Census. With the FCC’s new portal for customer input, the public could weigh in on the “at least” speeds. If a customer is receiving speeds slower than the “at least” speeds, then, after investigation, the ISP would be required to lower that number in its reporting.

This dual reporting will also allow quality ISPs to distinguish themselves from ISPs that cut corners. If a WISP only sells service to customers within 5 or 6 miles of a transmitter, then the difference between its “at least” speeds and its “up to” speeds would be small. But if another WISP is willing to sell a crappy broadband product a dozen miles from the transmitter, there would be a big difference between its two numbers. If this is reported honestly, the public will be able to distinguish between these two WISPs.

This dual reporting of speeds would also highlight the great technologies – a fiber network is going to have a gigabit “at least” and “up to” speed.

The FCC asks you to take their Speed Test

Posted on by
Reply

From the FCC…

As part of the Commission’s Broadband Data Collection effort to collect comprehensive data on broadband availability across the United States, the FCC is encouraging the public to download the FCC’s Speed Test app, which is currently used to collect speed test data as part of the FCC’s Measuring Broadband America program.  The app provides a way for consumers to test the performance of their mobile and in-home broadband networks.  In addition to showing network performance test results to the user, the app provides the test results to the FCC while protecting the privacy and confidentiality of program volunteers.

“To close the gap between digital haves and have nots, we are working to build a comprehensive, user-friendly dataset on broadband availability.  Expanding the base of consumers who use the FCC Speed Test app will enable us to provide improved coverage information to the public and add to the measurement tools we’re developing to show where broadband is truly available throughout the United States,” said Acting Chairwoman Rosenworcel.

The network coverage and performance information gathered from the Speed Test data will help to inform the FCC’s efforts to collect more accurate and granular broadband deployment data. The app will also be used in the future for consumers to challenge provider-submitted maps when the Broadband Data Collection systems become available.  More information about the app is available on the FCC website.  The FCC Speed Test App is available in the Google Play Store for Android devices, and in the Apple App Store for iOS devices.

Better broadband maps – the FCC is looking at changes

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC is looking to make their broadband maps better. GCN reports on the steps they are taking…

“The Commission will not only collect more data; it will collect better data,” Kiddoo said in a task force presentation. Minimum service speeds, maximum buffer sizes for fixed service along with infrastructure and drive-test data will give the FCC accurate broadband data, she said. Additionally, the commission will refine the data over time through crowdsourcing, audits and verification and enforcement actions.

“With these new data and tools, the Commission will produce vastly more granular and accurate broadband deployment maps, which in turn will allow the Commission to target Universal Service Funding more precisely and produce better data for Commission reports and analyses,” Kiddoo said.

The FCC has already brought on an expert data architect and design firm to work with the commission’s own data and IT teams to design the internal databases, systems and public-facing portals to support advanced broadband data collection and the resulting availability maps, FCC acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel wrote in a March 16 blog.

The commission has also issued a request for information for the creation of the broadband serviceable location fabric — a common dataset of all U.S. locations where fixed broadband internet access service can be installed — that will form the foundation for the location- or address-based reporting.

This complex, data-driven evaluation of broadband access involves building new systems, processes and supporting materials, and it will not happen overnight.

Meanwhile, the FCC is asking consumers to share their broadband experience by filling out a form on the FCC’s site. The simple form asks for basic contact information along with a three-to-five sentence description of connection problems and what could be done to solve them.

US Senate Committee meeting raises questions on speeds, needs and long term wins

Posted on by
Reply

RFDTV recently covered a Senate Commerce Committee that included a broadband update that seemed to cover two tricky topics, federal funding and speed goals. They used Dakota County as an example. The Committee heard from Justin Forde, the Senior Director of Government Relations at Midco who wanted to make sure that policy remained technology neutral and was concerned because other providers had received federal funding after they did for the same community. Apparently countering, Dr. Christopher Ali from the University of Virginia, seems to offer that some technologies will not meet the needs of farmers and that’s why we need to look at supply and demand. RFDTV reports…

According to Forde, “A lot of farmers do not want a fiber line to the farm, they want connectivity to the entire farm. In fact, we have a farmer that has two farms, 75 miles apart. He can use fixed wireless and get connections to both of those for less than $100 dollars. The cost of running fiber to those wouldn’t be economical for us or for the federal government to serve both of those farms.”

