All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico are currently working on digital equity plans. As they release draft plans seeking public feedback, the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society is sharing summaries focused on how states define their digital divides and their vision for reaching digital equity.

The purpose of the Arkansas Digital Skills and Opportunity Plan is to outline an actionable path forward to make digital opportunity an economic benefit and reality for all Arkansans. This plan will position the state’s residents to pursue cross-sectoral economic growth through broadband-related, nondeployment activities and enhance workforce development. The Arkansas State Broadband Office (ARConnect) details the barriers faced by Arkansans as well as the steps that the state office is taking to close the digital divide. The draft plan is open for public comment until January 25, 2024.

Arkansas's Vision for Digital Equity

Building on the state’s investment in broadband infrastructure and the high-level vision outlined in the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) Five-Year Action Plan, ARConnect has a detailed vision for achieving digital opportunity in Arkansas:

By 2030, every person, family, and community in Arkansas – regardless of location and income – will have access to:

• Affordable, reliable high-speed internet service in their homes, businesses, and community anchor institutions (i.e., libraries, schools, healthcare providers)
• The opportunity to enroll in basic computer skills training
• A computer, tablet, or mobile device

Every resident will be able to self-determine how they use digital tools and resources to safely and securely participate in education, healthcare, employment, and other important parts of our increasingly online society.

Digital opportunity means all Arkansans—regardless of the community they call home—will be able to fully participate in the digital world. Reliable, affordable options for internet service and digital devices should be available to enable families to accomplish everyday tasks such as sending emails, attending telehealth appointments, or paying bills. In-person, multilingual digital skills training opportunities covering basic information and security practices should be available to anyone interested. Making digital opportunity the new normal will benefit all Arkansans by enhancing educational opportunities, increasing economic mobility, and expanding self-determination.

ARConnect's mission statement for the draft Digital Skills and Opportunity Plan is to provide a comprehensive and detailed guide outlining what needs to be done to make digital opportunity a reality for those of whom it may be lacking.

Covered Populations and Barriers to Digital Equity

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) estimates that 87 percent of all Arkansans are likely to fall into at least one covered population and therefore are more likely to be negatively impacted by the digital divide. The largest covered population in Arkansas is our state’s rural residents, with over half of all Arkansans (55%) living in a rural area.

Individuals who live in low-income households

Based on the Arkansas Digital Skills and Opportunity Survey (ADSOS) results, individuals who live in low-income households (referred to as "covered households") differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• Covered households reported experiencing regular service interruptions at a higher rate than the general population. While 33.3 percent of all respondents noted that they encounter service interruptions one or more times each week, this number was significantly higher (42.2%) among respondents belonging to a covered household.
• Unsurprisingly, covered households indicated that they have a harder time affording their internet service bills. A total of 39.3 percent of all survey respondents said fitting a monthly internet bill into their household budget was either somewhat difficult or very difficult. But when evaluating covered households specifically, this percentage increases: 64.1 percent of covered household respondents said it was either somewhat difficult or very difficult to fit a monthly internet bill into their household budget.
• Covered households generally have fewer devices. Less than 10 percent of all survey respondents (9.4%) indicated that they only had 1 or 2 devices in their household, while 16.2 percent of covered household respondents selected this choice. Additionally, while 62.7 percent of all respondents reported owning 5 or more devices, only 52.6 percent of covered household respondents indicated the same.
• When assessing the devices that are owned, covered households generally have fewer laptops, desktops, and tablets. Compared to all survey respondents, 9.7 percent fewer covered household respondents own a laptop computer, 8.3 percent fewer own a desktop computer, and 8.4 percent fewer own a tablet.
• Covered household respondents also shared that it would take significantly longer – or not be possible – for them to replace a computer if it was lost or damaged beyond repair. Only 14.2 percent of all respondents indicated that they would not be able to replace their device in the foreseeable future in this kind of scenario, but 36.5 percent of covered household respondents selected this answer.
• When asked about their internet searching habits, 10.5 percent more covered household respondents indicated that they had used the internet to apply or search for a job in the past year, compared with the general population.

