INTERNET FOR ALL
Broadband Equity, Access, and
Deployment (BEAD) Program
Initial Proposal Guidance
U.S. Department of Commerce
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
Page | 2
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Current Status of BEAD Program.................................................................................................. 4
Overview of the Initial Proposal Requirements ............................................................................ 5
Initial Proposal Structure .............................................................................................................. 5
Initial Proposal Development and Public Comment Period ........................................................ 8
Initial Proposal Submission and Review....................................................................................... 9
Initial Proposal and State Digital Equity Plan Alignment ............................................................ 9
How to use the Initial Proposal Guidance and Template ........................................................... 10
Volume I (Requirements 3, 5 – 7) ................................................................................................................... 11
Initial Proposal Volume I Guidance Introduction ....................................................................... 11
Existing Broadband Funding (Requirement 3) ........................................................................... 11
Unserved and Underserved Locations (Requirement 5) ............................................................ 13
Community Anchor Institutions (Requirement 6) ..................................................................... 14
Challenge Process (Requirement 7) ............................................................................................ 18
Volume I Public Comment ........................................................................................................... 27
Volume II (Requirements 1, 2, 4, 8 – 20) ...................................................................................................... 28
Objectives (Requirement 1) ......................................................................................................... 28
Local, Tribal, and Regional Broadband Planning Processes (Requirement 2) ......................... 29
Local Coordination (Requirement 4) .......................................................................................... 30
Deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 8) .................................................................. 37
Non-Deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 9) ......................................................... 57
Eligible Entity Implementation Activities (Requirement 10) .................................................... 62
Labor Standards and Protection (Requirement 11) .................................................................... 63
Workforce Readiness (Requirement 12) ..................................................................................... 66
Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs/ Women’s Business Enterprises (WBEs)/ Labor
Surplus Area Firms Inclusion (Requirement 13) ........................................................................ 69
Cost and Barrier Reduction (Requirement 14) ........................................................................... 72
Climate Assessment (Requirement 15) ....................................................................................... 74
Low-Cost Broadband Service Option (Requirement 16) ............................................................ 78
Middle Class Affordability Plans (Requirement 20) .................................................................. 82
Use of 20 Percent of Funding (Requirement 17) ........................................................................ 84
Eligible Entity Regulatory Approach (Requirement 18) ............................................................ 89
Certification of Compliance with BEAD Requirements (Requirement 19) ............................... 91
Volume II Public Comment ......................................................................................................... 95
Page | 3
Looking Ahead: Final Proposal ...................................................................................................................... 96
Final Proposal .............................................................................................................................. 96
Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................ 97
Waiver Guidance .......................................................................................................................... 97
The 20 Requirements of the Initial Proposal .............................................................................. 98
The 15 Requirements of the Final Proposal ...............................................................................101
Page | 4
Introduction
This document is intended solely to assist recipients in better understanding the Broadband
Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program and the requirements set forth in the Notice
of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for this program. This document does not and is not intended
to supersede, modify, or otherwise alter applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, or the
specific application requirements set forth in the NOFO. In all cases, statutory and regulatory
mandates, and the requirements set forth in the NOFO, shall prevail over any inconsistencies
contained in this document.
Current Status of BEAD Program
NTIA issued the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program Notice of
Funding Opportunity (NOFO) in May 2022, describing the requirements under which it will
award grants for the Program. The BEAD Program provides eligible states, territories, and the
District of Columbia (“Eligible Entities”) the opportunity to receive federal grant funding to
expand high-speed Internet access by funding planning, infrastructure deployment, and
adoption programs. Currently in the BEAD Program timeline, Eligible Entities have submitted
their Letters of Intent (LOIs), have received Initial Funds, and may have started developing and
submitting their Five-Year Action Plans.
Through the Five-Year Action Plans, an Eligible
Entity will establish its broadband goals and
priorities, and provide a comprehensive needs
assessment. The Five-Year Action Plans will present
foundational information that will inform and be
complementary to the Initial and Final Proposals.
Eligible Entities that have already submitted their
Five-Year Action Plans may be able to directly copy a
limited number of Requirements from their Five-Year
Action Plans into their Initial Proposals, as outlined in the BEAD NOFO and within this
document. This Initial Proposal Guidance document aims to assist Eligible Entities to complete
their Initial Proposals by providing specific guidance, examples, and additional resources
necessary to fulfill each Initial Proposal Requirement according to the requirements set by the
Assistant Secretary in the BEAD NOFO.
IMPORTANT
BEAD Five-Year Action Plan
guidance is separate from Initial
Proposal guidance and can be
found on the
BroadbandUSA
website.
Page | 5
Overview of the Initial Proposal Requirements
The Initial Proposal is the “first draft” of an
Eligible Entity’s Final Proposal for BEAD
grant funding, and, among other things,
should explain how States and Territories
will ensure that every
resident has access to
a reliable, affordable, and high-speed
broadband connection, drawing on all
funding available to accomplish this goal,
including but not limited to BEAD Program
funds. The BEAD NOFO, Section IV.B.5.b
outlines 19 Requirements of the Initial
Proposal. Section IV.C.2.c.i also requires Eligible Entities to submit a middle-class affordability
plan, which will henceforth be considered the twentieth requirement of the Initial Proposal.
After the publication of the updated National Broadband Map
in June 2023, Eligible Entities
will receive a Notice of Available Amounts. An Eligible Entity will have 180 days from receipt of
their Notice of Available Amounts to submit a completed Initial Proposal and, if applicable, an
Initial Proposal Funding Package to the Assistant Secretary. Eligible Entities should not wait
until the Notice of Available Amounts is issued to begin preparing their Initial Proposals.
Eligible Entities are encouraged to submit Initial Proposals as early as possible within the 180-
day window. The Assistant Secretary reserves the right to extend the deadline for submissions if
requested; however, the Assistant Secretary will be reluctant to grant an extension except when
extenuating circumstances demonstrate that additional time will support the overall goals of the
BEAD Program.
The Assistant Secretary will publish resources on the BroadbandUSA website
, including an
online template, to help Eligible Entities prepare their Initial Proposals. The template will
include prompts where Eligible Entities must provide narratives, structured data, and
certifications to meet the requirements of the Initial Proposal. This template will contain the
same elements and questions as the online form required to submit the Initial Proposal via the
NTIA Grants Portal; therefore, it is strongly encouraged that Eligible Entities use the
template to draft the Initial Proposal offline. Eligible Entities can also use this template to post
their Initial Proposal for public comment prior to submission.
Initial Proposal Structure
BEAD is a unique federal grant program, and NOFO guidance allows flexibility in the
submission and review processes. Eligible Entities will submit their Initial Proposals via the
NTIA Grants Portal in two volumes to reduce the delays in awarding funding and to support
As outlined in the BEAD NOFO, NTIA will provide technical assistance to
Eligible Entities throughout the BEAD Program.
If you have any questions or require technical assistance in the development of the
Initial Proposal, please reach out to your assigned Federal Program Officer.
IMPORTANT
While the Middle-Class Affordability Plan
is not aligned to a specific Initial Proposal
Requirement outlined in Section IV.B.5 of
the BEAD NOFO, it is required as part of
Initial Proposal submissions, and will be
considered Requirement 20.
Page | 6
iterative reviews. The volumes approach will enable Eligible Entities to proceed with subsequent
phases of the BEAD Program more quickly. For example, NTIA’s review and approval of Volume
I prior to the other Initial Proposal requirements will allow Eligible Entities to begin conducting
their Challenge Processes before approval (but after submission) of the full Initial Proposal.
The contents of each volume and the separate Initial Funding Proposal Funding Request (IPFR)
are outlined in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Initial Proposal and IPFR Requirements by Document
Volume I will describe the Eligible Entity’s plan for the Challenge Process and includes
Existing Broadband Funding (Requirement 3), Unserved and Underserved Locations
(Requirement 5), Community Anchor Institutions (Requirement 6), and Challenge Process
(Requirement 7). NTIA strongly encourages Eligible Entities to develop and submit
Volume I first. This sequencing is critical for Eligible Entities seeking to proceed quickly with
1
The Middle-Class Affordability Plan is not aligned to a specific Initial Proposal requirement listed in
section IV.B.5 of the NOFO. However, section IV.C.2.c.i of the NOFO does require that Eligible Entities
submit this plan as part of their Initial Proposal submissions.
Document
Volume I of
the Initial
Proposal
•
Existing Broadband Funding (Requirement 3) – may be satisfied by
completion of the Five-Year Action Plan
• Unserved and Underserved Locations (Requirement 5)
• Community Anchor Institutions (CAIs) (Requirement 6)
Volume II of
the Initial
Proposal
Objectives (Requirement 1) – may be satisfied by completion of the Five-Year
Action Plan
• Local, Tribal, and Regional Broadband Planning Coordination
(Requirement 2)
– may be satisfied by completion of the Five-Year Action Plan
• Local Coordination (Requirement 4)
• Deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 8)
• Non-deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 9)
• Eligible Entity Implementation Activities (Requirement 10)
• Labor Standards and Protections (Requirement 11)
• Workforce Readiness (Requirement 12)
• Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs)/ Women’s Business Enterprises
(WBEs)/ Labor Surplus Firms Inclusion (Requirement 13)
• Cost and Barrier Reduction (Requirement 14)
• Climate Assessment (Requirement 15)
• Low-Cost Broadband Service Option (Requirement 16)
• Middle Class Affordability (Requirement 20)
1
• Use of 20 Percent of Funding (Requirement 17)
• Eligible Entity Regulatory Approach (Requirement 18)
Initial
Proposal
Funding
Request
•
Project Plan/Narrative
• Consolidated Budget Form
Page | 7
completing pre-requisite Challenge Process activities and the Subgrantee Selection Process (in
sequence) prior to submitting their Final Proposals. Once submitted, the Assistant Secretary
may either approve the Volume I proposed by the Eligible Entity or
notify the Eligible Entity of
deficiencies in the Volume I, provide the Eligible Entity with an opportunity to resubmit the
Volume I, and establish a deadline for resubmission.
Once an Eligible Entity makes any required
modifications, the Assistant Secretary will approve Volume I, either in conjunction with, or prior
to, approval of the Eligible Entity’s full Initial Proposal. Eligible Entities may also refer to the
BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice
for additional guidance on Volume I and may choose to
adopt the BEAD Model Challenge Process in whole or in part to expedite the development,
submission, and approval of Volume I.
Volume II will include the remaining Initial
Proposal Requirements, Requirements 1, 2, 4
and 8-20. Eligible Entities are encouraged to
begin drafting Volume II prior to the Notice of
Available Funding Amounts and opening of
the NTIA Grants Portal submission module.
Once Volume I is approved and Volume II is
submitted, the Eligible Entity may begin
executing their Challenge Process.
