It is amazing what the FCC accomplished in 60 days. On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 establishing the Emergency Connectivity Fund (“ECF”) and giving the FCC 60 days to establish rules for the new $7.1 billion E-rate-like program to support remote learning for schools and libraries. Right on target, the FCC delivered a Report and Order (FCC 21-58) on May 11, 2021 — a herculean effort of 91 pages.
Complete as the ECF Order was — at least as far as laying out the basic structure of the ECF program — schools and libraries just beginning to plan for the initial application window are confronting a host of detailed questions that USAC and/or the FCC will hopefully answer shortly. To understand the breadth and importance of these questions, we suggest that potential ECF applicants carefully read the following two recent FCC filings requesting clarification:
State E-Rate Coordinators’ Alliance (“SECA”)
Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition (“SHLB”)
The most important issues we see being raised, particularly relating to schools with long-established 1:1 programs, concern the definition of “unmet need.” The FCC has made it pretty clear that the purpose of ECF is not to fund a “refresh” of existing devices. Paragraph 81 of the Order states:
To ensure that funding is focused on unmet need, we will require schools to certify…that they are only seeking support for eligible equipment provided to students and staff who would otherwise lack access to connected devices sufficient to engage in remote learning.
Footnote 229 goes on to clarify:
We recognize that many school districts operate 1:1 device initiatives and may provide devices to all students regardless of need. In light of the admittedly substantial, but still limited funding…we do not think it is appropriate to support the purchase of devices or services for students that already have access to an adequate device.
The two key words in these statements are “sufficient” and “adequate.” The SECA filing, for example, asks:
If a district-owned device has already been assigned to a student that needs the device for remote online learning, but the device is no longer sufficient, can the district receive ECF money to purchase a new connected device? [Emphasis added]
Similarly, although the FCC has indicated that ECF will not support devices to be held in “reserve,” it would be logical to assume that devices that break (as is common, particularly for devices used at home) would need to be replaced, presumably with ones purchased in advance based on a projected replacement schedule. This too needs to be clarified by the FCC.
Until these “unmet need” and other issues are clarified, it will be difficult for any potential ECF applicant to develop a practical application strategy, much less to estimate the total expected demand in any ECF filing window.
For the benefit of schools and libraries considering ECF filings in the first application window covering 2021-2022 purchases — pending additional guidance from the FCC or USAC — we offer the following planning suggestions. We believe that this approach is consistent with the Order as we read it and within the spirit of the pandemic relief in the underlying American Recovery Act. To be conservative, we are focusing on the “Emergency Connectivity” aspect of the Order, not on a potentially longer-term solution to the “Homework Gap.”
- Review the steps taken by the school or library during the initial 16 months of the pandemic (March 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021) to address the device and internet service needs of students, staff, and patrons. In particular:
- What equipment (laptops, tablets, hotspots, modems, routers, etc.) were purchased for off-campus use?
- What proportion of pre-COVID or even new off-campus equipment needed to be replaced, permanently or temporarily, during the 16-month period?
- What off-campus internet services were newly provided for needy users?
- What additional equipment and services would have been provided had sufficient funding been available?
- How were both the “met” and “unmet” needs of students, staff, and patrons determined during this period?
- Note that documentation of these needs will be important, not only to serve as a basis for the first ECF window, but as a basis for seeking retroactive funding in a subsequent ECF window.
- Given the experience gained during the first 16 months of the pandemic, and assuming the availability of ECF funding, what are the equivalent needs for the 2021-2022 period to be covered by the initial ECF window? In particular:
- What equipment and services will be needed for new users? Schools, for example, will have to meet the needs of incoming students at the lowest grade plus enrollment changes at the higher grades.
- What level of existing off-campus equipment will need to be replaced based on past experience (see above)?
We suspect that this approach will need to be modified as more information on the details of the ECF program are forthcoming from USAC and the FCC, but the suggestions above should provide a reasonable approach to initial application planning.