Aging individuals

Aging individuals—defined as individuals 60 years or older—differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• Aging individuals are more likely to have older devices in their homes. While 14.4 percent of all survey respondents said the average age of their device was between 5 and 9 years, this figure was higher (20.1%) among aging individual respondents.
• While their devices are generally older than those in the average Arkansas household, aging individuals were more likely to report that if their computer was lost or damaged beyond repair they would be able to replace it more quickly. Roughly half of all respondents (51.3%) said they would be able to replace their computer within one to seven days, while this number was 10.1 percent higher (61.4%) among aging individual respondents.
• Interestingly, aging individuals were also more likely to indicate that there were no barriers to sufficient and reliable internet access where they live. Just over a quarter of all respondents (27.3%) selected this option when asked about their primary barrier to having reliable internet access at home, while 34.1 percent of aging individual respondents indicated the same.
• Aging individuals are also more likely to have their home internet service bundled with other telecommunication services, such as telephone or television services. While 35.6 percent of all respondents indicated that their home internet service is bundled, almost half (46.6%) of aging individual respondents reported having bundled service.
• This segment of the population is also more likely than the general population to use the internet to search for information about government benefits, such as social security. Just over a third of all respondents (34.7%) indicated that they have used the internet to apply for or manage their government benefits in the past year, while 46.5 percent of aging individual respondents reported doing so.
• When asked about their confidence with basic digital skills, aging individuals reported lower confidence levels using a video application, such as Zoom. Among the general population, 76.5 percent of respondents indicated that they were either somewhat confident or very confident using a video application, while only 70.4 percent of aging individual respondents selected one of the same two choices.

Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Individuals

Based on the ADSOS, formerly incarcerated individuals differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• The cost of at-home internet service tends to disproportionately impact incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals. When asked how much they pay for monthly internet service, only 2.6 percent of all survey respondents indicated that they cannot afford to pay for service and do not have at-home broadband access. However, 11.8 percent of incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals selected this option on the survey. Additionally, when asked how difficult it is to fit monthly internet service costs into their budgets, 7.3 percent more of incarcerated and formerly incarcerated respondents (16.0%) indicated that it is “very difficult,” compared with general population respondents (8.7%).
• Incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals also generally have fewer devices in their households. While 62.7 percent of all respondents reported owning 5 or more devices, only 52.4 percent of incarcerated and formerly incarcerated respondents indicated the same.
• The devices that incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals tend to have in their households are also generally older than those of the general population. While 14.4% of all survey respondents said the average age of their devices was between 5 and 9 years, this figure was higher (20.7%) among incarcerated and formerly incarcerated respondents.
• Incarcerated and formerly incarcerated respondents also shared that it would not be possible for them to replace a computer if it was lost or damaged beyond repair at higher rates than the general population. Only 14.2 percent of all respondents indicated that they would not be able to replace their device in the foreseeable future in this kind of scenario, but 19.8 percent of incarcerated and formerly incarcerated respondents indicated this response.
• Furthermore, incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals are less likely to have enough devices in their homes. When asked if their households have enough computer devices for their needs, 28.0 percent of incarcerated and formerly incarcerated respondents answered “no,” compared with 10.8 percent of the general population.

Veterans

Based on ADSOS results, veterans differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• Veterans tend not to have mobile access to the internet at the same rates that the general population reported. While 69.2 percent of all survey respondents indicated that they or someone in their household accesses the internet via a cellular data plan on a mobile device, the percentage of veterans who indicated having a mobile service plan goes down 6.1 percent.
• While nearly all of the other covered population groups identified internet service cost as the top barrier to having reliable high-speed internet at home, veterans identified service availability as their top barrier to internet access.
• Following logically from the above result, the veteran population tends to have an easier time affording monthly internet service. Only 21.7 percent of the general population indicated that it is “not at all difficult” to pay for at-home internet access, while slightly less than a third of veteran respondents (29.1%) selected this option.
• Veterans are also more likely to have their home internet service bundled with other telecommunication services, such as telephone or television services. While 35.6 percent of all respondents indicated that their home internet service is bundled, just under half (44.7%) of veteran respondents reported the same.
• Additionally, veterans reported using the internet to search for information related to their government benefits at higher rates than the average Arkansan. Just over a third of all respondents (34.7%) indicated that they have used the internet to apply for or manage their government benefits in the past year, while 44.3 percent of veteran respondents reported doing so.