Last, the optional Initial Proposal Funding Request is a separate document that Eligible
Entities are only required to submit if they are seeking funding at this stage of the BEAD
program. It includes requirements set forth by NIST to request BEAD funds. The Initial
Proposal Funding Package includes two Requirements: Project Plan/Narrative and a
Consolidated Budget Form. The NOFO does not require an Eligible Entity to submit an Initial
Proposal Funding Request with its Initial Proposal.. Under the Infrastructure Act, if the
Assistant Secretary approves an Initial Proposal, NTIA will make 20 percent of an Eligible
Entity’s funding allocation available to it for allowable expenses listed in the Initial Proposal
related to programmatic costs, such as the execution of the Challenge Process and Subgrantee
Selection Process; broadband deployment projects, subject to the limitations related to high
poverty areas for deployment prior to approval of the Final Proposal; digital equity projects
subject to the requirement of demonstrating sufficient funding to serve all unserved and
underserved areas; and costs related to the administration of the Eligible Entity’s grant (not to
exceed 2 percent).
2
2
An Eligible Entity may request less than 20 percent of its funding allocation if it so chooses. All
individual costs, and the total amount requested, must be substantiated in the Eligible Entity’s Initial
Proposal.
IMPORTANT
NTIA highly encourages Eligible
Entities to submit their Initial
Proposals early to accelerate the review
process and enable quicker access to
funding.
Page | 8
Eligible Entities may request more than 20 percent of funding before the Final Proposal if they
demonstrate a need and develop a
comprehensive plan for using the
additional funds. Eligible Entities may
also request the full amount (100
percent) of their funding allocations in
the Initial Proposal round, if they
demonstrate a specific need, such as but
not limited to, a state requirement (e.g.,
anti-deficiency clause) that would
require the obligation of all funding
prior to conducting the Subgrantee
Selection Process. Additional information on the funding scenarios is in the guidance for
Requirement 17: Use of 20 Percent of Funding
.
Initial Proposal Development and Public Comment Period
Eligible Entities are strongly encouraged to
utilize the support of their assigned Federal
Program Officer (FPO) for informal reviews
and feedback while drafting the Initial
Proposal before it is published for public
comment. NTIA encourages Eligible Entities
to utilize the template format when making
their Initial Proposals available for public
comment prior to submission to NTIA. This
format will facilitate the public’s review of Volumes I and II of the Initial Proposal. Eligible
Entities may choose to post their Volumes I and II at the same time, or separately, but each
volume must be available for public comment for no less than 30 days.
The public comment period is intended to promote transparency by gathering feedback from
stakeholders. Eligible Entities must conduct outreach and engagement activities to encourage
broad awareness and participation during the public comment period, particularly among Tribal
Governments, local community organizations, unions and worker organizations, and other
underrepresented groups. Eligible Entities may utilize outreach mechanisms including, but not
limited to, public meetings, informational brochures, local media, relevant social media
channels, and direct mail. Eligible Entities must provide a high-level summary of the comments
received during the public comment period and demonstrate how the Eligible Entity
incorporated feedback in its Initial Proposal submission, if applicable.
IMPORTANT
An Eligible Entity requesting funding must
submit its Initial Proposal Funding
Request along with Volume II for
Assistant Secretary approval. It is highly
recommended that Eligible Entities request
funding to accelerate their access and use of
funds prior to approval of the Final Proposal.
IMPORTANT
Volumes I and II can be posted for
public comment prior to the Notice of
Available Amounts. NTIA requires a
public comment period of at least 30
days for Volumes I and II.
Page | 9
Initial Proposal Submission and Review
Following the public comment period, Eligible
Entities must submit the Initial Proposal via the
NTIA Grants Portal
. Eligible Entities may include
waiver requests when submitting their Initial
Proposal. NTIA will review the Initial Proposal in
sequence by volume. Each submission will be
reviewed by the NTIA Office of Internet
Connectivity and Growth prior to being sent to the
Assistant Secretary for final approval. The Assistant
Secretary may approve the Initial Proposal by
volume, with an Eligible Entity’s Volume I
approved before Volume II. This approach will allow the Eligible Entity to proceed with
initiating their Challenge Process while NTIA reviews the remaining Requirements of its Initial
Proposal.
When drafting Initial Proposals, Eligible Entities:
• Must ensure the Initial Proposal proposes uses of funds that:
o Comply with Section 60102(f) of the Infrastructure Act;
o Are in the public interest; and
o Effectuate the purpose of the Infrastructure Ac; and
• Should ensure the Initial Proposal:
o Provides a layperson a full understanding of the Eligible Entity goals;
o Communicates, in its entirety, all material steps in the process of ensuring that every
resident of the Eligible Entity has access to a reliable, affordable, high-speed
broadband connection, utilizing all funding available to be brought to bear to
accomplish this goal, including but not limited to BEAD Program funds;
o Identifies and describes each significant decision point; and
o Articulates the manner in which the Eligible Entity will determine the proposed
course of action at each decision point.
Initial Proposal and State Digital Equity Plan Alignment
The State Digital Equity Planning Grant (SDEPG) and State Digital Equity Capacity Grant
(SDECG) Programs were authorized by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021
(November 15, 2021), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These Programs provide
new federal funding for grants to states, territories, and tribes to further advance federal goals
relating to digital equity and digital inclusion.
It is anticipated that each Eligible Entity participating in the BEAD Program will concurrently
participate in the SDEPG Program. There are opportunities to integrate digital inclusion
activities to both satisfy requirements of the State Digital Equity Plan and the BEAD Initial
Proposal. For example, Requirement 9 of the Initial Proposal allows an Eligible Entity that can
demonstrate it has a plan for bringing affordable, high-speed broadband service to all unserved
and underserved locations within its jurisdiction to also allocate funding to non-deployment
IMPORTANT
NTIA will provide additional
guidance to Eligible Entities on
utilizing the NTIA Grants Portal to
submit and, if necessary, correct
deficiencies within their Initial
Proposals prior to the Notice of
Funding Amounts.
Page | 10
activities, including the implementation of an Eligible Entity’s digital equity plans. Thus, a non-
deployment activity is to supplement, not duplicate, Planning and Capacity Grant funds received
by the Eligible Entity in connection with Digital Equity Act of 2021.
Additionally, an Eligible Entity that is also relying on funding from the SDEPG should
coordinate the stakeholder engagement that they conduct for the purposes of that plan with the
stakeholder engagement conducted for the development of the Initial Proposal. For example, for
both efforts, an Eligible Entity should assemble comprehensive lists of stakeholders, identify
overlaps, and coordinate or combine outreach to those stakeholders through combined listening
sessions, surveys, and site visits. This will help limit confusion and reduce the burden on
mutually relevant stakeholders. Further, the Initial Proposal must be informed by collaboration
with Tribal entities as applicable. It is the responsibility of the Eligible Entity under the BEAD
Program and a state’s Administering Entity for the State Digital Equity Planning Grant Program
to understand and address the broadband needs of Tribal and Native entities.
How to use the Initial Proposal Guidance and Template
The following pages outline a proposed template and associated guidance to meet the
requirements of the Initial Proposal. The proposed structure for the Initial Proposal includes
two volumes:
• Volume I (Requirements 3, 5 - 7)
, and
• Volume II (Requirements 1, 2, 4, 8 - 20).
Eligible Entities that are requesting use of initial 20 percent of funding are required to submit
an Initial Proposal Funding Package. Additional guidance, training, and FAQs on the Initial
Proposal Funding Package will be provided separately at a later date.
The appendix includes a list of the Initial Proposal’s 20 Requirements
, as written in the BEAD
NOFO, Section IV.B.5.b.
The attachments include:
• The template for the Initial Proposal, and
• Templates for structured data elements to be submitted with the Initial Proposal.
The guidance—and template—are structured to align with the Initial Proposal’s 20
Requirements. As such, the sections of the guidance with these requirements include call-out
boxes with the NOFO language, for reference. The guidance also includes an overview of the
purpose of each proposed section, importance of the content for the success of the program, and
other optional information or data that the Eligible Entity may consider when developing its
Initial Proposal.
Page | 11
Volume I (Requirements 3, 5 – 7)
Initial Proposal Volume I Guidance Introduction
An Eligible Entity may find an outline of the submission requirements for Initial Proposal
Volume I in the BEAD NOFO. However, much of the guidance and additional substantive
requirements outlined in this document are derived from the
NTIA BEAD Challenge Process
Policy Notice and the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process.
Existing Broadband Funding (Requirement 3)
An Eligible Entity that has already completed its Five-Year Action Plan may directly copy
Existing Programs (Requirement 3 in the Five-Year Action Plan) into the Initial Proposal to
satisfy this Requirement. An Eligible Entity that is still drafting its Five-Year Action Plan must
ensure that its responses to this Requirement in the Initial Proposal and the Five-Year Action
Plan are consistent.
The purpose of this section is to identify existing broadband efforts funded by the federal
government or an Eligible Entity within the jurisdiction of the Eligible Entity to minimize
duplication of efforts or funding. Documenting the current state of broadband efforts is
important to understand current resources and relationships, identify gaps and barriers that
may exist, and inform and improve future planning and implementation efforts to deploy
broadband and close the digital divide.
1.1.1 Attachment: As a required attachment, submit the file identifying sources of funding, a
brief description of the broadband deployment and other broadband-related activities, the total
funding, the funding amount expended, and the remaining funding amount available. Eligible
Entities may copy directly from their Five-Year Action Plans.
To identify existing sources of funding, an Eligible Entity is required to upload a file identifying
funding source(s), their purpose, the total funding amount, the expended funding amount, and
the remaining funding amount. The file must be a five-column file. Examples of funding include,
but are not limited to, other NTIA competitive grant programs, USDA telecom and broadband
programs, American Rescue Plan funding, Treasury funding, and other federal, state, and local
government programs.
The Eligible Entity may consider resources, such as USASpending.gov
to populate this and
identify funding sources being spent within a State or Territory. The funding could be stated as a
sum for each of the funding programs. The Eligible Entity must know of individual projects to
know where the unserved/underserved locations remain.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Identify existing efforts funded by the federal government or an Eligible Entity within the
jurisdiction of the Eligible Entity to deploy broadband and close the digital divide, including
in Tribal Lands.
41
41
For States and Territories that have completed Five-Year Action Plans, reference to this
plan satisfies this requirement.
Page | 12
In addition to the relevant requirements above, the Eligible Entity may also choose to include
information or resources related to broadband deployment and digital inclusion, including
existing state policies, mapping, or other technological resources used to inform broadband-
related activities, studies and best practices, or outreach endeavors.
To download a copy of the NTIA Template for Existing Broadband Funding, please
see the file named “BEAD Initial Proposal_Volume I_Broadband Funding Sources
Template.xlsx”
Page | 13
Unserved and Underserved Locations (Requirement 5)
1.2.1 Attachment: As a required attachment, submit one CSV file with the location IDs of each
unserved location including unserved locations in applicable Tribal Lands.
1.2.2 Attachment: As a required attachment, submit one CSV file with the location IDs of each
underserved location including underserved locations in applicable Tribal Lands.
An Eligible Entity is required to identify each unserved and underserved location under its
jurisdiction, including unserved and underserved locations in applicable Tribal Lands. To derive
its list of unserved and underserved locations, an Eligible Entity must consult the latest version
of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC)’s National Broadband Map. The Eligible
Entity can do so through the BEAD Eligible Entity Planning Toolkit. The BEAD Eligible Entity
Planning Toolkit, expected for release in Summer 2023, is a collection of NTIA-developed
technology tools that, among other things, overlay multiple data sources to capture federal,
state, and local enforceable commitments. For reference, the National Broadband Map can be
accessed and downloaded at this link: https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/
.