Using a recent example from Minnesota, he explained how better agency coordination is needed to ensure federal dollars are spent wisely and where they are needed most.

“We’ve been awarded CAF 2 funding to reach areas of Dakota County in Minnesota and are fully on track for our deployment schedule, but recently we learned two other providers have been awarded CARES Act funding to serve the same areas,” Forde states. “That’s three providers awarded federal funds to serve the exact same area.”

Lawmakers also spent a significant amount of time on the question of what level of connectivity is needed.

Dr. Christopher Ali from the University of Virginia says that precision ag needs access to symmetrical 100×100 speeds.

“I’ve spent a lot of time in rural Minnesota talking to precision agriculture companies and providers; they are uploading terabytes of data and doing an incredible amount of soil analysis oftentimes in realtime, if possible if the technology is there… They need that ultra-fast symmetric upload speeds to enable them to make real-time decisions about planting,” Dr. Ali explains.

However, Forde pushed back saying that increasing the standard from 25/3 MBS to 100/100 would only reclassify some areas as unserved.

“The farms, hundreds of them in the vast agriculture area could also get over 100/20 service out in those farms surely from Midco,” Forde adds. “All of those areas, if the speed changes, would now become eligible for federal funding.”

Farmers don’t want fiber?

There’s a lot to unpack here. First the allegations that famers don’t want fiber seems strange. They certainly want fiber to the tower and I suspect they would be happy to get fiber to the farm but that costs may be a factor in their decision. One way or another they will be creating a wireless network built off a wired connection because they are doing precision agriculture, which generally means connecting lots of moving pieces. (Think of the super charged version of your kids’ various devices connecting to your home network.) And just like we’re all learning we want to best connection we can get to support those home devices, farmers feel the same.

To change or not to change broadband definitions or goals that is the question.

Dr. Ali offers that precision ag needs access to symmetrical 100/100 speeds. And according to the article, Forde pushed back saying that increasing the standard from 25/3 MBS to 100/100 would only reclassify some areas as unserved. The federal definition of broadband right now is 25/3 (25 Mbps down and 3 Mbps up). The Minnesota state goals are 25/3 by 2022 and 100/20 by 2026 – but the MN Broadband Task Force is investigating whether that should be increased.

I’ve heard this reasoning in previous discussions in the Task Force meetings and other places. So again I think it’s worth unpacking. On the front lines, a user is more concerned with “do I have enough broadband” than whether they are considered served, underserved or unserved. Can I get through a telehealth visit while feeding the pigs or does my broadband drop or slow down? Can I do a zoom call while my kids are taking classes online?

Providers and policymakers care about whether someone is served/underserved/unserved because that determines where the funding goes and that helps color the maps that show how successful we are in getting everyone broadband. A mismatch in the definitions may help policymakers declare an early success – but it will be short-lived because constituents who can’t get their work done with slower (25/3) speeds will still be calling them to complain. And if it turns out that taxpayer money has been spent on broadband solutions that do not scale to higher speeds, constituents will be angry and policymakers may feel duped. The only ones who benefit from a lower speed goal are the providers who get the funding to build to lower speeds.

I’m trying to think of an analogy – the best I can do is I go to buy a dress for my daughter, she needs a size 4 and they only have a size 2. But the salesperson convinces me that this size 2 will work, because it’s sleeveless or short or (worse) made of stretchy material. Oh and I can get it on sale. So I buy the dress. My kid is excited. Big win for the mom. Until she tries it on. It simply doesn’t fit. Maybe she can cut it into a top or a skirt – she can be partially served – but at the end of the day, she can’t go to the prom in it.