Individuals with Language Barriers

Based on ADSOS results, individuals with language barriers differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• More so than the average respondent, individuals with language barriers reported cost as their primary barrier to having reliable internet access at home. Roughly a quarter of all respondents indicated cost as their top obstacle to having broadband access, whereas 36.5 percent of respondents with a language barrier selected this option.
• This population was more familiar with the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) and respondents with language barriers were slightly more likely to report already being enrolled in the program than the general population, but awareness and enrollment rates are still low. Only one in four Arkansans (25.4%) said they had heard of the program, while 30.8 percent of respondents with a language barrier indicated they were aware of the ACP. Only 5.9 percent of all survey respondents reported current participation in the ACP, while 12.0 percent of respondents with a language barrier reported the same.
•  Individuals with language barriers also reported that their households tend to have older devices compared to all Arkansans. While 7.6 percent of all respondents indicated that the average age of the internet devices in their home was 10+ years, 13.0 percent of respondents who identified as individuals with language barriers reported having devices with an average age of 10+ years.
• Respondents with language barriers also shared that it would take significantly longer – or not be possible – for them to replace a computer if it was lost or damaged beyond repair. Only 14.2 percent of all respondents indicated that they would not be able to replace their device in the foreseeable future in this kind of scenario, but 24.1 percent of respondents with a language barrier selected this answer.
• Additionally, respondents with a language barrier shared that they cannot afford to purchase a desktop or laptop at higher rates than the general population. Roughly a quarter (24.3%) of all respondents indicated that they would not be able to afford a computer, while 36.4 percent of respondents with a language barrier selected this answer.
• When asked about their internet searching habits, 5.4 percent more respondents with a language barrier indicated that they had used the internet to apply or search for a job in the past year, compared with the general population.

Individuals with Disabilities

Based on ADSOS results, individuals with disabilities—defined as people with any physical and/or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of their major life activities – differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• While nearly all of the other covered population groups identified internet service cost as the top barrier to having reliable, high-speed internet at home, individuals with disabilities identified service availability as their top barrier to internet access.
• Even though service availability was identified as the top obstacle, cost is also still a large barrier. Only 39.3 percent of all survey respondents indicated that fitting their monthly service bill into their household budget is either “somewhat difficult” or “very difficult,” but over half (51.5%) of respondents with a disability selected one of the same two options.
• Additionally, while most respondents (72.2%) said that they access the internet at work at least monthly, respondents with disabilities were much less likely to report accessing the internet at work. Over a third of respondents with a disability (35.0%) said they never access the internet at work.
• Respondents with disabilities are less likely to have enough devices in their homes. When asked if their households have enough computer devices for their needs, 16.3 percent of respondents with a disability answered “no,” compared to 10.8 percent of the general population.
• Furthermore, respondents with disabilities also shared that it would not be possible for them to replace a computer if it was lost or damaged beyond repair at higher rates than the general population. Only 14.2 percent of all respondents indicated that they would not be able to replace their device in the foreseeable future in this kind of scenario, but 20.0 percent of respondents with disabilities selected this answer.

Individuals who are Members of a Racial or Ethnic Minority Group

Based on ADSOS results, individuals who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• The cost of at-home internet service tends to disproportionately impact individuals who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group. While almost a quarter of the general population (24.5%) identified cost as the primary barrier to having reliable internet access where they live, 31.5 percent of respondents who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group identified cost as their primary barrier to having high-speed internet access at home.
• Furthermore, individuals who are members of this covered population have a more difficult time fitting their monthly internet service bills into their household budgets. Only 8.7 percent of the total population reported affording internet service as “very difficult,” while 14.3 percent of respondents who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group selected this option.
• Individuals in this group tend to be less satisfied with the quality of their at-home internet service, as well. More than 4 in 10 members of the general population (41.2%) reported being “very satisfied” with the quality of their broadband service, while only 35.2 percent of respondents who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group indicated the same level of satisfaction.
• This population was more familiar with the ACP, but awareness rates are still low. Only one in four Arkansans (25.4%) said they had heard of the program, but 30.7 percent of respondents who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group indicated they were aware of the ACP.
• Individuals who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group are more likely to have older devices in their homes. While 73.1 percent of all survey respondents said the average age of their devices was between 1 and 4 years, this figure was lower (63.9%) among respondents who are members of a racial or ethnic minority group.
• When asked about their internet searching habits, 10 percent more respondents who belong to a racial or ethnic minority group indicated that they had used the internet to apply or search for a job in the past year compared with the general population.

