Places seeking federal broadband grants have problems with FCC map; process may hurt areas that need it most

Photo by Peter Cade, Getty Images

With state and local officials tasked with gaining their communities' fair share of "the federal government’s single-biggest investment in high-speed internet, some observers have voiced concern that the grant process will leave some communities short-changed," reports Lindsay McKenzie of StateScoop. "The National Telecommunications and Information Agency, which is managing the $42.5 billion Broadband, Equity, Access and Deployment program," plans to allocate money using the Federal Communication Commission's recently revised map of internet coverage.

"Officials in Vermont found more than 67,000 addresses in the state’s enhanced-911 database that were not present in the FCC map," McKenzie reports. "Confusion over the process for correcting inaccurate map data is raising worries that the broadband accessibility data that NTIA grant-makers are accessing does not reflect reality, which could prevent the funds from reaching the areas most in need . . .  For state broadband offices with limited resources, leaders face difficult choices. . . . Should they continue challenging the accuracy of the FCC map data in the hope that this information is taken into account? Or should offices instead look ahead and focus on developing plans for spending?" The priority should be "participating in the planning processes that are going on right now," said Scott Woods, who works at Ready, a software company that’s supporting broadband data collection and grant applications for ISPs — as well as state and local governments — through its broadband.money website.

For a chance at success, rural areas need to start early and keep at it. Jim Cupples, director of field operations at the Precision Ag Connectivity and Accuracy Stakeholder Alliance, a nonprofit focused on helping rural communities improve their broadband access, told McKenzie, "Rural communities need to have their ducks in a row and not just reach out to their state broadband office."

Cuopples added, "The map process feels rushed to the people at the county level that we work with. I think they understand the importance and want to accommodate the timelines, but many of them have one person working on geographic information systems. How is a small county like that supposed to take on the extra burden of data collection and GIS analysis to challenge these maps in a period of months? . . . It’s obvious that the maps and process are meant to prevent fraud and waste, but with all of the restrictions and confusing guidelines, it has ended up harming the communities it is meant most to serve — those that are currently unserved and under-served."