Angela Siefer

[Commentary] The Internet is driving innovation in community and economic development, education, health care, and government services. But residential broadband adoption1 has stalled. Community anchor institutions (CAIs) are improving residential broadband adoption in several ways: providing digital literacy training, educating consumers about government programs to promote broadband adoption, leading community planning efforts, lending wireless “hot spots,” and, in some cases, providing wireless broadband services directly to consumers. For these efforts to have the greatest impact, however, policymakers must provide CAIs and their community partners with the right resources and incentives. Solutions should be locally customized to meet the needs of specific populations.

[Angela Siefer is the Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance]

[Commentary] In November 2016 we launched Digital Inclusion Trailblazers, a catalog of local, state, and national digital inclusion leadership. This is the first public inventory of local government initiatives promoting digital literacy and broadband access for underserved residents. NDIA and Mobile Citizen developed Digital Inclusion Trailblazers as an advocacy tool. It provides a handy database of examples and contacts for communities interested in taking similar steps themselves. I am pleased to present to you articles from seven of our Digital Inclusion Trailblazers: Austin (TX), Boston (MA), Kansas City (MO), Portland (OR), Raleigh (NC), San Antonio (TX), and San Francisco (CA).
[Angela Siefer is director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance.]

The Ashbury Senior Community Computer Center (ASC3) is a community-based organization which provides technology training and low-cost home internet service. ASC3 serves four Cleveland neighborhoods (Glenville, Forest Hills, South Collinwood and East Cleveland) -- and anyone else who requests their services. These neighborhoods are economically-diverse and family-oriented with a strong representation of older, African-American adults and Case Western Reserve University students. The draw of important churches in these neighborhoods brings in traffic from elsewhere in Cleveland. All four neighborhoods have low home broadband adoption rates. Wanda Davis and her family wanted to strengthen their community. They had two family businesses they needed to close, but they owned the property and realized there was an opportunity to create a community center. Ms. Davis said, “As we closed the hardware store and deli, wanted to make sure what we left was long standing and supportive of the community. The purpose has always been about impact.”
[Siefer is the Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance]

The Federal Communications Commission's March 31, 2016 Order that modernized Lifeline to include broadband service included references to the FCC working with the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) when implementing the National Verifier (an online platform that will verify eligibility) "to provide Lifeline providers with guidance and procedures for creating aggregation projects and for enrolling subscribers in aggregation projects".

A footnote on page 55 of the Order states "USAC will not fund consumer outreach efforts but may provide administration and expertise to community-based organizations, housing associations, and institutions seeking to coordinate the aggregation of benefits." The National Verifier will not be ready for multiple years. Until then, Internet Service Providers of Lifeline Broadband and community-based organizations, housing associations and institutions may develop agreements to cooperatively aggregate eligible households of Lifeline Broadband service.

The National Digital Inclusion Alliance releases its new list of "The Top 25 Worst Connected U.S. Cities, 2015". Our rankings for 2015 are based on recently released Census data on home access to fixed broadband Internet services. This includes wireline broadband technologies (cable Internet, DSL, fiber to the premises) as well as satellite and "fixed wireless" technologies. It does not include 3G and 4G mobile devices like smartphones, or non-broadband connections like dial-up modems.

At the top of 2015's Worst Connected is Detroit (MI), where a full 54% (!) of all households still didn't have fixed broadband connections in 2015. Second on the list was Brownsville (TX) at 52%, followed closely by Cleveland (OH) at 48%, Memphis (TN) at 47%, and Shreveport (LA) and Laredo (TX) at 45%.

[Commentary] In May 2016, digital inclusion practitioners, advocates, academics, Internet service providers, and policymakers gathered in Kansas City at Net Inclusion: The National Digital Inclusion Summit and a funny thing happened on our way to the library: we discovered we were speaking different languages. We were gathered to discuss current and potential local, state, and federal policies aimed at increasing digital equity. But we realized there were a number of working definitions of ‘digital equity’ and ‘digital inclusion’ being used by summit attendees. In the weeks since meeting face-to-face in KC, a working group of us affiliated with the National Digital Inclusion Alliance began meeting online in an attempt to reach consensus definitions for these terms. After many discussions the working group came to think of “digital equity” as the goal – and “digital inclusion” as the strategy to reach the goal.
[Angela Siefer is the Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance]

The Federal Communications Commission has recently tasked its Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau with the development of a plan to identify and work to address non-price related barriers to digital inclusion. Here, we share strategies that local/regional governments can implement in their digital equity planning process. We are currently investigating the digital equity planning processes in Austin (TX), Portland (OR), and Seattle (WA) -- three US cities with their own established stand-alone plans. We have interviewed local government officials and other key stakeholders as well as reviewed city-level policy and planning documents. Based on our preliminary examination of the digital equity plans and through our own interviews with local policymakers, we offer these recommendations:
Local governments should employ a central planning and coordination office with legitimate authority to facilitate digital equity planning.
Local planners should ensure that traditionally-excluded groups are included in digital equity planning.
Local decision-makers should use research from a variety of sources to inform digital equity planning.
We offer these preliminary findings and recommendations as key insights to assist local, state, and federal policymakers in creating effective digital equity plans.

[Dr Brandon Brooks is an Assistant Professor of Digital Media Studies in the James L. Knight School of Communication at Queens University of Charlotte. Dr Colin Rhinesmith conducts original Benton research and is an assistant professor in the School of Library and Information Science at Simmons College and a faculty associate with the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. Angela Siefer is the Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA).]

[Commentary] Functional broadband access and adoption are essential for full participation in our society, for education, for public health, and for public safety. But nagging gaps in broadband adoption exist for too many US communities. In Digital Inclusion and Meaningful Broadband Adoption Initiatives,(1) Dr. Colin Rhinesmith explored successful, local efforts to help low-income individuals and families overcome the barriers to broadband adoption. Dr. Rhinesmith finds that successful digital inclusion organizations focus on: 1) Providing low-cost broadband, 2) Connecting digital literacy training with relevant content and services, 3) Making low-cost computers available, and 4) Operating public access computing centers. In this new series, the Benton Foundation and the National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA) explore the origins, strategies, challenges and funding mechanisms for successful digital inclusion organizations. In this first article, we examine PCs for People, an organization which refurbishes recycled computers and provides affordable technology and broadband service to low-income individuals and families. PCs for People’s work is touching many lives, helping to improve educational and economic outcomes.

[Angela Siefer is the Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA).]

AT&T has declined to make its new low-cost Internet program available to many thousands of eligible households who have the bad luck to live at an address where the company's maximum download speed for new residential accounts is below 3 mbps. Here’s the story. “Access From AT&T” is a low-cost broadband service that was a Federal Communications Commission condition of AT&T's merger with DirectTV. Launched in most AT&T markets in April, the program is supposed to enable any user of the Federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to purchase AT&T high speed home Internet service for either $10 or $5 a month, depending on the download speed “technically available” at the user's address – 10 Mbps for $10/mo, 5 Mbps for $10/mo or 3 Mbps for $5 (plus tax).

As some National Digital Inclusion Alliance affiliates in AT&T's service area geared up to help SNAP participants apply for Access in May and June, they found that a significant number were being told the program was unavailable at their addresses. Some of those households had recent histories of AT&T Internet service or had next door neighbors with current accounts. So, why were they being told AT&T did not serve their addresses? The problem: The threshold for Access From AT&T is a download speed of 3 Mbps. If the fastest speed available at a particular address is less than 3 mbps, an otherwise eligible SNAP recipient at that address can't sign up for Access – though they can pay full price for lower speeds.