Unfortunately broadband is a lot more expensive than a prom dress. We all want a win – aiming for what we need will help us reach a longer lasting win.

Minnesota speed tests –spreading to other states and a competition is formed. Time to take a test!

Posted on by
Reply

I love a competition in January – from St Paul Winter Carnival Treasure Hunt to beating others states at taking state broadband speed tests. And while I have my Carnival button, just incase I find the medallion first, I’m feeling better about the odds for winning the most speed tests award.

Regular readers will know that GEO Partners have partnered with Minnesota Broadband Coalition to encourage people throughout Minnesota to take the broadband speed tests. Traditional broadband maps have been built largely on broadband provider-supplied data; GEO Partner maps are built on user-supplied data. Well, Kentucky is the latest state to take on the user-focused mapping, largely with the help of the Center for Rural Development.

GEO Partners report in an email…

Lt. Gov. Jacqueline Coleman announced today the launch of the Kentucky Broadband Speed Test, a crowd-sourcing project that will gather data from Kentuckians needed to expand internet home access for distance learning, telework and telehealth. Kentuckians can take the free, anonymous speed test from Jan. 19 to Feb. 18 at ewdc.ky.gov/Initiatives/Pages/KBI.aspx.

 

This means four states are using the mapping:

You can see from the map, that Minnesota’s definitely in the running but here are the map stats:

  • Minnesota has mapped 32,171 locations.
  • Washington has mapped 32,307.
  • Kentucky is at 10,984 (as of Sunday)– but they have only been up a few days.
  • Main has mapped 10,083

We’re going to need a burst of energy to get the most mapped!

EVENT Feb 17: Data as the Foundation for Broadband Planning

Posted on by
Reply

Another great event coming up…

Data as the Foundation for Broadband Planning

The federal government compiles huge broadband datasets cataloguing broadband availability and subscriptions through the US Census Bureau and Federal Communications Commission, among others. These can be augmented with commercially available speed test data to provide a better insight into broadband access and availability. Join BroadbandUSA on February 17, 2021 to gain a fuller understanding of these datasets and how to use data to strengthen your broadband planning efforts.

Wed, Feb 17, 2021 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM CST
Register now!

Klobuchar Broadband Provisions Included in Year-End Package Passed by Senate, Expected to be Signed Into Law

Posted on by
Reply

Big news from Senator Klobuchar, especially on broadband mapping and college kids in need of better broadband…

U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar, co-chair of the Senate Broadband Caucus, announced that several of her key broadband priorities were included in the year-end omnibus package passed by the Senate and expected to be signed into law. These provisions include funding to ensure students with the greatest financial need have access to high-speed internet based off Klobuchar’s Supporting Connectivity for Higher Education Students in Need Act and funding to implement the Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability (DATA) Act, bipartisan legislation to improve the accuracy of the FCC’s broadband availability maps which was signed into law in March.

 

“In 2020, every family in America should have access to high-speed internet, regardless of their zip code,” Klobuchar said. “The pandemic has exposed how critical broadband is to staying connected to work, school, health care and more. These provisions will help bring us closer to ensuring all Americans have access to high speed internet by improving the broadband data collection process and connecting our college students with the greatest financial need to vital internet services.”  

 

The following provisions were included:

  • Connecting College and University Students in Need: The provision includes funding to ensure college students with the greatest financial need have access to high-speed internet based-off the Supporting Connectivity for Higher Education Students in Need Act. The package includes $285 million funding for historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), Tribal colleges and universities (TCUs), Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) and other minority-serving institutions (MSIs), their students, and minority-owned businesses near those colleges and universities.
    • The funding can be used to purchase routers, modems, wi-fi hotspots, tablets, and laptops. Funding recipients must prioritize students eligible for the Pell Grant or the FCC’s Lifeline program; approved to receive unemployment insurance benefits; currently receiving other need-based financial aid; or earning less than 150 percent of the federal poverty level (i.e., $39,300 for a family of four in the contiguous U.S.). The legislation also allows for connectivity funding for minority-owned businesses near those higher education institutions and establishes the Office of Minority Broadband Initiatives within the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to carry out programs to expand access to broadband at and in communities around HBCUs, TCUs, HSIs and other MSIs.