To report the set of unserved and underserved locations identified, the Eligible Entity is
required to upload two separate CSV files containing the location IDs of unserved and
underserved locations. One CSV file must contain the location IDs of unserved locations (named
“unserved.csv”), and the other CSV file must contain the location IDs of underserved locations
(named “underserved.csv”). Both CSV files must be single-column files. For this question, the
definition of reliable broadband service follows the BEAD NOFO definition (pg.15), without any
changes in the list of technologies. The Eligible Entity must refer to
NTIA BEAD Challenge
Process Policy Notice Appendix A for additional guidance as needed.
In the file attachment, the Eligible Entity must follow the format of the NTIA template.
To download a copy of the NTIA Templates for Unserved and Underserved
Locations, please see the files named “unserved.csv” and “underserved.csv”
1.2.3 Date Selection: Identify the publication date of the National Broadband Map that was
used to identify the unserved and underserved locations.
The Eligible Entity will need to identify the publication date of the National Broadband Map to
ensure that the most recently published National Broadband Map (as of the date of submission
of the Initial Proposal) is used in identifying unserved and underserved locations. Only the first
edition of the National Broadband Map in each month can be selected. The publication date of
the National Broadband Map cannot predate submission of the Initial Proposal by more than 59
days, a timeframe designed to allow the Eligible Entity sufficient time to identify eligible
locations from the National Broadband Map and submit the Initial Proposal.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 31:
Identify each unserved location and underserved location under the jurisdiction of the Eligible
Entity, including unserved and underserved locations in applicable Tribal Lands, using the
most recently published Broadband DATA Maps as of the date of submission of the Initial
Proposal, and identify the date of publication of the Broadband DATA Maps used for such
identification.
Page | 14
Community Anchor Institutions (Requirement 6)
1.3.1 Text Box: Describe how the statutory definition of “community anchor institution” (e.g.,
schools, libraries, health clinics) was applied, how eligible CAIs were identified, and how
network connectivity needs were assessed, including the types of CAIs that the Eligible Entity
intends to serve.
The identification of Community Anchor Institutions (CAIs) is essential to facilitate greater use
of broadband service by vulnerable populations and to advance the goals of the BEAD program.
Given the variability in the types of CAIs to be identified and served, it is important that an
Eligible Entity uses consistent criteria in identifying CAIs and accurately assess the network
connectivity needs for each institution. NTIA does not expect an Eligible Entity to identify an
exhaustive list of every CAI in within its jurisdiction. However, to the best of its ability, an
Eligible Entity must identify CAIs within its jurisdiction that lack access to 1 Gpbs symmetrical
broadband.
In describing the process to identify eligible Community Anchor Institutions, the Eligible Entity
must include:
1. A description of how the Eligible Entity applied the statutory definition of the term
“community anchor institution.”
2. The Eligible Entity identified which categories of institutions that fall within broad
categories of CAIs it considered but declined to classify as CAIs, including based on
public comment.
a. The Eligible Entity provided a reasonable justification for declining to define the
aforementioned categories of institutions as CAIs and explained why it
determined those categories of institutions did not facilitate greater use of
broadband service by vulnerable populations.
3. If the Eligible Entity identified one or more categories of CAI that are not specifically a
“school, library, health clinic, health center, hospital or other medical provider, public
safety entity, institution of higher education, public housing organization, or community
support organization that facilitates greater use of broadband service by vulnerable
populations, including low-income individuals, unemployed individuals, and aged
individuals,” the Initial Proposal provided a reasonable basis on which the Eligible Entity
determined that each such category of CAI facilitates greater use of broadband service by
vulnerable populations.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, page 31:
Describe how the Eligible Entity applied the statutory definition of the term “community
anchor institution,” identified all eligible CAIs in its jurisdiction, identified all eligible CAIs in
applicable Tribal Lands, and assessed the needs of eligible CAIs, including what types of CAIs
it intends to serve; which institutions, if any, it considered but declined to classify as CAIs;
and, if the Eligible Entity proposes service to one or more CAIs in a category not explicitly
cited as a type of CAI in Section 60102(a)(2)(E) of the Infrastructure Act, the basis on which
the Eligible Entity determined that such category of CAI facilitates greater use of broadband
service by vulnerable populations.
Page | 15
4. The Eligible Entity described how the Eligible Entity identified eligible CAIs in its
jurisdiction, including eligible CAIs in applicable Tribal Lands.
5. The Eligible Entity describes how the Eligible Entity assessed the needs of eligible CAIs,
including what types of CAIs it intends to serve.
To do so, an Eligible Entity should:
1. Document standardized criteria used to include and exclude specific classes or
types of such institutions.
2. Outline the definitions and sources used to support the identification of CAIs and
types of CAIs. The categories of CAIs identified may include, but not limited to, the
following examples:
Schools: K-12 schools may include all K-12 schools participating in the FCC
E-Rate program or that have an NCES (National Center for Education
Statistics) ID in the categories “public schools” or “private schools”.
Libraries: Libraries may include all libraries that participate in the FCC E-
Rate program as well as all member libraries, and their branches, of the
American Library Association (ALA).
Health Clinic, Health Center, Hospital, or other Medical
Providers: The list of health clinics, health centers, hospitals and other
medical providers may include all institutions that have a Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) identifier.
Public Safety Entities: Public safety entities may include fire houses,
emergency medical service station, police station, among others. An Eligible
Entity can obtain records of primary and secondary
Public Safety Answering
Points (PSAP) to determine the network connectivity needs of public safety
organizations across the state.
Institutions of Higher Education: Institutions of higher education may
include all institutions that have an NCES ID in the category “college,”
including junior colleges, community colleges, universities, or other
educational institutions.
Public Housing Organizations: Public housing organizations may be
identified by contacting the Public Housing Agencies (PHAs)
for the state or
territory enumerated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. The nonprofit organizations Public and Affordable Housing
Research Corporation (PAHRC) and National Low-Income Housing
Page | 16
Coalition maintain a database of nationwide public housing units at the
National Housing Preservation Database (NHPD).
Community Support Organizations: Community support organizations
may include any organization that facilitate greater use of broadband service
by vulnerable populations, including low-income individuals, unemployed
individuals, and aged individuals. An Eligible Entity can access a list of job
training centers using the American Job Center Finder
. An Eligible Entity
may also find senior center locations through the National Council on Aging
(NCOA).
The Eligible Entity is also encouraged to draw on state, territorial, tribal, county/parish
and municipal resources to identify additional types of eligible community anchor
institution and include justification for including such type or instances of CAIs
identified.
3. Engage relevant government agencies or stakeholders across the state or territory
to better understand network connectivity needs:
Government Agencies: An Eligible Entity can compile data from agencies
such as the Eligible Entity Department of Health and Human Services that
maintains records on Eligible Entity-run health centers, or the Eligible Entity
Department of Education or Procurement Offices that may collect and keep
records of the broadband service available at CAIs across the Eligible Entity.
Nonprofit Organizations: An Eligible Entity can also reach out to
nonprofit organizations, such as community support organizations that
support elderly individuals or other vulnerable members of the population,
to determine connectivity needs.
Umbrella Organizations: An Eligible Entity can conduct outreach to
umbrella organizations that work with CAIs to gather information on the
needs of their members and ensure network connectivity needs are being
met.
An Eligible Entity can refer to the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process
for example responses
to Section 1.3.1 An Eligible Entity may also refer to the NTIA BEAD Challenge Process Policy
Notice Section 5.2 for additional guidance.
1.3.2 Attachment: As a required attachment, submit the CSV file (named “cai.csv”) that lists
eligible community anchor institutions that require qualifying broadband service and do not
currently have access to such service, to the best of the Eligible Entity’s knowledge.
Page | 17
An Eligible Entity must include a list of each CAI location identified within the jurisdiction of
the Eligible Entity, to the best of the Eligible Entity’s knowledge, including the National
Broadband Map location ID (if applicable) and/or latitude and longitude for each eligible CAI in
the data format in Appendix A. The Eligible Entity must complete all mandatory fields in the file
named “cai.csv” as outlined in Appendix A of the BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice
,
including:
1. Type: Enumerated character identifying the type of CAI;
2. Entity Name: Official name of the CAI;
3. Entity Number: USAC assigned unique identifying number to each school or library
that participates in the E-Rate program;
4. CMS number: The CMS certification number (CCN);
5. FRN: FCC registration number if applicable;
6. Location ID: The identifier for the broadband serviceable location from the BDC;
7. Street Address: Street number, street name, and any applicable prefix or suffix of the
first address line (primary address) of the CAI;
8. City: Full name of the city, town, municipality, or census designated place associated
with address;
9. State or Territory: Two-letter USPS abbreviation identifying the state or territory
associated with address;
10. Zip code: Five-digit USPS ZIP code associated with address, including any leading
zeros.
11. Longitude: Unprojected (WGS-84) geographic coordinate longitude in decimal degrees
for the CAI, with a minimal precision of 6 decimal digits;
12. Latitude: Unprojected (WGS-84) geographic coordinate latitude in decimal degrees for
the CAI, with a minimal precision of 6 decimal digits;
13. Explanation: For CAIs of type C, provide a brief explanation of how the institution
facilitates greater broadband use and the population it serves, either as text or as a
reference to a longer explanation accompanying the submission. For example, the
submitter may define a set of sub-categories of CAI category C and describe how they
meet the conditions;
14. Broadband Need: The broadband need on the CAI, denoted in Mbps download
speeds.
15. Broadband Availability: The highest available broadband service speed of the CAI,
denoted in Mbps download speeds.
The Eligible Entity must enter the address of the physical location of the Community Anchor
Institutions, not the administrative location. For example, the address must describe the
location of the school building, not that of the board of education administrative building.
An Eligible Entity is not expected to submit an exhaustive list of eligible community anchor
institutions within their jurisdiction. However, submitting a list of community anchor
institutions that is as complete as possible will expedite the review of eligible community anchor
institutions during the challenge process.
To download a copy of the NTIA Template for CAIs, please see the file named “cai.csv”
Page | 18
Challenge Process (Requirement 7)
NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process Adoption
1.4.1 Yes/No Box: Select if the Eligible Entity plans to adopt the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge
Process for Requirement 7.
When designing its BEAD Challenge Process, an
Eligible Entity will have access to the
NTIA BEAD
Model Challenge Process. The goal of the NTIA
BEAD Model Challenge Process is to provide Eligible
Entities a baseline framework in the design of the
challenge process. Eligible Entities are encouraged to
review the NTIA pre-approved answers and adopt
the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process.
The NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process is expected to save Eligible Entities significant time
when designing a robust and comprehensive challenge process. The NTIA BEAD Model
Challenge Process will also provide Eligible Entities with the flexibility to adopt different
modules for speed test and area challenge requirements, depending on the Eligible Entity’s
preferences and technical capacity.
An Eligible Entity must select whether it plans to
adopt the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process for
Initial Proposal Requirement 7. The Eligible Entity
should refer to “How to Use the NTIA BEAD Model
Challenge Process” section of the NTIA BEAD Model
Challenge Process if choosing to adopt the model for
Initial Proposal Requirement 7.
