Funding Status
Wave 4 for FY 2011 will be released on Tuesday, July 12th, for $31.5 million. Cumulative funding for FY 2011 will be $537 million. Only Priority 1 applications are being funded at this time. The funding of EDU2011 wireless pilot applications is awaiting FCC action.
Wave 57 for FY 2010 will be released on Wednesday, July 13th, for $5.6 million. Cumulative funding for FY 2010 will be $2.58 billion. Priority 2 funding is still being awarded at 81% and above, and denied at 79% and below. The status of Priority 2 funding at 80% is pending an FCC decision.
Wave 89 for FY 2009 will be released on Monday, July 11th. Cumulative funding for FY 2009 is $2.86 billion.
E-Rate Updates and Reminders
Out-of-Window Letters:
The SLD plans to send letters this week to 226 applicants notifying them that their Form 471 applications for FY 2011 will be considered as having been filed on an untimely basis. Such applications will be denied. The Out-of-Window Letters will cover the following three scenarios:
Online Form 471s submitted electronically after March 24th
- Paper Form 471s postmarked after March 24th
- Online Form 471s submitted on time, but not certified by the extended certification deadline May 17th
Applicants receiving Out-of-Window Letters, particularly those who just missed the deadline, should consider requesting deadline waivers from the FCC. Historically, the FCC has approved waivers for those filing Form 471s within 14 days of the deadline (or longer, in limited cases involving serious illness or the death of a family member). USAC cannot grant such waivers, so the FCC is the only appeal option.
Red Light Rule Webinar:
For the last two weeks, USAC has run three "Understanding the Red Light Rule." Webinars. A recording of one of those Webinars is now available online.
No. There are No E-Rate Applicants in Ontario:
The SLD's online Automated Search of Commitments provides funding details for every funding wave since FY 1998. For each wave, a list is provided showing the total funding awarded for each state and U.S. territory — and for "ONTARIO, CANADA." Except for the highly geographically-challenged, this may come as a shock. Are E-rate discounts really being provided to a province in Canada? Fortunately, the answer is "no." Indeed, a historical analysis of wave-by-wave funding will show that every entry for Ontario indicates $0.00 in funding.
Why then is Ontario on the list at all? (Or: why not Nova Scotia, which is prettier?) We have heard two explanations. One is that the original list was generated from a larger list of E-rate participants, both applicants and service providers, including at least one service provider from Canada (possibly Nortel, at the time). Another and more likely possibility is that the original list of potential applicants included at least one U.S. school managed from Canada, meaning that the Billed Entity address would be in Canada. Indeed, the SLD's Entity Search tool includes a State/Territory pull-down list with an "ON" option (for Ontario) — although searching on that code results in an Internet error.
Perhaps a more interesting question is why, some twelve years or more later, is Ontario still on the list? Could it be that Selchow and Righter, the licensee of Trivial Pursuit, is paying USAC to maintain an obscure game question? More likely, the answer is that the SLD's computer systems are so inflexible that only higher priority changes are being scheduled.
Schools and Libraries News Brief dated July 8 – Form 486 Notification Letters
The SLD's News Brief for July 8, 2011, indicates that the initial batch of Form 486 Notification Letters for FY 2011 will be mailed later this week. The 486 letters will be sent to those applicants who have already been funded for FY 2011 and whose associated Form 486s have been filed and accepted by USAC.
The section on Form 486 Notification Letters includes a relatively detailed discussion of Technology Plan Approval ("TPA") reviews. Historically, TPA reviews are conducted on a certain portion of Form 486s (often randomly selected) to make sure that the applicants had met both the creation and approval requirements for technology plans. Since only Priority 1 applications are currently being funded for FY 2011, and since technology plans are no longer required for Priority 1 services, TPA reviews are not yet expected in connection with FY 2011 Form 486s. The discussion, however, does apply to almost every Form 486 now being filed for FY 2010 or earlier. It also serves as a useful reminder to applicants with pending Priority 2 applications for FY 2011 to make sure they have approved plans before services begin.