Bob Bartz: The Broadband Map Is Getting Better. Here’s What Still Needs to Change
Faster provider reporting and engineering field data would make FCC broadband maps more accurate, and that matters for investment decisions well beyond BEAD.
For all the discussion about broadband maps over the last several years, what we're trying to accomplish is straightforward. We need a good picture of where broadband exists and where it doesn't.
For providers deciding where to invest—and policymakers deciding where public dollars should go—the problem is that what shows up on a map and what you find in the field can be very different.
Watch the online course preview!
I've seen firsthand how different the picture on a map can be from what you find in the field. We were looking at an area where the FCC map appeared to show multiple locations. When we looked closer, what we found was an abandoned farmhouse.
When those maps are guiding funding decisions and multimillion dollar network investments, that kind of discrepancy matters.
Congress is taking another look at broadband mapping, and I think there are some practical ways we can make the information more timely, accurate, and useful.
Get network information into the system sooner
Providers are building fiber and turning up new service all the time. The challenge is that the map can lag behind those builds.
I think there's room to tighten that up. If you've finished a fiber build and you're serving customers, the FCC should know about it sooner. I've suggested requiring those changes to be reported within roughly 60 days.
There will always be some lag in a national database. The concern is how much has changed between what's shown on the map and what's happening in the market.
The more current the information is, the more useful it becomes—to government agencies making funding decisions, and to providers evaluating markets, planning network expansions, and deciding where to invest.
Look at engineering data as another resource
Engineering companies have information that could help.
We're designing networks and collecting field data. We're looking at routes, infrastructure and locations as part of that work. We see a lot of information before construction begins because it’s fundamental to designing the network correctly.
That creates an opportunity to use engineering and field data to help identify discrepancies in the broadband map.
It doesn't replace the information providers submit to the FCC. It gives us another source to compare against it.
That abandoned farmhouse is a good example. The map showed one thing. The field information told us something different.
If we can identify more of those discrepancies earlier, we start with better information.
This doesn't end with BEAD
BEAD has brought a lot of attention to broadband mapping because the maps have been used to determine which locations are eligible for funding.
But providers were looking at broadband maps before BEAD, and they'll be looking at them after BEAD.
When you're considering a new market, one of the first questions is what's already there. Who is serving it? Where are the unserved areas? What is the competitive opportunity? Is there enough opportunity to justify the investment?
If the initial information is wrong, you spend more time and money sorting that out before you get very far into planning.
A broadband map isn't going to answer every question about whether a network should be built. There is field work, engineering, permitting, make-ready and construction to consider before you know what a project will involve.
But the map is one of the places we start. The better that starting information is, the better positioned providers are to make informed decisions about what comes next. There’s value well beyond a federal funding program.
Keep making the map better
I don't think we need to start over.
We've learned a lot through the mapping process and through BEAD. We should use what we've learned to improve how information is collected and updated.
Faster reporting from providers would help. Engineering and field data may give us another way to identify discrepancies. If there are other mapping technologies that can improve the information, we should look at those too.
Broadband networks don’t stand still. New fiber will be built, existing networks will expand and areas that are unserved today will be served in the future. Our mapping process needs to keep pace and reflect those changes as quickly and accurately as it reasonably can.
BEAD has given the industry a reason to scrutinize broadband maps more closely, but the need for accurate data will outlast the program. Providers will continue making decisions about where to build, expand and invest their next dollar.When millions of dollars ride on those decisions, better information at the beginning isn’t just a mapping issue. It’s a business imperative.
Bob Bartz is Executive Vice President of Engineering with more than 30 years of construction management experience, 20 in the telecommunication industry. Bob has extensive experience in the various construction methods and manners of constructing OSP telecommunications facilities. Bob has directed all aspects of the OSP design and construction of fiber to the premise, middle mile fiber, fiber overbuilds, and Ethernet over copper projects across the United States. Bob has OSP design and construction experience with ILEC’s and CLEC’s as a consultant, general contractor, and as a vendor under Rural Utility Service contracts. This Expert Opinion is exclusive to Broadband Breakfast.
Broadband Breakfast accepts commentary from informed observers of the broadband scene. Please send pieces to commentary@breakfast.media. The views expressed in Expert Opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the views of Broadband Breakfast and Breakfast Media LLC.