Individuals Living in Rural Areas

Based on ADSOS results, individuals living in rural areas differ from the general population across barriers to access in the following ways:

• While broadband availability was the top primary barrier that the general population identified, respondents from rural areas overwhelmingly identified lack of available service as their primary barrier to broadband access. Just over a third of all survey respondents (36.5%) indicated service availability as their primary barrier to access, while 43.8 percent of respondents from rural areas selected this option.
• According to the NTIA Covered Population Viewer, over half of Arkansas’ population (55.3%) is made up of individuals living in rural areas. As a result, other ADSOS findings were not significantly different between the general population and individuals living in rural areas because this population makes up a majority of the state’s population.
• The lack of broadband infrastructure in rural areas of the state was one of the most common discussion topics during focus groups with this covered population. As with other segments of the population, individuals living in rural areas reported high service costs due to a lack of competition among providers and the necessity to pay higher fees for broadband access via mobile hotspots.
• Participants noted that in areas where service offerings are available, the lack of competition and high prices can make service prohibitive for many. They also shared that the ACP has not been well-promoted in rural communities, but that it is a program that could help make access more affordable for many families. Participants suggested disseminating information through local school districts, social media, and putting informational flyers in grocery stores.
• Like others, there was a desire for digital skills training opportunities, and people were enthusiastic about the opportunity to build their knowledge in cybersecurity, namely related to how to avoid online hacking and scams.

Implementation Strategy and Objectives

ARConnect has developed strategies to close the digital divide in Arkansas. These strategies complement the infrastructure-focused goals and objectives outlined in the state’s BEAD Five-Year Action Plan and Initial Proposal. To fund and achieve these goals, ARConnect will apply for and leverage federal funding from the DEA and BEAD programs.

The goals and strategies outlined below were intentionally designed to work in tandem and be inclusive of all Arkansans—including all eight covered population groups—to push the state closer to Governor Sanders’ vision of achieving digital opportunity for all Arkansans by 2030.

Goal 1: Increase the Availability and Affordability of Internet Service in Arkansas.

Strategy 1.1: Connect 100 percent of broadband serviceable locations with access to reliable, high-speed internet and enhance broadband access at community anchor institutions.

Measurable Objectives:

• Key Performance Indicator (KPI): Number homes and businesses with access to reliable, high-speed internet
  • Target: 100 percent of homes and businesses by December 31, 2028
• KPI: Number of community anchor institutions with enhanced broadband access
  • Target: 100 percent of community anchor institutions by December 31, 2028

Strategy 1.2: Continue to advertise and expand enrollment in the ACP.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of eligible state residents enrolled in the ACP
  • Baseline: 170,755 residents
  • Near-term Target: 25 percent increase in enrollment among eligible Arkansans
  • Long-term Target: 85 percent increase in enrollment among eligible Arkansans

Strategy 1.3: Explore partnerships with municipal housing authorities to include affordable at-home internet service at multi-unit dwellings.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of partnerships developed
  • Near-term Target: 50 partnerships by December 31, 2028
  • Long-term Target: 100 partnerships by December 31, 2030

Strategy 1.4: Create a temporary, community mini grant program to support the expansion of free Wi-Fi access at organizations and institutions that serve covered populations.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Prioritizing areas with lower broadband access, the number of locations awarded to expand access to free Wi-Fi
  • Near-Term Target: 20 locations by December 31, 2026.
  • Long-Term Target: 100 locations by December 31, 2028.

Goal 2: Improve Arkansans’ Digital Skills by Implementing Digital Skills Training Opportunities for All Interested Arkansans.

Strategy 2.1: Invest in a core digital skills curriculum that can be adopted across all state libraries and other community anchor institutions.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of people who participate in or graduate from core digital skills training programs as tracked by ARConnect or tracked and reported to ARConnect by participating entities administering the digital skills curriculum
  • Near-term Target: 10,000 people by December 31, 2027
  • Long-term Target: 50,000 people by December 31, 2030
• KPI: Number of libraries that adopt core digital skills training programs
  • Near-term Target: 30 libraries by December 31, 2026
  • Long-term Target: 100 libraries by December 31, 2030
• KPI: Number of additional community anchor institutions and community partners that adopt core digital skills training programs
  • Near-term Target: 5 partners by December 31, 2026
  • Long-term Target: 15 partners December 31, 2030
• KPI: Percentage of participants who achieve basic digital skills after completing core digital skills training program
  • Near-term Target: 60 percent of participants
  • Long-term Target: 90 percent of participants

