Better broadband needs better data collection, report says

Tim Robberts via Getty Images
A new report from The Pew Charitable Trusts said the federal government has made progress, but BEAD and other programs could still struggle to achieve their goals.
The federal government marked a major milestone in its efforts to roll out broadband internet under a revised $42 billion program earlier this month.
In a series of posts to X, formerly Twitter, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration said that all 56 states and territories had submitted correction letters for their initial proposals on how they plan to spend grant money from the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment program, known as BEAD. That effort was recently the subject of what Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick called “critical reforms.”
But new research from The Pew Charitable Trusts suggests that effort may be hamstrung by shortcomings in federal data on broadband deployment and access, and policymakers could do even more to improve it. Researchers acknowledged that the federal government has come a long way in mapping broadband availability, but for programs to be successful, they must do more.
“Data collection issues have taken on new urgency because the BEAD program places significant reporting requirements on state broadband offices that must be met by 2030 and need accurate data to evaluate the successes and challenges of their efforts,” the report says.
In addition to mapping where a broadband connection is available, policymakers should work to address broadband affordability and competition in various areas, Pew said. That would need lawmakers to assess trends tied to broadband prices, which is beyond the scope of the Federal Communications Commission and NTIA, which work to map broadband.
The report also called on the federal government to improve its data on network performance and quality so it can understand its effects on services like telehealth, education and economic development. Colby Humphrey, a research officer with Pew's Broadband Access Initiative, said federal agencies should be better aligned on how they define broadband, echoing a finding from the Government Accountability Office in April.
“There's been some reliability issues with the data, in terms of available information that we had, that the federal government has, but can try to independently verify the speeds and availability question,” said Humphrey, who authored the report. “Different federal agencies have had different definitions of what broadband is, and so trying to map that out, if you're trying to see the broader impact of all these federal policies, can be challenging if they don't all define it the same way.”
GAO’s report found that there is some coordination between the FCC, NTIA and the Departments of Agriculture and Treasury, which all have broadband deployment programs and grants. While GAO gave the agencies credit for including relevant participants and leveraging resources and information, the watchdog said they do not do enough in some other areas.
Those areas GAO identified for improvement include defining common outcomes, ensuring accountability, clarifying roles and responsibilities and identifying and sustaining leadership. It said better coordination will help ensure federal funds for broadband are spent properly.
“For example, they have not clearly defined or documented key areas of their collaborative efforts, such as what ‘covered data’ include when sharing information about their broadband deployment projects, as referenced in the memorandum,” GAO said. “The agencies also have not established timelines for providing data on funded projects to the map used to display information on federally funded broadband projects, or documented a formal process for avoiding duplicate funding.”
Pew called for better impact assessments, especially on cost, as whether a household can access broadband often comes down to its price. That lack of data on pricing and affordability becomes particularly problematic in low-income and majority-minority communities, as well as Tribal land, and Pew said having better data in this area can help fuel work on digital equity.
“Many factors affect adoption rates, including affordability, digital skills, and demographic and economic circumstances, but there are no federal datasets assessing adoption patterns that holistically account for multiple factors beyond broadband availability,” the report says. “This problem becomes more severe when researching minority communities.”
All this uncertainty and inconsistency around federal broadband data could mean funds are misallocated or duplicated, especially as NTIA has directed that states deem a location as “served” if it has already received federal or state broadband deployment funds. That then places a “significant burden” on states and others to determine which areas can receive funding, Pew warned.
In the meantime, states may be tempted to ramp up their own broadband data collection, but even that could run into issues of interoperability. The federal government must embrace its leadership role, Humphrey said.
“You don't want to get in the situation where you have 50 different datasets that you have to try to merge and get all of this information to talk to each other,” he said.