An Eligible Entity must copy and paste the Model text into the appropriate response textbox and
complete all required additional information (indicated in blue text throughout the Model) if
adopting the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process.
An Eligible Entity may also choose to adopt the optional modules if choosing to accept speed
tests, conduct area challenges, or make modifications to reflect data not present in the National
Broadband Map.
Modifications to Reflect Data Not Present in the National Broadband Map
1.4.2 Text Box: If applicable, describe any modifications to classification of broadband
serviceable locations in the Eligible Entity’s jurisdiction as “served,” “underserved,” or
“unserved,” and provide justification for each modification.
An Eligible Entity may modify the classification of locations identified as eligible for funding on
the National Broadband Map subject to the approval of the Assistant Secretary. If an Eligible
Entity plans to modify the classification of locations identified as eligible for funding, a
description of the proposed modifications and associated justification must be included in the
description.
IMPORTANT:
An Eligible Entity may choose to
adopt NTIA’s Model Challenge
Process to meet NTIA’s
requirements and expedite the
approval process.
Looking Ahead
Eligible Entities will be required to
submit the results of their
challenge process to NTIA for
review and approval.
Page | 19
An Eligible Entity that chooses to adopt the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process may adopt
one of the optional modules outlined in the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process:
1. Optional module 1: No modifications
• The broadband office will make no modifications to the National Broadband
Map’s list of unserved and underserved locations.
2. Optional module 2: Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) modifications
• The broadband office will treat locations that the National Broadband Map shows
to have available qualifying broadband service (i.e., a location that is “served”)
delivered via DSL as “underserved.”
3. Optional module 3: Speed test modifications
• The broadband office will treat as “underserved” locations that the National
Broadband Map shows to be “served” if rigorous speed test methodologies (i.e.,
methodologies aligned to the BEAD Model Challenge Process Speed Test
Module) demonstrate that the “served” locations actually receive service that is
materially below 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream.
An Eligible Entity must copy and paste the chosen module text into the appropriate response
box. The Eligible Entity should refer to NTIA BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice
Section 6.1
for additional guidance.
Deduplication of Funding
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 36 – 37:
3. In identifying an Unserved Service Project or Underserved Service Project, an Eligible
Entity may not treat as “unserved” or “underserved” any location that is already subject to an
enforceable federal, state, or local commitment to deploy qualifying broadband as of the date
that the challenge process described in Section IV.B.6 of this NOFO is concluded.
NOFO Footnote 52, pages 36 – 37:
An enforceable commitment for the deployment of qualifying broadband to a location exists
when the commitment to deploy qualifying broadband service to that location was made as a
condition of:
• Any grant, loan, or loan guarantee provided by an Eligible Entity to the provider of
broadband service;
• Any grant, loan, or loan guarantee provided by the Secretary of Agriculture under:
o Title VI of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. § 950bb et seq.),
including: any program to provide grants, loans, or loan guarantees under
Sections 601 through 603 of that Act (7 U.S.C. § 950bb et seq.); and the
Community Connect Grant Program established under Section 604 of that Act
(7 U.S.C. § 950bb–3); or
o The broadband loan and grant pilot program known as the “Rural
eConnectivity Pilot Program” or the “ReConnect Notice of Funding
Opportunity Program” authorized under Section 779 of division A of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115–141; 132 Stat. 348);
o Any high-cost universal service support provided under Section 254 of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 254), except that in the case of the
Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, a location will be considered to have an
Page | 20
1.4.3 Yes/No Box: Select if the Eligible Entity plans to use the BEAD Eligible Entity Planning
Toolkit to identify existing federal enforceable commitments.
An Eligible Entity must select whether it
plans to use the BEAD Eligible Entity
Planning Toolkit (expected to be released in
Summer 2023) to identify existing federal
enforceable commitments within its
jurisdiction. The BEAD Eligible Entity
Planning Toolkit is a collection of NTIA-
developed technology tools that, among
other things, overlays multiple data sources
to capture federal, state, and local
enforceable commitment for qualifying broadband only (a) after the Federal
Communications Commission has announced in a Public Notice that RDOF
support for that location is ready-to-authorize or is authorized, and (b) the
provider does not rely on satellite technologies to deliver service;
• Any grant provided under Section 6001 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009 (47 U.S.C. § 1305);
• Amounts made available for the Education Stabilization Fund established under the
heading “DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION” in title VIII of division B of the CARES
Act (Public Law 116–136; 134 Stat. 564), and funded under the CARES Act, the
Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSA Act), and
the American Rescue Plan Act (ARP Act);
• Amounts made available for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds
(SLFRF) established under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (Public Law 117–2;
135 Stat. 4) (ARPA);
• Amounts made available for the Capital Projects Fund established by Section 604 of
the Social Security Act, as added by Section 9901 of ARPA; or
• Any other grant, loan, or loan guarantee provided by, or funded in whole or in part by,
the federal government or a State or Territorial government for the provision of
broadband service.
Eligible Entities may fund Unserved Service Projects and Underserved Service Projects that
include locations in an area that has an enforceable commitment for the deployment of
qualifying broadband to less than 100 percent of the locations in that area. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R.
§ 54.308(a). Eligible Entities must, however, seek to identify as part of the challenge process
described in Section IV.B.6 of this NOFO those unserved locations and underserved that will
not be served by qualifying broadband service as a result of such enforceable commitment,
and use that information in determining whether to treat each location as unserved or
underserved within the relevant area.
Further, for unserved locations and underserved on Tribal Lands, a commitment that
otherwise meets the criteria set forth above shall not constitute an enforceable commitment
for the deployment of qualifying broadband unless it includes a legally binding agreement,
which includes a Tribal Government Resolution, between the Tribal Government of the Tribal
Lands encompassing that location, or its authorized agent, and a service provider offering
qualifying broadband service to that location.
IMPORTANT:
Eligible Entities are strongly encouraged
to use the BEAD Eligible Entity Planning
Toolkit (expected release Summer
2023), which is a collection of NTIA-
developed technology tools that will
overlay multiple data sources to capture
enforceable commitments.
Page | 21
enforceable commitments. The BEAD Eligible Entity Planning Toolkit is intended to help
Eligible Entities quickly and efficiently identify existing federal enforceable commitments.
1.4.4 Text Box: Describe the process that will be used to identify and remove locations
subject to enforceable commitments.
An Eligible Entity must describe the process used to identify and remove locations subject to
enforceable commitments, and outline whether the Eligible Entity plans to use the BEAD
Eligible Entity Planning Toolkit. If the Eligible Entity does not plan to use the BEAD Eligible
Entity Planning Toolkit, the Eligible Entity must also include the following information:
1. A description of the technology or tool to be used for deduplication, including explanation of
its capacity to aggregate multiple data sources to create an accurate list of existing federal,
state, and local commitments.
2. Assurance that the process to identify and remove enforceable commitments will analyze, at
a minimum:
1. All programs included in the Broadband Funding Map published by FCC (pursuant
to the Infrastructure Act§60105), as of the date of the deduplication of funding
process. These may include:
• Programs administered by NTIA, including the Broadband Infrastructure
Program, the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program, and Middle Mile
Broadband Infrastructure Grant Program.
• Programs administered by FCC, including the Rural Digital Opportunity
Fund (RDOF), Connect America Fund Phase II Auction, Alternative Connect
America Model (A-CAM), Connect America Fund Broadband Loop Support
(CAF BLS), and Alaska Plan.
3
• Programs administered by USDA, including the ReConnect Loan and Grant
Program, Community Connect Grant Program, Telecommunications
Infrastructure Loans and Loan Guarantees, and programs established by the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (also known as the Farm Bill).
2. All state broadband deployment programs that utilize funds from the Capital Projects
Fund and the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds administered by the U.S.
Treasury.
In addition to the programs specified above, Eligible Entities must consider any additional
programs specified by OICG, prior to the initiation of the challenge process.
3
FCC.gov has publicly-available data for the amount of Universal Service Fund (USF) High-Cost/Connect
America Fund support distributed to each state. The FCC’s Federal-State Joint Board Monitoring Reports
include data on funding received each year from the various USF High-Cost distribution mechanisms and
the FCC
Public Reporting System includes results from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Phase I and
Connect America Fund Phase II auctions.
Page | 22
1.4.5 Attachment: As a required
attachment, submit the list of the federal,
state/territorial, and local programs that will
be analyzed to remove enforceable
commitments from the set of locations
eligible for BEAD funding.
If the Eligible Entity plans to use the
BEAD Eligible Entity Planning Toolkit,
the Eligible Entity must list any state or
territorial and local programs that will be used to identify existing enforceable commitments.
If the Eligible Entity does not plan to use the BEAD Eligible Entity Planning Toolkit,
the Eligible Entity must list the federal, state or territorial, and local programs that will be
analyzed to identify existing enforceable commitments. These programs must include, at a
minimum:
1. All programs included in the Broadband Funding Map published by FCC (pursuant
to the Infrastructure Act§60105), including:
• Programs administered by NTIA, including the Broadband Infrastructure
Program, the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program, and Middle Mile
Broadband Infrastructure Grant Program.
• Programs administered by FCC, including the Rural Digital Opportunity
Fund (RDOF), Connect America Fund Phase II Auction, Alternative Connect
America Model (A-CAM), Connect America Fund Broadband Loop Support
(CAF BLS), and Alaska Plan.
4
• Programs administered by USDA, including the ReConnect Loan and Grant
Program, Community Connect Grant Program, Telecommunications
Infrastructure Loans and Loan Guarantees, and programs established by the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (also known as the Farm Bill).
2. All state broadband deployment programs that utilize funds from the Capital Projects
Fund and the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds administered by the U.S.
Treasury.
To download a copy of the NTIA Template for Deduplication of Funding, please see
the file named “BEAD Initial Proposal_Volume I_Deduplication of Funding Programs
Template.xlsx”
Challenge Process Design
4
See id.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 34-35:
Each Eligible Entity shall develop and describe in the Initial Proposal, a transparent,
evidence-based, fair, and expeditious challenge process under which a unit of local
government, nonprofit organization, or broadband service provider can challenge a
determination made by the Eligible Entity in the Initial Proposal as to whether a particular
location or community anchor institution within the jurisdiction of the Eligible Entity is
IMPORTANT:
If an Eligible Entity plans to use the
BEAD Eligible Entity Planning Toolkit, it
will be required to submit the
state/territory program location data at a
later date to support the deduplication of
funding process.
Page | 23
1.4.6 Text Box: Describe the plan to conduct an evidence-based, fair, transparent, and
expeditious challenge process.
In designing its challenge process to be evidence-based, fair, transparent, and expeditious, an
Eligible Entity is encouraged to adopt the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process
. An Eligible
Entity not adopting the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process in full is still encouraged to
consider adopting the approaches outlined by NTIA wherever possible.
An Eligible Entity that adopts the NTIA Model Challenge Process must copy and paste the full
text response to Section 1.4.6 outlined in the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process, while also
submitting individualized responses (where indicated in blue text) in the NTIA BEAD Model
Challenge Process.
In its response, an Eligible Entity must include:
1. The proposed approach for the challenge process, including the publication of eligible
locations, challenge phase, rebuttal phase, and final determination phase.