Strategy 2.2: Create a temporary, community mini grant program to support the expansion of existing digital skills programs at organizations and institutions that serve covered populations.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of people who participate in or graduate from existing digital skills training programs as tracked by ARConnect or tracked and reported to ARConnect by participating entities administering the digital skills training
  • Near-term Target: 5,000 people by December 31, 2027
  • Long-term Target: 25,000 people by December 31, 2030

Strategy 2.3: Work with industry partners to create and implement an agriculture-specific digital skills curriculum.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Complete needs assessment for agriculture-specific digital skills training program
  • Near-term Target: Communicate with 15 industry partners by December 31, 2028
  • Long-term Target: Communicate with 30 industry partners by December 31, 2030

Strategy 2.4: Explore the creation of specialized digital skills curricula for healthcare and small business applications.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of people who participate in healthcare-specific digital skills training
  • Near-term Target: 2,500 people by December 31, 2029
  • Long-term Target: 5,000 people by December 31, 2030
• KPI: Percentage of participants who achieve specialized digital skills after completing healthcare-specific digital skills training
  • Near-term Target: 60 percent of participants
  • Long-term Target: 90 percent of participants
• KPI: Number of people who participate in small business-specific digital skills training
  • Near-term Target: 1,000 people by December 31, 2028
  • Long-term Target: 2,000 people by December 31, 2030
• KPI: Percentage of participants who achieve specialized digital skills after completing small business-specific digital skills training
  • Near-term Target: 60 percent of participants
  • Long-term Target: 90 percent of participants

Goal 3: Leverage Existing State Agencies, Programs, and Organizations to Keep Arkansans Connected, Safe, and Healthy, and Prioritize Accessibility.

Strategy 3.1: Coordinate with state agencies and other partners to highlight existing state programs or encourage the development of novel programs to train residents on how to use online government programs available to them.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of Arkansans trained on how to use online state-managed programs
  • Near-term Target: 2,500 people by December 31, 2027
  • Long-term Target: 10,000 people by June 30, 2029

Goal 4: Increase Access to Affordable Digital Devices.

Strategy 4.1: Establish a device refurbishment campaign with corporate, philanthropic, and workforce partners across the state.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of business partner participants in affordable device campaign
  • Near-term Target: 5 businesses by December 31, 2026
  • Long-term Target: 10 businesses by December 31, 2030
• KPI: Number of devices donated from businesses, state agency partners, and other institutions across the state
  • Near-term Target: 30,000 devices by June 30, 2027
  • Long-term Target: 75,000 devices by December 31, 2030
• KPI: Percentage of donated devices successfully refurbished
  • Near-term Target: 75 percent of devices
  • Long-term Target: 90 percent of devices

Strategy 4.2: Foster programs that distribute low-cost and free devices to those included in covered populations across the state.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of free or low-cost devices (combination of free and refurbished) that meet users’ needs distributed to members of covered populations
  • Near-term Target: 20,000 devices
  • Long-term Target: 65,000 devices

Strategy 4.3: To incentivize participation in digital skills training opportunities, tie affordable device distribution to completion of one or more courses.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Percentage of free and low-cost devices distributed by ARConnect to individuals who have completed at least one digital skills training course
  • Near-term Target: 35 percent of all devices
  • Long-term Target: 50 percent of all devices

Goal 5: Engage All Interested Arkansans and Community Partners in Digital Opportunity Efforts.

Strategy 5.1: Continue to regularly convene the ABLN and expand ARConnect’s outreach to broadband stakeholders throughout Arkansas and integrate additional partners into the ABLN.

• KPI: Number of ABLN meetings hosted
  • Near-term Target: 1 meeting per month
  • Long-term Target: 2 meetings per month
• KPI: Number of in-person ABLN meetings
  • Near-term Target: 1 meeting per year
  • Long-term Target: 2 meetings per year
• KPI: Number of partners added to ABLN.
  • Near-term Target: 10 partners by December 31, 2026
  • Long-term Target: 30 partners by December 31, 2030

Strategy 5.2: Publicize success stories of new connectivity and where digital skills training is making an impact across the state.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of community success stories published annually
  • Near-term Target: 5 stories per year
  • Long-term Target: 10 stories per year

Strategy 5.3: House an AmeriCorps digital navigator in the ARConnect office for the duration of implementation to support this project.