Lies, damned lies and mapping? Not quite but Senators are putting FCC on alert

Posted on by
Reply

That might be a slight exaggeration, but people have been questioning the maps for years and few on the ground have doubts about the exaggeration of the maps themselves. It matters because the maps often define who qualifies for government funding – state and federal. Today, Senator Manchin reports…

Today, U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) announced he has submitted over 2,000 broadband speed tests to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proving the FCC’s broadband coverage maps are wrong and must be fixed before the $20 billion Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) is distributed incorrectly. In June, Senator Manchin challenged West Virginians to submit 2,000 speed tests to the FCC by the end of the year. …

“With more than two months left in 2020, West Virginians have met and exceeded the goal I set earlier this year to submit 2,000 speed tests to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. I am impressed by their dedication and persistence in proving the FCC’s maps wrong and it is a testament to their efforts to improve broadband coverage for their families, friends, and neighbors in West Virginia. Last week, Chairman Pai agreed to update the maps before the $9 billion 5G Fund for Rural America is distributed, but that’s only one piece of the pie. The FCC is planning to finalize $16 billion in RDOF funding at the end of this month using their incorrect maps, shutting much of West Virginia out of the competition for this funding. It’s just plain wrong, and over 2,000 West Virginians have proven it. I won’t stop submitting West Virginians’ tests until the FCC agrees to use the updated maps to distribute RDOF and commits to creating a user-friendly public feedback system just like they are required to do under law. This fight is far from over, and I need West Virginians to please help me fight for better broadband for the Mountain State by submitting a speed test at https://www.manchin.senate.gov/speedtest.”

Wonder what you can do in Minnesota to combat the FCC maps? Take a Minnesota statewide broadband speed test!

Fastest and slowest rural broadband? MN not on either list

Posted on by
Reply

Good news or bad news? I’m not sure but SatelliteInternet recently posted the fastest and slowest broadband connections in rural America and Minnesota doesn’t make either list.

This site looks a lot like a commercial so I take much of what it says with a grain of salt but there are a number of provider options, including speeds and pridces in detail, which is nice for comparison to what you’re being offered in your community by these and other providers. They even outline the pros and cons of different services.

And they outline the issue…

According to the FCC’s 2020 Broadband Deployment Report, 22.3% of rural Americans don’t have access to internet download speeds of at least 25 Mbps (which is the recommended speed for working from home and online schooling).4,5 And the numbers are even worse on Tribal lands, where 32.1% of Americans don’t have access to internet speeds of 25 Mbps.5

Yet in metropolitan areas, only 1.5% of Americans lack access to these same speeds.5 Rural America’s lackluster internet speeds contribute to the homework gap and a lower percentage of college graduates when compared to Americans living in metropolitan areas.

They outline their methodology, which I think it interesting as we look at statewide speed testing in Minnesota…

Our data comes from speed tests taken on HighSpeedInternet.com. We examined results from more than one million US speed tests to find the fastest and slowest average rural internet speeds.

We defined a “rural” city as a community with a population of less than 10,000 people that is geographically removed from an urban city, which we qualified as meaning it’s at least an hour drive away from the nearest major city. We also filtered out locations with fewer than 50 speed test results to ensure accurate representation of the city’s average speed. In all, we ranked and researched nearly 600 rural cities in the US.

RDOF Bidders Mapped from CNS – any bidders if your area?