2. Challenge types permitted, including the identification of Community Anchor
Institutions, existing Broadband Serviceable Location (BSL) and Community Anchor
Institution BEAD funding eligibility determinations, enforceable commitments, and
planned service.
3. Challengers permitted, including units of local and tribal government, nonprofit
organizations, and broadband service providers.
eligible for grant funds. Among other things, the process must allow for challenges regarding
whether a particular location is unserved or underserved as those terms are defined in the
Infrastructure Act and Section I.C of this NOFO. Eligible Entities should update the data
provided in their Initial Proposal to reflect the most recently published version of the National
Broadband Maps available as of the initiation of the challenge process.
The Assistant Secretary may modify the challenge process proposed by the Eligible Entity as
necessary and shall inform the Eligible Entity of any modifications required. Once an Eligible
Entity makes any required modifications, the Assistant Secretary shall approve the challenge
process, either in conjunction with, or prior to, approval of the Eligible Entity’s Initial
Proposal. The Eligible Entity shall conduct the approved challenge process before allocating
grant funds received from BEAD for the deployment of broadband networks to subgrantees.
After resolving each challenge and at least 60 days before allocating grant funds for network
deployment, an Eligible Entity must provide public notice of the final classification of each
unserved location, underserved location, or Eligible Community Anchor Institution within the
jurisdiction of the Eligible Entity. An Eligible Entity must also notify NTIA of any
modifications to the Initial Proposal that are necessitated by successful challenges to its initial
determinations. Pursuant to the discretionary authority granted to the Assistant Secretary in
the Infrastructure Act, NTIA may reverse the determination of an Eligible Entity with respect
to the eligibility of a particular location or community anchor institution.
Page | 24
4. Proposed evidentiary review process through which the Eligible Entity will review and
make determinations based on challenges and rebuttals received. If the Eligible Entity
decides to add any additional data sources to or remove from the list as outlined in Table
3 “Examples of Acceptable Evidence for BEAD Challenges and Rebuttals” in Section 7.4
of the BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice, it must respond to question 1.4.6 and
outline the proposed sources and requirements that will be considered acceptable
evidence.
5. Requirements for acceptable speed tests (e.g., number of speed tests, geographic
distribution, speed test collection time), if applicable.
6. Plan to ensure that sufficient opportunity and time is given to all relevant parties to
initiate, rebut, and substantiate challenges, and that the challenge process standards of
review are applied uniformly to all challenges submitted.
7. The plan to ensure transparency, including:
a. The plan to publicly post documentation explaining the challenge process once it
is approved by NTIA (prior to beginning the challenge process)
b. The plan to post all submitted challenges and rebuttals before final
determinations are made, including information from Section 7.6 of the NTIA
BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice.
c. The plan to host a website, including the link to the website’s URL, if the hosting
website already exists.
d. The plan to inform units of local government, relevant nonprofit organizations
and broadband providers to the challenge process, its deadlines, and how
providers and other affected parties will be notified of challenges.
8. The plan to ensure the protection of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) and
proprietary information, including anyone who will have access to any PII submitted
through the challenge process (e.g., provider’s subscriber PII), including through
state/territory public records processes.
9. The overall timeline, with tentative dates of initiation and completion, for the challenge
process. An Eligible Entity may determine the specific timeframes for the various
Requirements of the challenge process (e.g., challenge submission, rebuttal window) if
the requirements below are met. The Eligible Entity is encouraged to extend the
submission and rebuttal window, as possible, based on the Eligible Entity’s preferred
timelines and capacity. The timeline must also include a plan to ensure that:
a. The proposed challenge process will be completed within 120 days, starting with
the initiation of the challenge submission window;
b. The proposed challenge process will allow a minimum challenge submission
window of at least 14 days;
c. The proposed challenge process will include a minimum 14-day window to file a
rebuttal after the challenge is available on the challenge portal;
d. Following approval by NTIA, the proposed challenge process will publicly post
final classification of eligible locations after resolving each challenge, at least 60
days before allocating grant funds for network deployment.
The Eligible Entity must also indicate which modules from the NTIA Model Challenge Process ,
if any, the Eligible Entity plans to adopt, including the speed test module and the area challenge
module. If the Eligible Entity chooses to not adopt the modules, the Eligible Entity must indicate
whether it plans to accept speed tests or conduct an area challenge and if so, it must include its
plans for doing so. NTIA will review the proposed speed test requirements and/or area challenge
plan.
The Eligible Entity should refer to NTIA BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice
Section 7 for
additional guidance for designing the challenge process.
Page | 25
1.4.6 Optional Attachment: As a required attachment only if the Eligible Entity is not using
the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process, outline the proposed sources and requirements that
will be considered acceptable evidence.
An Eligible Entity adopting the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process
is not required to upload
the attachment.
An Eligible Entity not adopting the NTIA BEAD Model Challenge Process must list any proposed
data sources that will be accepted as sufficient evidence that are not included in Section 7.4 of
the NTIA BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice. The Eligible Entity must also include any data
sources that are included in Section 7.4 of the NTIA BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice that
will not be accepted as sufficient evidence.
• To add an additional data source: complete all columns and indicate in column 3
(“Proposed Change to NTIA Policy Notice”) whether the Eligible Entity will add or
remove this data source as outlined in Section 7.4 of the NTIA BEAD Challenge Process
Policy Notice.
• To remove an approved data source: skip columns 4 and 5 (e.g., “Data Source
Requirement” and “Permissible Rebuttal” and fill out only columns 1 and 2 (e.g.,
“Challenge Type” and “Data Source”).
The Eligible Entity should refer to NTIA BEAD Challenge Process Policy Notice Section 7.4 for
additional guidance.
Table 2: Proposed Data Sources
Complete the table below to identify any data sources the Eligible Entity is proposing to add
or remove from the list of acceptable evidence sources in NTIA BEAD Challenge Process
Policy Notice Section 7.4. The Eligible Entity must follow the instructions for each column
when submitting any potential data sources additions or removals.
Page | 26
In the file attachment, the Eligible Entity must follow the format of the NTIA template.
To download a copy of the NTIA Template for Evidence Data Sources, please see the
file named “BEAD Initial Proposal_Volume I_ Evidence Data Sources Template.xlsx”
Challenge Type Data Source Proposed
Change to
NTIA Policy
Notice
Data Source
Requirements
Permissible
Rebuttal
Type of challenge
based on BEAD
Challenge
Process Policy
Notice Table 3:
“Examples of
Acceptable
Evidence for
BEAD Challenges
and Rebuttals in
the BEAD Policy
Notice”
Brief description
of the data
source
Whether Eligible
Entity will add
or remove this
data source as
outlined in the
BEAD Challenge
Process Policy
Notice
Brief description
of the
requirements
associated with
each data source
being added to
the list of
acceptable
sources. If
proposing
removal,
indicate N/A.
Brief
description of
the
acceptable
rebuttal
evidence and
any
associated
requirements
for each
source being
added to the
list of
acceptable
sources. If
proposing
removal,
indicate N/A.
Page | 27
Volume I Public Comment
1.5.1 Text Box: Describe the public comment period and provide a high-level summary of the
comments received during the Volume I public comment period and how they were addressed
by the Eligible Entity. The response must demonstrate:
a. The public comment period was no less than 30 days; and
b. Outreach and engagement activities were conducted to encourage feedback during the
public comment period.
The Eligible Entity must describe how it
conducted a public comment period for no
less than 30 days, provide a high-level
summary of the comments received, and
demonstrate how the Eligible Entity
incorporated feedback in its Initial Proposal
submission, as applicable. The Eligible Entity is not required to respond to all individual
comments but must capture where public comments impacted the contents of the Initial
Proposal submission.
The Eligible Entity must also demonstrate how it conducted outreach and engagement activities
to encourage broad awareness, participation, and feedback during the public comment period,
particularly among Tribal Governments, local community organizations, unions and worker
organizations, and other underrepresented groups. Examples of outreach mechanisms include,
but are not limited to, public meetings, informational brochures, local media, relevant social
media channels, and direct mail.
1.5.2 Optional Attachment: As an optional attachment, submit supplemental materials to
the Volume I submission and provide references to the relevant requirements. Note that only
content submitted via text boxes, certifications, and file uploads in sections aligned to Initial
Proposal requirements in the NTIA Grants Portal will be reviewed, and supplemental materials
submitted here are for reference only.
The Eligible Entity may upload additional documentation, such as formatted text, tables, or
graphics, relevant to any of the requirements in Volume I. If the Eligible Entity chooses to
upload supplemental materials, they must provide a crosswalk to the relevant requirement(s). In
the responses to Volume I requirements, the Eligible Entity may reference the materials
uploaded here to provide additional context to their responses. However, content submitted
here will not be reviewed for sufficiency in meeting Initial Proposal requirements; only
responses to requirements in previous sections of the NTIA Grants Portal will be evaluated for
meeting the standard of review required for approval.
IMPORTANT
The Eligible Entity must conduct a
public comment period for no less
than 30 days.
Page | 28
Volume II (Requirements 1, 2, 4, 8 – 20)
Objectives (Requirement 1)
An Eligible Entity that has already completed its Five-Year Action Plan may directly copy
Objectives from its Five-Year Action Plan into the Initial Proposal to satisfy this requirement. An
Eligible Entity that is still drafting its Five-Year Action Plan should ensure that its responses to
this requirement in its Initial Proposal and its Five-Year Action Plan are substantively the same.
2.1.1 Text Box: Outline the long-term objectives for deploying broadband; closing the digital
divide; addressing access, affordability, equity, and adoption issues; and enhancing economic
growth and job creation. Eligible Entities may directly copy objectives included in their Five-
Year Action Plans.
In this section, the Eligible Entity is required to explicitly outline long-term objectives covering
each of the following:
Broadband Deployment
Closing the Digital Divide
Addressing Access,
Affordability, Equity, or
Adoption Issues
Enhancing Economic Growth
and Job Creation
Objectives are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-based and support the
attainment of long-term goals. Example objectives may include:
• Develop broadband investment and deployment strategies for unserved and underserved
areas.
• Leverage all resources, including BEAD Program funding and support from other
federal, state or territory, and local programs and binding commitments from Internet
providers, to achieve the Eligible Entity’s broadband deployment goals.
• Develop and strengthen partnerships with community stakeholders to identify
opportunities for an Eligible Entity to support and coordinate broadband deployment
and equity initiatives.
• Enhance economic growth and job creation by promoting sector-based partnerships
among employers and education providers.
Objectives are not required to be specific to the BEAD Program funds. Instead, the Eligible
Entity may also include objectives related to other federal, state or territory, and local programs.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Outline long-term objectives for deploying broadband, closing the digital divide, addressing
access, affordability, equity, and adoption issues, and enhancing economic growth and job
creation including information developed by the Eligible Entity as part of the Five-Year Action
Plan and information from any comparable strategic plan otherwise developed by the Eligible
Entity, if applicable.
39
39
For States and Territories that have completed Five-Year Action Plans, reference to this
plan satisfies this requirement.