• KPI: Number of months without an American Connection Corps fellow in ARConnect office through 2030
  • Near-term Target: 2 months per year
  • Long-term Target: 0 months per year

Strategy 5.4: Create and regularly update a digital resource guide for members of the public.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of updates made to asset inventory
  • Target: 1 update per year
• KPI: Number of digital resource guides distributed to community anchor institutions, agency partners, and municipal governments
  • Near-term Target: 50 guides distributed by December 30, 2025
  • Long-term Target: 200 guides distributed by December 31, 2030

Strategy 5.5: Ensure ARConnect applies for subsequent rounds of federal DEA and BEAD funding.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Percentage of grant applications for federal broadband funding submitted by posted due date
  • Target: 100 percent of applications

Strategy 5.6: Facilitate education with ISPs to improve customer service.

Measurable Objectives:

• KPI: Number of ISPs that participate in ARConnect customer service education programming
  • Near-term Target: 20 percent of ISPs by December 31, 2025
  • Long-term Target: 100 percent of ISPs by December 31, 2030

Arkansas Wants to Hear From You

The deadline for public comments on the Arkansas State Broadband Office's draft Digital Skills and Opportunity Plan is January 25, 2024. Comments can be submitted via ARConnect's comment form or via email at broadband@arkansas.gov. More information can be found on ARConnect website.

More in this series:

• A New Chapter of Digital Equity Work in California
• New Mexico's Plan for an Inclusive and Prosperous Society
• Everyone Connected: Connecticut's Digital Equity Plan
• Coloradans at the Heart of State's Digital Access Plan
• Connected and Empowered: A Digital Equity Plan for Pennsylvania
• Guiding Texas' Digital Opportunity Investments
• Florida's Roadmap for Closing the Digital Divide
• Creating Digital Opportunities in Nebraska
• Developing Digital Equity Solutions in Vermont
• Working Towards Digital Equity in DC
• Oregon's Plan for Meaningful Broadband Access
• Massachusetts' Unified Vision of Digital Equity
• Alaska's Plan to Address Broadband Adversity
• Georgia's Plan for Digital Connectivity
• In a New York State of Digital Equity
• A Plan for Digital Equity in Delaware
• Equity for the Digital Age: Maryland's Plan
• North Dakota's Collective Approach to Digital Equity
• A Plan for Connecting New Jersey
• Achieving a Digitally Inclusive Ohio
• A Digital Access Plan for All Idahoans
• Envisioning a Connected, Interconnected Alabama
• Missouri Pursues Sustainable Digital Opportunity Initiatives
• A Digital Equity Plan to Connect All Kansans
• South Dakota's Plan to Leverage Digital Equity to Reach Economic Goals
• Aloha Spirit Inspires Hawai'i Digital Equity Plan
• The Plan for Closing Nevada’s Digital Divide
• Wisconsin's Digital Equity Values
• ¡Su opinión cuenta! Puerto Rico Releases Initial Draft of Digital Equity Plan | ¡Su Opinión Cuenta! Puerto Rico Pública el Borrador Inicial del Plan de Equidad Digital
• Kentucky Pursues Full and Equitable Digital Access for All
• Tennessee Drafts a Digital Opportunity Plan
• Washington State Sets Digital Equity Goals
• West Virginia's Plan to Conquer the Digital Divide
• Wyoming Seeks Feedback on Digital Access Plan
• Communities Know Communities Best: Michigan's Digital Equity Plan
• Montana's Digital Opportunity Plan
• Achieving Digital Independence in Utah
• Maine's Vision of Digital Equity
• A Look at Louisiana's Draft Digital Equity Plan

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society is a non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring that all people in the U.S. have access to competitive, High-Performance Broadband regardless of where they live or who they are. We believe communication policy - rooted in the values of access, equity, and diversity - has the power to deliver new opportunities and strengthen communities.

---

© Benton Institute for Broadband & Society 2023. Redistribution of this email publication - both internally and externally - is encouraged if it includes this copyright statement.

---

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, please email headlinesATbentonDOTorg