Posted on by
Reply

Cooperative Network Services (CNS) shares (via email) an interative map for RDOF bidder and eligible areas…

505 potential bidders filed the FCC’s short form application to bid.
We mapped most of them to help you identify who your potential auction competitors might be, based on the blocks they report on the FCC form 477.
While the map is not comprehensive, it does illustrate that there could be a lot of competition in the auction.
If you have any questions, please reply.
If you’re still looking for precise RDOF location counts, or need a hand with the technical review of an “incomplete” short form, please reach out.

Here are two screenshots that I hope will be helpful . On the left is RDOF short form applicant bidders and on the right they’ve overlayed the final RDOF eligible blocks.

You can learn more about the map by clicking on the info buttonon the top right. Here’s the small print from the website about the map. It’s a reminder that it’s not comprehensive but helpdul nonetheless. They also include a key to the specific providers shown in the map…

For more information, raw data, or RDOF location count assistance, please contact Paul Solsrud paul.solsrud@cooperative-networks.com

For fully interactive data, CNS provides the CNS Broadband Operations map which includes 477 data for the Midwest as well as many other layers including ACAM, CAF, RDOF, Study Areas, etc. More information can be found here: https://www.cooperative-networks.com/broadband-operations-map-app/

This map represents the reported serving areas (derived from the most recently released FCC 477 data) of most of the assumed smaller RDOF Short Form Applicants and potential bidders in the upcoming Rural Digital Opportunity Fund auction. The goal of this map is to help potential bidders understand which entities are likely to bid on RDOF Eligible Census Block Groups.

This map is made from a dissolved data set meaning that all reported serving areas have been dissolved and flattened into one layer on the map. In some cases, there may be multiple providers who serve an area. This map does not individual feature data for provider areas, and has also been tiled to improve performance, and thus clicking a map location does not identify the reported carrier.

Due to a variety of factors, this is not a comprehensive list of bidders. Price Cap carriers like Frontier, Centurylink, Consolidated, Verizon, Windstream,  are not included since they cover and surround the RDOF eligible areas. Of the 505 short form applicants, 166 were not readily matched to their reported 477 data. 27 of these were matched using additional sources. This leaves approximately 139 short form applicants as either being Price Cap, a part of a bidding consortium, a new market entrant, existing carriers using a new FRN, and or new or different holding company name, Satellite provider, large Cellular, etc.

Since it’s not possible to know which carriers may be included in a consortium, the areas identified in this map are not complete or comprehensive.

Some providers who do not appear on the map are providers who only recently have begun offering services and the 477 data does not reflect their recent build outs. Other providers like Charter use “CCO Holdings’” FRN for their short form application. Other providers used a variety of methods that appear to obfuscate who may be behind the bidding entity.

Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation ask people in South MN to take the MN Broadband speed test

Posted on by
Reply

Owatonna”s People’s Press reports…

outhern Minnesota Initiative Foundation is seeking input from community members in southern Minnesota to help define where broadband service is available and what speeds people are receiving. SMIF is partnering with the Minnesota Rural Broadband Coalition, among other partners, on this Minnesota Speed Test Initiative by asking people in its 20-county region to take a one-minute test.

The pandemic has highlighted how important access to broadband is for every Minnesotan now that more people are working, learning and receiving care from home. “There is no doubt that the lack of broadband in rural Minnesota hampers telework, distance learning and telehealth,” said Vince Robinson, Chair of the Minnesota Rural Broadband Coalition.

The speed test can be taken with any device that has an internet or cellular connection and takes less than one minute to complete. No personal information will be collected. For people who are unable to access the internet at all, please call 715-222-2824 to take the test. The test can be found at mnruralbroadbandcoalition.com/speedtest.

Incorrect MN broadband maps making some areas ineligible for broadband grant and leaving students offline

Posted on by
Reply

MinnPost reports on folks in rural areas trying to keep up with distance eudcation depsite spotty broadband and the maps that are overstating their access and making it harder to get grants and other funding to upgrade to sufficient broadband. They spoke with a family in in Lake Shore, a northern Minnesota community served by the Brainerd Public Schools district – but I’ve heard similar in other places too…

Ideally, for a faster, more reliable connection, they’d connect their home to the local provider’s nearest cable hub box, located just a quarter mile down their driveway. But it’s never going to happen, Moore says, because the expense of building out that connection isn’t an economical one for the provider.