Page | 29
Local, Tribal, and Regional Broadband Planning Processes
(Requirement 2)
An Eligible Entity that has already completed its Five-Year Action Plan may directly copy its
Stakeholder Engagement Process (Requirement 7 in the Five-Year Action Plan) into the Initial
Proposal to satisfy this requirement. An Eligible Entity that is still drafting its Five-Year Action
Plan must ensure that the response to this requirement in its Initial Proposal and its Five-Year
Action Plans are substantively the same.
2.2.1 Text Box: Identify and outline steps that the Eligible Entity will take to support local,
Tribal, and regional broadband planning processes or ongoing efforts to deploy broadband or
close the digital divide. In the description, include how the Eligible Entity will coordinate its own
planning efforts with the broadband planning processes of local and Tribal Governments, and
other local, Tribal, and regional entities. Eligible Entities may directly copy descriptions in their
Five-Year Action Plans.
The purpose of this section is to identify and outline steps to support local, Tribal, and regional
broadband planning processes or ongoing efforts to deploy broadband or close the digital divide
through coordination with local and Tribal Governments, and other local, Tribal, and regional
entities.
The Eligible Entity must describe existing local and regional planning or deployment efforts,
including those in Tribal areas. The Eligible Entity must describe how it has coordinated with
local and, if applicable, Tribal Governments in developing statewide strategies, and how the
Eligible Entity will continue this engagement moving forward. The Eligible Entity may provide
an inventory of existing broadband planning efforts across the Eligible Entity or describe how it
is conducting and/or plans to conduct outreach activities to facilitate coordination with local
and Tribal Governments, and other local, Tribal, and regional entities.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Identify, and outline steps to support local, Tribal, and regional broadband planning
processes or ongoing efforts to deploy broadband or close the digital divide and describe
coordination with local and Tribal Governments, along with local, Tribal, and regional
broadband planning processes.
40
For States and Territories that have completed Five-Year Action Plans, reference to this
plan satisfies this requirement.
Page | 30
Local Coordination (Requirement 4)
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Certify that the Eligible Entity has conducted coordination, including with Tribal
Governments, local community organizations, unions and worker organizations, and other
groups, consistent with the requirements set forth in Section IV.C.1.c of this NOFO, describe
the coordination conducted, summarize the impact such coordination had on the content of
the Initial Proposal, detail ongoing coordination efforts, and set forth the plan for how the
Eligible Entity will fulfill the coordination requirements associated with its Final Proposal.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, page 52:
In evaluating whether local coordination and outreach efforts meet the programmatic
requirements, the Assistant Secretary will assess whether plans and activities undertaken
ensure: (1) full geographic coverage of the Eligible Entity; (2) meaningful engagement and
outreach to diverse stakeholder groups, labor organizations, and community organizations,
including to promote the recruitment of women and other historically marginalized
populations for workforce development opportunities and jobs related to BEAD-funded
eligible activities; (3) utilization of multiple awareness and participation mechanisms and
different methods to convey information and outreach; (4) transparency of processes, to
include the documentation and publication of results and outcomes of such coordination and
outreach efforts, including additions or changes to the Eligible Entity’s Initial Proposal and/or
Final Proposal; and (5) outreach to and direct engagement of unserved and underserved
communities to include historically underrepresented and marginalized groups and/or
communities. These requirements are designed to allow Eligible Entities to tailor the program
for the unique environments within its boundaries. In evaluating the sufficiency of local
coordination efforts, the Assistant Secretary will consider quantitative measures as well as the
quality of the engagements.
The purpose of this section is to detail how an Eligible
Entity has coordinated and will continue to
coordinate with all communities within its
jurisdiction, including its marginalized and
underrepresented populations. Local government,
Tribal, and stakeholder coordination is essential to
the BEAD Program’s success because it promotes full
representation and inclusion of unserved,
underserved, and underrepresented communities
throughout the planning and deployment processes,
and fosters strong relationships and buy-in from the
individuals this Program is designed to serve. The Eligible Entity should refer to the
Local
Coordination Resources One-Pager for additional information on conducting local coordination
including guidance on creating accessible meetings and how to conduct effective community
engagement.
2.3.1 Text Box: Describe the coordination conducted, summarize the impact such impact has
on the content of the Initial Proposal, and detail ongoing coordination efforts. Set forth the plan
for how the Eligible Entity will fulfil the coordination associated with its Final Proposal.
Looking Ahead
In the Final Proposal, the Eligible
Entity will be required to certify and
describe local coordination
conducted, including a summary of
the impact such coordination had
on the content of the Final Proposal.
Page | 31
2.3.1.1 Attachment: As a required attachment, submit the Local Coordination Tracker Tool to
certify that the Eligible Entity has conducted coordination, including with Tribal Governments,
local community organizations, unions and work organizations, and other groups.
The Eligible Entity must submit both a narrative summarizing their local coordination efforts
and the Local Coordination Tracker Tool detailing specific coordination activities the Eligible
Entity has conducted.
The Eligible Entity is required to describe local coordination conducted, ongoing coordination
efforts, and the impact of such coordination on the content of the Initial Proposal. The Eligible
Entity must coordinate with
political subdivisions, Tribal
Governments, local and
community-based
organizations, and unions
and worker organizations
within its jurisdiction to
promote full representation
and inclusion of unserved,
underserved, and underrepresented communities throughout the planning and deployment
processes.
The Eligible Entity must address each of the following five criteria mentioned in the
BEAD NOFO
in its descriptions of local coordination efforts.
The Eligible Entity must describe how its local coordination efforts within its political
subdivisions and applicable Tribal Governments include sufficient geographic granularity to
demonstrate full participation within the Eligible Entity. Engagement must include Tribal, rural,
suburban, and urban areas as well as all key demographic groups within the Eligible Entity’s
jurisdiction, to the extent these categories are applicable in the Eligible Entity.
IMPORTANT
It is strongly recommended that the Eligible Entity
conducts local coordination for the BEAD and Digital
Equity Act in tandem as one cohesive effort. This
approach will be particularly important to avoid
confusion and reduce the burden on local stakeholders.
Page | 32
Throughout its local coordination and outreach activities, the Eligible Entity must involve a
diverse set of stakeholders in the development of its Initial Proposal. The Eligible Entity must
coordinate with local governments, Tribal governments, and stakeholders to solicit input on
relevant portions of their Initial Proposals. For example, the Eligible Entity should seek input
from groups that carry out workforce development programs and labor unions, to develop an
approach to ensuring a reliable supply of skilled workers, elicit feedback on plans for creating
well-paid jobs, and to recruit and hire women and other historically marginalized groups for the
job opportunities created through the BEAD Program.
Examples of stakeholder groups for consideration include, but are not limited to the following:
Figure 1: Broadband Stakeholders
The Eligible Entity must describe multiple mechanisms it is using or intends to use to promote
broad awareness and participation from various stakeholder groups. It is not sufficient to only
utilize one type of awareness mechanism. Examples of such methods include but are not limited
to those listed in Figure 2 below.
Page | 33
Figure 2: Examples of Awareness Mechanisms
Note that the Local Coordination Tracker Tool is required to reflect a wide-ranging use of
awareness mechanisms in the conducted and planned engagement activities.
In conducting local coordination and outreach activities, the Eligible Entity must establish,
document, and adhere to clear procedures to promote transparency. The Eligible Entity must
describe how it makes information on planned broadband activities accessible to a diverse set of
stakeholder groups.
Examples of ways to promote and document transparency include:
• Posting publicly available information to easily navigable websites with up-to-date
information;
• Conducting periodic reporting/reports on broadband efforts to local and community
stakeholders;
• Involving a diverse set of stakeholders in the planning, implementation and execution of
coordination and outreach efforts and activities, and in-person meetings and mailings;
and
• Providing information in commonly used languages other than English to be accessible
to a broad range of community members.
The Eligible Entity must describe direct engagement efforts with underrepresented communities
within its jurisdictions and highlight any feedback provided by these groups. The Eligible Entity
must identify these communities and determine specific outreach and engagement strategies
tailored to their needs, including providing outreach in the languages used in the communities
these eligible activities serve.
Page | 34
Examples of activities that might be used to reach unserved, underserved, and underrepresented
communities include, but are not limited to:
• The creation of an Eligible Entity-wide task force or advisory board with representatives
from underrepresented communities;
• Frequent engagement with State, Territorial, county, Tribal, and municipal associations
that may have a greater reach to these communities through their local elected official
members;
• Engagement with other Eligible Entity departments or agencies that regularly serve
these communities and can help identify and engage with them, such as Eligible Entity
departments of education, health and human services, workforce development, and/or
public health;
• Utilization of the awareness mechanisms listed above that demonstrates a targeted focus
on the above identified communities; and
• Investment in surveys, data collection, and mapping initiatives to better understand gaps
in connectivity and needs.
An Eligible Entity that is also utilizing funding from the State Digital Equity Planning Grant
Program (SDEPG) is encouraged to make sure that the stakeholder engagement that is
conducted for the purposes of the Digital Equity plan is coordinated and aligned with the
stakeholder engagement conducted for the development of the Initial Proposal. For example, for
both efforts, the Eligible Entity is encouraged to assemble comprehensive lists of stakeholders,
identify overlaps, and coordinate or combine outreach to those stakeholders through combined
listening sessions, surveys, and site visits. This will be particularly important to avoid confusion
and reduce the burden on community stakeholders.
For the attachment, the Eligible
Entity is required to submit a
Local Coordination Tracker
Tool to document coordination
efforts conducted, including
with Tribal Governments, local
community organizations,
unions and worker
organizations, and other
groups. A completed Local Coordination Tracker must demonstrate compliance with all five
coordination criteria required by the
BEAD NOFO.
The Local Coordination Tracker tool includes several important tabs, including:
• Overview: The Overview tab outlines the purpose of the tool and provides descriptions
for each tab including how they relate to specific BEAD NOFO requirements.
• List of Organizations: The List of Organizations tab is an area to document and
record each organization and stakeholder group engaged and the purpose of the
engagement. The List of Organizations must illustrate engagement with a diverse set of
stakeholders (see Figure 1), including underrepresented communities, and reflect that
local coordination efforts have met the requirement for sufficient geographic coverage.
IMPORTANT
An Eligible Entity that has already completed the
Local Coordination Tracker Tool for the Digital
Equity program may submit the same document for
the Initial Proposal, as long as it fulfills the five
coordination criteria required by the BEAD NOFO
.
Page | 35
• Stakeholder Engagement Tracker: The Stakeholder Engagement Tracker tab
provides an area to document and record engagement with each stakeholder group. This
list must comprise a diverse set of stakeholders (see Figure 1), including
underrepresented communities, and reflect that local coordination efforts have met the
requirement for sufficient geographic coverage. Note that the Eligible Entity is not
required to complete the column for “Covered Populations Reached” since this is a
Digital Equity Program requirement, but it is encouraged to do so in coordination with
the development of the State Digital Equity Plan.
• Local Plans: The Local Plans tab provides an area to document any plans submitted to
the Eligible Entity or existing plans or programs instituted by municipal, regional, or
local governments and/or Tribal Entities, as well as notes on how these plans will be
incorporated into the Initial Proposal. Each political subdivision and federally
recognized Tribe must be given an opportunity to submit its own local broadband plan to
the Eligible Entity for consideration in the development of the Eligible Entity’s
Proposals. Each Eligible Entity must detail how it addressed each submitted plan in its
Initial Proposal.
