In honor of Indigenous Peoples’ Day, ILSR celebrates the growing number of Tribal nations exercising digital sovereignty by building Tribally-owned broadband networks.

Our freshly updated Indigenous Networks map and census highlights the burgeoning Tribal broadband movement, offering a window into this critical work across Indian Country.

Our updates underscore how much has changed since 2020 when ILSR first undertook research on Tribal networks. When we began tracking the development of Tribal broadband, of the 574 federally-recognized Tribes in the nation, there were about 40 Tribal networks offering service.

Four years later, there are now twice as many active networks in operation with 50 more Tribes who have secured funding to build their own networks, thanks in part to unprecedented federal investments in Tribal broadband. An additional four dozen Tribes have expressed interest in following suit, determined to close the digital divide in what has historically been the least connected part of the United States.

Image

Many Tribal broadband networks that we previously identified have continued to thrive. Others have been able to upgrade their services to offer fiber service, the gold standard of Internet connectivity.

Meanwhile, a steady stream of new Tribal broadband programs have launched, with networks coming online each year and many others on the horizon, signaling a period of tremendous growth in Tribal broadband.

As the nation observes Labor Day, Public Knowledge is gearing up to celebrate the work of four Internet champions who have made significant contributions “on behalf of the public interest to help everyone connect and communicate.”

To that end, Public Knowledge recently announced the award winners for the 21st Annual IP3 Awards, which will be held on September 26th at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington D.C.

Among the four award recipients is Angela Siefer, Executive Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA). She will be presented with the Internet Protocol Award this year, recognizing her as a national leader of the digital equity movement.

In announcing the awards, Public Knowledge noted how Angela has been a trailblazer “in the field we now call ‘digital inclusion.’”

The announcement went on to recount the early days of her notable career – “starting with setting up computer labs in underserved areas and managing local digital inclusion programs” and how Angela’s “first-hand knowledge” led to her being called on to consult for the US Department of Commerce as well as testify before Congress on a number of occasions.

In 2015, as Angela saw “the growing field needed its own place to build best practices and community,” she focused her attention on becoming “the founding executive director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, which advances digital equity by supporting community programs and equipping policymakers to act,” the announcement read in explaining why she is being honored.

Three other award recipients were also announced:

FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks is being honored with the President’s Award for his work “from combating Internet inequality to advocating for diversity in employment, entrepreneurship, and media ownership.”

*In partnership with Broadband Breakfast, we occasionally republish each other's content. The following story by Broadband Breakfast Reporter Jericho Casper was originally published here.

The broadband market is often described as robustly competitive. But some have their doubts.

With the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) preparing a biennial report to Congress assessing competition in communications, some industry stakeholders have voiced concern over the growing dominance of a few major players.

Last Thursday, representatives from INCOMPAS, the trade association for competitive communications companies, met with FCC officials to discuss the forthcoming 2024 Communications Marketplace Report. This report is intended to guide FCC policies that foster competition, innovation, and consumer choice in the industry.

Image

During the meeting, INCOMPAS President Angie Kronenberg and Attorney Lindsay Stern emphasized the ongoing issue of high market concentration in the fixed broadband internet access service sector, urging the FCC to more closely examine the barriers that stifle competition.

In an August 12 filing at the FCC, INCOMPAS pointed out that the top four broadband providers—Comcast, Charter, AT&T, and Verizon—dominate nearly 80% of the fixed BIAS market, leaving most consumers with only one or two options for broadband service, especially at higher speed tiers.

EMPOWER Broadband, a subsidiary of Mecklenburg Electric Cooperative (MEC), is asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to waive financing requirements attached to the provider’s takeover of thousands of subsidized broadband locations from RiverStreet Networks. It’s a move the cooperative says will save it millions of dollars in errant additional penalties.

It’s also highly representative of the ongoing challenges facing a program that has long been criticized for dysfunction and mismanagement.

The FCC program not only fell short of fulfilling its original promise, it now risks boxing numerous communities out from what could be a generational funding opportunity made possible by the 2021 infrastructure bill.  