She’d like to apply for state grant dollars allocated to these very projects in rural communities. But on state maps, her household gets marked as covered by a local provider — a glitch in the system that makes her and many in her community ineligible.

“Until that gets fixed, lots of communities like ours are going to be passed over. We’ll still have kids going to school, people working from home,” she said. “We’re waiting for the system to catch up with reality.”

The article gives a deserved nod to Rep Ecklund and Sen Westrom, who have each been pushing funding in the Minnesota Legislature. And shows the DEED served/unserved map – that most readers will know (also show at right). They talk about the school’s survey too..

In early May, the state Department of Education asked all public school districts and charter schools to self-report the number of individual students without internet access or access to a device for distance learning. The data set isn’t complete, but based on the counts provided by 540 districts and charter schools — including the state’s three largest districts — 20,899 students were still lacking access to a device in early May, and 21,523 were still lacking internet access.

According to the Minnesota Rural Education Association (MREA), those counts seem a bit low. Their analysis shows that nearly 31,000 rural public students live in households that do not have adequate broadband access (defined as a connection with at least 25 Mbps download speed and at least 3 Mbps upload speed), accounting for 85 percent of the statewide total. The association arrived at these estimates by combining the Minnesota State Office of Broadband Development coverage maps with the American Community Survey data on households with persons under age 18 in each school district, along with state Department of Education data on 2018-19 student enrollment.

I know the survey I received as a parent did not define broadband or access. It asked if we had access to the Internet. I’ve heard the same from folks in other districts. So access at grandma’s may have been counted – even if that isn’t’ 25/3.

Another deserved nod to broadband providers and recognition that they cannot keep giving away access AND invest in future, better soltuions…

The scope of the need, when it comes to closing the digital divide, has also been blurred by the goodwill of providers that stepped up by offering free services and hotspots to districts and families across the state, to finish out the school year from home. …

“It’s not a sustainable model, for the long-term,” she said. “We’ll have to figure out something else.”

 

Broadband maps are unreliable – even in Minnesota

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

Broadband Breakfast Live Online panelists on Wednesday said that current broadband maps are insufficient and that they are harming the people they are meant to serve.

The forum was an opportunity for participants to describe the state of broadband in their respective areas as well as the applications of various services during the coronavirus pandemic.

Speakers included Glenn Fishbine, chief technology officer at NEO Partners, LLC, Eric Frederick, vice president for community affairs at Connected Nation, Brian Webster, CEO of Wireless Mapping Inc. and Russ Elliot, director of the Washington State Broadband Office.

The article include a map “showcasing areas in which Connected Nation had low confidence in broadband connectivity reports — which included almost all supposedly connected regions.” I’ve included it here and you can see what Minnesota looks like.

They used an example from Minnesota…

For example, a Minnesota broadband company called Radio Link Internet offers 300-megabyte symmetric wireless, which disqualifies areas under its service for grants. But a NEO Partners study found that Radio Link had not undergone an LTD speed test in the previous 12 months.

“We are seeing the impact of bad reporting by individual ISPs either because they’re clumsy or they don’t know what they’re doing or because the process is broken,” Fishbine said. “But this is taking a large number of communities out of the pool of potential grant applications.”

Webster said that for broadband maps to transition away from clunky inaccuracy, they have to move to the household level.

It’s hard to get good mapping. Broadband coverage changes almost daily. The ISP tends to report in broadband swaths, which can overstate coverage. Speed tests rely on so many moving pieces including broadband speed between the connection to the node, to the home and then the quality of the device. But these maps are important because eligibility for funding – for billions of dollars – is often based on mapping.