• Public Comment Disclosure: The Public Comment Disclosure tab provides an area
to capture any feedback and public comments from political subdivisions, Tribal
Governments, and stakeholders, and how the Eligible Entity will address the feedback.
2.3.2 Text Box: Describe the formal tribal consultation process conducted with federally
recognized Tribes, to the extent that the Eligible Entity encompasses federally recognized
Tribes. If the Eligible Entity does not encompass federally recognized Tribes, note “Not
applicable.”
2.3.2.1 Optional Attachment: As a required attachment only if the Eligible Entity
encompasses federally recognized Tribes, provide evidence that a formal tribal consultation
process was conducted, such as meeting agendas and participation lists.
Where an Eligible Entity encompasses federally recognized Tribes, the Eligible Entity must
describe the formal consultation process conducted with federally recognized Tribal or Native
entities to promote alignment and visibility of broadband needs and priorities between the
Eligible Entity and Tribal officials.
The Eligible Entity must describe how it provided multiple opportunities for Tribes to provide
input and ensure that feedback is both recorded (e.g., through recordings, detailed notes, or
summary reports) and incorporated into the Initial Proposal.
Where an Eligible Entity encompasses federally recognized Tribes, the Eligible Entity must
submit evidence that a formal tribal consultation process was conducted. Evidence may include,
but not be limited to:
• Documenting meeting details and feedback in the Local Coordination Tracker Tool
• Providing Tribal consultation summary reports, meeting agendas, and participant lists
• Providing a copy of a Dear Tribal Leader Letter (DTLL) sent as request to engage with
Tribal Governments
Page | 36
An Eligible Entity may refer to and leverage pre- and post-consultation materials previously
developed for the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP) as examples for
documentation of Tribal engagements for the BEAD Program. This includes Dear Tribal Leader
Letters (DTTLs), agendas, summary reports, and consultation transcripts and recordings.
Additionally, English Entities may refer to the
Memorandum on Uniform Standards for Tribal
Consultation for more information on how Tribal consultations are to be conducted.
If an Eligible Entity does not encompass sovereign Tribal or Native entities, please note “Not
applicable” within this text box.
Page | 37
Deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 8)
The purpose of this section is to provide a detailed plan to competitively award subgrants. This
is a critical Requirement of the Initial Proposal as subgrantees will be primarily responsible for
completing eligible deployment activities. Figure 3 below provides examples of eligible uses of
funding related to broadband deployment projects, as outlined in the BEAD NOFO
.
Figure 3: Eligible Uses of Funding Related to Deployment Projects
Please note that while requirements vary in this section, most responses should integrate strong
grants management practices, including establishing and following best practices on 1) policies
and procedures; 2) transparency; 3) and internal controls. Figure 4 provides several helpful tips
that can be applied across requirements for both Deployment Subgrantee Selection
(Requirement 8) and Non-Deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 9).
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Include a detailed plan to competitively award subgrants consistent with Section IV.B.7.a of
this NOFO with regard to both last-mile broadband deployment projects and other eligible
activities. With respect to last-mile broadband deployment projects, the plan must explain
how the Eligible Entity will ensure timely deployment of broadband and minimize the BEAD
subsidy required to serve consumers consistent with Section IV.B.7 and the other priorities
set out in this NOFO. The Initial Proposal must include identification of, or a detailed process
for identifying, an Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold to be utilized during the
Subgrantee Selection Process described in Section IV.B.7 of this NOFO. Each Eligible Entity
must establish its Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold in a manner that maximizes
use of the best available technology while ensuring that the program can meet the
prioritization and scoring requirements set forth in Section IV.B.7.b of this NOFO. NTIA
expects Eligible Entities to set the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold as high as
possible to help ensure that end-to-end fiber projects are deployed wherever feasible.
Page | 38
When an Eligible Entity is required to identify or outline a detailed process for a
requirement of the Initial Proposal, they should consider the following grants
management best practices.
What Policies Should Eligible
Entities Have?
• Procurement Policy
• Record Retention Policy
• Subgrantee Selection Policy
• Subgrantee Monitoring Policy
Post-Award
• Plan to document clear,
explicit terms and conditions
along with processes to
revise or amend subawards.
Award
• Plan to document and retain
records for evaluation
review, including rules and
submission packages.
Pre-Award
• Plan to develop solicitation
documents, application
guidance, technical
assistance, etc., for grantees.
For responding to each subgrantee selection requirement consider responding with: 1) Who is
responsible for the requirement? 2) Why is the requirement necessary for the project/program
outcome? 3) What is the level of detail a subgrantee would need to understand this
Eligible Entities should highlight
strong record retention
policies when writing responses
that include details on subgrantee
certification.
Figure 4: Best Practices for Subgrantee Selection Grants Management
• Established and approved policies, processes, and
procedures are fundamental to ensuring Eligible Entities
are properly managing, monitoring, and assessing
subgrantees. Eligible Entities should include all
established policies, processes, & procedures
when responding to each subgrantee selection
requirement.
• If an Eligible Entity is developing a new process, this
should be noted and tied back to an existing internal
control or policy document. This makes the process
easier to justify and explain to potential subgrantees and
auditors.
T
IE
Y
OUR
R
ESPONSE TO
E
STABLISHED
P
OLICIES
,
PROCESSES, & PROCEDURES
• The more transparent an Eligible Entity is with their potential subrecipients, the better
applications/submissions and eventually outcomes will be. Subrecipients will have a
better understanding of what is needed, what is required, and what will make a good application.
• Eligible Entities should consider developing support documents, where needed, and
including these materials in their subgrantee selection responses. Materials could include
checklists, samples, outreach plans, etc.
• Eligible Entities should also include conflict of interest rules in their approach to increase
transparency and reduce risk.
I
NCLUDE
A
S
M
UCH
T
RANSPARENCY
A
S
P
OSSIBLE
T
O
Y
IELD
B
ETTER
APPLICATIONS/OUTCOMES
• Strong responses should include references to internal control plans for all phases of the
subgrantee selection lifecycle.
N
OTE
S
TRONG
I
NTERNAL
C
ONTROLS
A
S
T
HEY
I
NSTILL
C
ONSTANCY AND
C
ONFIDENCE
I
N
PLANS TO VALIDATE SUBGRANTEE QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
Page | 39
Deployment Projects Subgrantee Selection Process & Scoring Approach
2.4.1 Text Box: Describe a detailed plan to competitively award subgrants to last-mile
broadband deployment projects through a fair, open, and competitive process.
The Eligible Entity must provide detailed description of the selection process that is
fundamentally fair, open, and competitive.
The Eligible Entity must describe the safeguards to ensure the subgrantee selection process is
fair, including safeguards against each of the following:
• Collusion
• Bias
• Conflicts of interest
• Arbitrary decisions
The Eligible Entity must ensure the subgrantee selection process is open by describing how the
Eligible Entity will provide adequate public notice to potential subgrantees to enable
participation by a wide variety of potential applicants, to ensure an open and competitive
process, and to prevent favoritism, collusion, and abuse.
The Eligible Entity must also describe how it ensured the subgrantee selection process is
competitive, such as by using a competitively neutral evaluation criteria that does not favor
one type of provider over another, except certain preferences expressed neutrally and in
advance. Such preferences may only be included as secondary criteria.
As part of creating a plan to competitive award subgrants to last-mile broadband deployment
projects, Eligible Entities should understand the regulations outlined in the BEAD NOFO and
document their adherence to these regulations in a set of Sub-granting Accountability
Procedures. In accordance with the BEAD NOFO, subgrant agreements should, at a minimum,
include the following in their Sub-granting Accountability Procedures:
• Disbursement of funding to subgrantees for all deployment projects, at a minimum, on a
reimbursable basis (which would allow the state or territory to withhold funds if the
subgrantee fails to take the actions the funds are meant to subsidize);
• The inclusion of clawback provisions (i.e., provisions allowing recoupment of funds
previously disbursed) in agreements between the state or territory and any subgrantee;
• Timely subgrantee reporting mandates; and
• Robust subgrantee monitoring practices.
When developing their Sub-granting Accountability Procedures, Eligible Entities should
demonstrate how they intend to satisfy the comprehensive monitoring and management
requirements of their awarded subgrantees. Eligible Entities are encouraged to conduct periodic
comprehensive monitoring of all awarded subgrantees to ensure they are demonstrating strong
performance throughout the lifecycle of the program.
Additionally, when developing a plan to competitively award subgrants, Eligible Entities should
be aware of restrictions surrounding Conflict of Interest in the BEAD NOFO. Conflict of Interest
applies when two parties have concerns that can be incompatible, or there exists a conflict
between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust.
Page | 40
For additional information on creating a competitive application process, please reference the
Subgrantee Selection Primer
.
2.4.2 Text Box: Describe how the prioritization and scoring process will be conducted and is
consistent with the BEAD NOFO requirements on pages 42 – 46.
2.4.2.1 Attachment: As a required attachment, submit the scoring rubric to be used in the
subgrantee selection process for deployment projects. Eligible Entities may use the template
provided by NTIA, or use their own format for the scoring rubric.
The Eligible Entity must describe how the prioritization and scoring process will be conducted
and how the subgrantee selection process is consistent with the principles for I) selection among
Priority Broadband Projects covering the same location or locations and/or II) selection among
Other Last-Mile Broadband Deployment Projects.
• Priority Broadband Projects:
5
An Eligible Entity’s process in selecting subgrantees
for last-mile broadband deployment projects must first assess which locations or sets of
locations under consideration are subject to one or more proposals that (1) constitute
Priority Broadband Projects and (2) satisfy all other requirements set out in this NOFO
with respect to subgrantees. In the event there is just one proposed Priority Broadband
Project in a location or set of locations, and that proposal does not exceed the Eligible
Entity’s Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold, that proposal is the default
winner, unless the Eligible Entity requests, and the Assistant Secretary grants, a waiver
allowing the Eligible Entity to select an alternative project. To the extent there are
multiple proposals in a location or set of locations that (1) constitute Priority Broadband
Projects and (2) satisfy all other requirements with respect to subgrantees, the Eligible
Entity must competitively select a project based on the criteria set by the BEAD NOFO.
• Other Last-Mile Broadband Deployment Projects: In deciding among competing
projects that are not Priority Broadband Projects covering the same locations or area, the
Eligible Entity must use the criteria detailed in the BEAD NOFO.
Selection Criteria for Priority Broadband Projects
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 43 – 44:
Primary Criteria. In deciding among competing Priority Broadband Projects covering the
same location or locations, Eligible Entities must give the greatest weight (e.g., substantial
points or credits) to the following criteria:
1
• Minimal BEAD Program Outlay. The total BEAD funding that will be required to
complete the project, accounting for both total projected cost and the prospective
subgrantee’s proposed match (which must, absent a waiver, cover no less than 25
percent of the project cost), with the specific points or credits awarded increasing as
the BEAD outlay decreases. In comparing the project’s BEAD outlay and the
prospective subgrantee’s match commitments, Eligible Entities should consider the
cost to the Program per location while accounting for any factors in network design
that might make a project more expensive, but also more scalable or resilient.