During the 2018 Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II auction, RiverStreet was awarded $32.1 million in financing to provide high-speed Internet to 13,518 locations in Virginia. RiverStreet is looking to divest 3,757 locations across three counties, poised to receive $8.1 million in annual CAF II broadband deployment support.

Image

According to a May RiverStreet filing with the FCC spotted by Broadband Breakfast, the divestment is necessary because the company “encountered certain obstacles that have prevented it from meeting its CAF II buildout milestones in the assigned CBGs.”

On July 24, 2024, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 9-7 that the Universal Service Fund is unconstitutional. 

The decision throws a whole raft of federal broadband programs - including those which help schools pay for connectivity, those which help homes pay for home Internet access, and more - into a state of uncertainty. 

All signs point to a stop at the Supreme Court for final ruling on the future of the program. On the most recent episode of the Connect This! Show, hosts Christopher Mitchell (ILSR) and Travis Carter (USI Fiber) were joined by regular guests Doug Dawson (CCG Consulting) and Kim McKinley (UTOPIA Fiber) as well as special guest Casey Lide (Keller and Heckman Law Firm) to talk about the decision. They discuss the impact of the decision in the long-term, including how the USF fits into the jigsaw puzzle of federal broadband funding programs and what we can expect to see if the decision is upheld. 

Watch the segment below.

Email us at broadband@communitynets.org with feedback and ideas for the show.

Subscribe to the show using this feed or find it on the Connect This! page, and watch on LinkedIn, on YouTube Live, on Facebook live, or below.

A new report published today by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) reveals how the sovereignty of Tribal Nations and their own efforts to solve connectivity challenges on Tribal lands can be undermined by the poor design and maze of bureaucracy associated with some federal broadband programs.

The report – Native Nations and Federal Telecom Policy Failures: Lessons from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund [pdf] – begins with a startling example of how one Tribe learned about the plans of a major fiber Internet provider to serve “a handful of locations in the heart of the Tribal Reservation.”

Authored by Dr. Jessica Auer, Tribal Broadband Policy Analyst with ILSR’s Community Broadband Networks initiative, the report captures the pernicious consequences of a program that was supposed to help bring high-speed Internet service to rural communities who lacked access:

A non-Tribal telecommunications company had received federal funding to build broadband infrastructure on Tribal lands without consent, had appeared to shirk required federal Tribal engagement requirements, had ignored the Tribe’s attempt to raise concerns about it, and now seemed to be expecting to dictate what would happen next.

While the report begins with a real-life example of how Tribal nations now working to build their own broadband networks can be blindsided by bureaucratic neglect and non-Tribal ISPs, it goes on to detail why the FCC’s approach to broadband funding has fostered tension between providers and Tribal ISPs, and why RDOF has earned a particularly bad reputation among many Tribes.

“Some recent federal broadband programs do actually require ISPs to secure Tribal consent prior to receiving funds,” Auer says. “But, the FCC still has not adopted this approach. The problems outlined in this report reinforce the need for such a requirement.”

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) says it won’t be providing broader relief for broadband operators that have defaulted on grant awards via the agency’s messy and controversial Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) broadband subsidy program.

According to an FCC public notice, the FCC stated it found "no demonstrated need for broad relief" from provider penalties connected to either the RDOF or Connect America Fund II (CAF II) programs. It also shot down calls for a broader amnesty program for defaulters.

“Given the flexibility available under the existing default processes…we decline to provide a blanket amnesty,” the agency’s Wireline Competition Bureau said.

In a letter to the agency last February, a broad coalition of providers and consumer organizations suggested that either reduced penalties – or some sort of amnesty program – might speed up defaults, freeing areas for upcoming broadband infrastructure bill (Broadband Equity Access And Deployment, or BEAD) subsidies.

Image

The group was quick to point out that areas where RDOF and CAF II money has been committed are considered “served” for purposes of BEAD deployments, potentially boxing out many desperate U.S. communities from billions in potential funding.

“Many of the RDOF and CAF II awardees who cannot or will not deploy their networks are located in states with the greatest connectivity needs, like Missouri and Mississippi,” the authors wrote. “The Commission should not permit these unserved rural communities to face this type of double whammy and be left behind once again.”

But in its statement, the FCC insisted that changes to its approach aren’t necessary because, it claims, its existing processes are working.