CIPA Compliance Checklist
Schools and libraries that plan on receiving E-rate discounts on Internet access and/or internal connection services after July 1, 2002, need to be in compliance with the Children's Internet Protection Act ("CIPA"). CIPA compliance means that schools and libraries are filtering their Internet services and have implemented formal Internet Safety Policies (also frequently known as Acceptable Use Policies).
The Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"), charged with administering CIPA for E-rate purposes, has established only the broadest guidelines for interpreting the Act's filtering and policy requirements. For the most part, the FCC has left it to applicants to determine the precise requirements of the Act. The FCC requires only that applicants certify their compliance on the Form 486.
Last fall, in an effort to provide additional, albeit unofficial, guidance, E-Rate Central developed a CIPA E-rate primer that summarizes the Internet filtering and policy requirements and provides a model of a very basic two-page policy.
In response to requests for assistance in reviewing Internet Safety Policies and in documenting CIPA compliance, E-Rate Central has just released a simple two-page checklist. If an applicant can check "Yes" to at least one of the filtering provisions and to all seven of the basic policy provisions (and can indicate the date of the public meeting that was held to discuss the policy), we believe that an applicant, in all good faith, can certify CIPA compliance. The checklist should be signed, dated, and retained in the applicant's E-rate files for documentation purposes.
E-Rate Central's CIPA Compliance Checklist is available on the E-Rate Central Web site.
As a general rule, applicants who have been denied funding by the SLD for reasons that appear incorrect or unsubstantiated are encouraged to appeal those decisions to the SLD and, if necessary, to the FCC. In our experience, SLD and FCC appeal reviews are usually thorough and fair (though never quick). Although many appeals are ultimately denied, the appeal process is essentially the only mechanism the SLD and the FCC have to correct individual and/or systemic funding decision errors. In several important cases, FCC decisions in favor of the appellants have changed SLD funding review rules. On a retroactive basis, however, such changes only benefit applicants with pending appeals. Usually, there is no downside to appealing, only upside.
As with many rules, there are exceptions. Unfortunately, this week, one New York parochial school experienced the downside of a thorough FCC appeal review. The school had appealed to the SLD, and then to the FCC, a SLD funding decision that reduced the school's Internet access funding request under what the school considered an automatically renewing, multiyear contract, but that the SLD considered a contract needing to be re-bid prior to each extension and which otherwise expired in midyear. The FCC not only agreed with the SLD contract expiration decision, but determined that the school's original contract had been signed one day before the Allowable Contract Date of the associated Form 470 - a point apparently missed during the SLD's initial review of the school's application. The FCC not only denied the school's appeal, but directed the SLD "to pursue commitment adjustment procedures with regard to certain funds already awarded." In other words, the school may be asked to repay the E-rate discount it had already received on the portion of the year's Internet service previously approved by the SLD (see FCC Appeal Decision ).
This is a cautionary lesson for all applicants. Before appealing any decision to the SLD or FCC, an applicant should review its own application for any potential problem(s) that the SLD might have missed during the original approval process. If any other aspect of the application is questionable, the probabilities of a gain or loss from the appeal should be carefully weighed.