5
The term “Priority Broadband Project” means a project that will provision service via end-to-end fiber-
optic facilities to each end-user premises BEAD NOFO at 14.
Page | 41
• Affordability.
The prospective subgrantee’s commitment to provide the most
affordable total price to the customer for 1 Gbps/1 Gbps service in the project area.
• Fair Labor Practices. Eligible Entities must give priority to projects based on a
prospective subgrantee’s demonstrated record of and plans to be in compliance with
federal labor and employment laws. New entrants without a record of labor and
employment law compliance must be permitted to mitigate this fact by making
specific, forward-looking commitments to strong labor and employment standards
and protections with respect to BEAD-funded projects. This prioritization requirement
is described in further detail in Section IV.C.1.e of this NOFO.
Secondary Criterion. Eligible Entities must also give weight (e.g., some number of points
or quantity of credits less than the amount given to the criteria above) to the following
criterion:
• Speed to Deployment. All subgrantees that receive BEAD Program funds for
network deployment must deploy the planned broadband network and begin
providing services to each customer that desires broadband services within the project
area not later than four years after the date on which the subgrantee receives the
subgrant from the Eligible Entity. Eligible Entities must give secondary criterion
prioritization weight to the prospective subgrantee’s binding commitment to provide
service by an earlier date certain, subject to contractual penalties to the Eligible Entity,
with greater benefits awarded to applicants promising an earlier service provision
date.
2
The Eligible Entity may develop additional prioritization criteria to be given weight that aligns
with Eligible Entity and local priorities. The Eligible Entity may incorporate the following as
additional prioritization criteria:
Additional Prioritization Factors.
• Equitable Workforce Development and Job Quality. NTIA encourages
Eligible Entities to adopt selection criteria relating to the subgrantee’s enforceable
commitments with respect to advancing equitable workforce development and job
quality objectives, see Section IV.C.1.f of this NOFO.
• Open Access. NTIA encourages Eligible Entities to adopt selection criteria
promoting subgrantees’ provision of open access wholesale last-mile broadband
service for the life of the subsidized networks, on fair, equal, and neutral terms to all
potential retail providers.
• Local and Tribal Coordination. NTIA encourages Eligible Entities to adopt
selection criteria reflecting a prospective subgrantee’s support from the local and/or
Tribal Government with oversight over the location or locations to be served.
1
The primary criteria must collectively account for no less than three-quarters of the total
benefits available across all the criteria the Eligible Entity employs in choosing between or
among competing proposals.
2
Nothing herein supersedes the requirement that, barring an extension granted by the
Assistant Secretary, any subgrantee that receives BEAD Program funds for network
deployment must deploy the planned broadband network and begin providing services to
each customer that desires broadband service within the project area not later than four years
after the date on which the subgrantee receives the subgrant from the Eligible Entity.
Page | 42
Selection Criteria for Other Last-Mile Broadband Deployment Projects
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 44 – 45:
Primary Criteria. In deciding among competing projects that are not Priority Broadband
Projects covering the same locations or area, Eligible Entities must give the greatest weight
(e.g., substantial points or credits) to the following criteria:
• Minimal BEAD Program Outlay. The total BEAD funding that will be required to
complete the project, accounting for both total projected cost and the prospective
subgrantee’s proposed match (which must, absent a waiver, cover no less than 25
percent of the project cost), with the specific benefits awarded increasing as the BEAD
outlay decreases. In comparing the project’s BEAD outlay and the prospective
subgrantees match commitments, Eligible Entities should consider the cost to the
Program per location while accounting for any factors in network design that might
make a project more expensive, but also more scalable or resilient.
• Affordability. The prospective subgrantee’s commitment to provide the most
affordable total price to the customer for 100/20 Mbps service in the proposed service
area.
• Fair Labor Practices. Eligible Entities must give priority to projects based on a
prospective subgrantee’s demonstrated record of and plans to be in compliance with
federal labor and employment laws. New entrants without a record of labor and
employment law compliance must be permitted to mitigate this fact by making
specific, forward-looking commitments to strong labor and employment standards
and protections with respect to BEAD-funded projects. This prioritization requirement
is described in further detail in Section IV.C.1.e of this NOFO.
Secondary Criteria. Eligible Entities must also give weight (e.g., some number of points or
credits less than the amount given to the criteria above) to the following criteria:
• Speed to Deployment. The prospective subgrantee’s binding commitment to
provision service by a date certain, subject to contractual penalties to the Eligible
Entity, with greater benefits awarded to prospective subgrantees promising an earlier
service provision date.
• Speed of Network and Other Technical Capabilities. Eligible Entities must
weigh the speeds, latency, and other technical capabilities of the technologies
proposed by prospective subgrantees seeking to deploy projects that are not Priority
Broadband Projects. Applications proposing to use technologies that exhibit greater
ease of scalability with lower future investment (as defined by the Eligible Entity) and
whose capital assets have longer useable lives should be afforded additional weight
over those proposing technologies with higher costs to upgrade and shorter capital
asset cycles.
Additional Prioritization Factors. Eligible Entities may develop additional secondary
criteria to be given weights that align with Eligible Entity and local priorities, subject to the
requirement to give the greatest weight to the primary criteria and the approval of the
Assistant Secretary in the Initial and Final Proposal process. In particular, NTIA encourages
Eligible Entities to incorporate the following as selection criteria:
Page | 43
Regardless of whether the Eligible Entity is selecting among Priority Broadband Projects, the
Eligible Entity must describe how primary criteria will account for at least 75% of the total
scoring or bidding credits. Secondary criteria can account for no more than 25% of total scoring
or bidding credits. This criterion must be reflected in the scoring rubric(s) to be used in each
proposed subgrantee selection process.
An Eligible Entity that includes advancing equitable workforce development and job quality
objectives should make sure that those objectives are also included in its response to
Requirement 12 (Workforce Readiness).
For the attachment, the Eligible Entity must submit a scoring rubric to be used in the proposed
subgrantee selection process. The Eligible Entity may reference the subgrantee selection scoring
rubric template to help complete the attachment. The Eligible Entity may submit a scoring
rubric using their own format or may use the template provided below.
To download a copy of the NTIA Template for the Subgrantee Selection Process
Scoring Rubric, please see the file named “BEAD Initial Proposal_Volume II_Subgrantee
Selection Scoring Rubric.xlsx.” The Eligible Entity may also reference the sample Subgrantee
Selection Process Scoring Rubric for guidance when completing their submission.
2.4.3 Text Box: Describe how the proposed subgrantee selection process will prioritize
Unserved Service Projects in a manner that ensures complete coverage of all unserved locations
prior to prioritizing Underserved Service Projects followed by prioritization of eligible CAIs.
The Eligible Entity must describe how the proposed subgrantee selection process is consistent
with the principle for funding broadband deployment to all unserved locations and underserved
locations, followed by prioritization of eligible CAIs. Eligible Entities that are able to fund
• Equitable Workforce Development and Job Quality.
NTIA encourages
Eligible Entities to adopt selection criteria relating to the subgrantee’s enforceable
commitments with respect to advancing equitable workforce development and job
quality objectives, see Section IV.C.1.f of this NOFO.
• Open Access. NTIA encourages Eligible Entities to adopt selection criteria
promoting subgrantees’ provision of open access wholesale last-mile broadband
service for the life of the subsidized networks, on fair, equal, and neutral terms to all
potential retail providers.
• Local and Tribal Coordination. NTIA encourages Eligible Entities to adopt
selection criteria reflecting a prospective subgrantee’s support from the local and/or
Tribal Government with oversight over the location or locations to be served.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, page 41:
The Eligible Entity, in awarding subgrants for the deployment of a broadband network, shall
award funding in a manner that ensures the deployment of service to all unserved locations
within the Eligible Entity’s jurisdiction. If the Eligible Entity has sufficient funds to ensure
deployment of service to all underserved locations within its jurisdiction, it must ensure such
deployment as well. If the Eligible Entity lacks sufficient funds to ensure deployment of
service to all underserved locations, it must commit the remainder of its BEAD funds to
ensure deployment to underserved locations. Eligible Entities must submit Initial Proposals
and Final Proposals that will result in coverage for all unserved locations, and (to the extent
funds are available) all underserved locations.
Page | 44
deployment to all unserved and underserved locations are to allocate remaining funds to eligible
CAIs, and to move to alternative eligible uses only if they are able to fund deployments to all
unserved locations, underserved locations, and eligible CAIs.
More specifically, the Eligible
Entity must describe how it will
award funding in a manner that
ensures the deployment of service
to all unserved and
underserved locations within
the Eligible Entity’s jurisdiction.
Eligible Entities must submit Initial
Proposals and Final Proposals that
will result in coverage for all
unserved locations, and (to the
extent funds are available) all underserved locations.
For this section, the Eligible Entity may describe how it will use multiple rounds of funding to
ensure coverage for areas without successful bids in earlier rounds, provide special
consideration for hard to serve areas, and specifically plan to engage with providers to expand
into areas without initial applications or bids.
The requirement that an Eligible Entity has a plan to ensure deployment to all unserved and
underserved locations before contemplating non-deployment uses of funds does not impose any
temporal requirement as to the order in which BEAD-funded initiatives are undertaken or
completed. If an Eligible Entity has a plan to deploy service to all unserved and underserved
locations within its jurisdiction, it may pursue nondeployment initiatives using BEAD funds
before or while deployment projects are underway.
To the extent that an Eligible Entity demonstrates
that there are insufficient funds available to fund
deployment to all unserved, underserved, or eligible
CAI locations, the Eligible Entity must prioritize
projects within each of those categories based on a
strong preference for projects in high poverty areas
or persistent poverty counties.
The BEAD NOFO defines high poverty areas as areas
in which the percentage of individuals with a
household income that is at or below 150 percent of the poverty line applicable to a family of the
size involved (as determined under Section 673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act
(42 U.S.C. § 9902(2)) is higher than the national percentage of such individuals. Persistent
poverty counties are counties that have had poverty rates of 20 percent or greater for at least 30
years as calculated by the Economic Research Service in the Department of Agriculture.
2.4.4 Text Box: If proposing to use BEAD funds to prioritize non-deployment projects prior
to, or in lieu of the deployment of services to eligible CAIs, provide a strong rationale for doing
so. If not applicable to plans, note “Not applicable.”
If an Eligible Entity proposes to use BEAD funds to prioritize non-deployment projects prior to,
or in lieu of the deployment of service to eligible CAIs, the Eligible Entity must provide a strong
IMPORTANT
The Assistant Secretary will only approve an
Initial Proposal and Final Proposal that include a
plan to ensure deployment of broadband to all
unserved and underserved locations within the
Eligible Entity or that provides a strong showing
that the Eligible Entity is financially incapable of
ensuring universal coverage of all unserved and
underserved locations.
Looking Ahead
The Eligible Entity will be
required to certify that it
provided service to all unserved
and underserved locations in its
Final Proposal.
Page | 45
rationale for doing so. For example, the Eligible Entity may provide an explanation of why the
remaining CAIs do not need gigabit symmetrical service to meet the needs of the organization or
why the planned non-deployment uses are essential to achieving BEAD Program goals. Refer to
the BEAD NOFO page 41 for more information related to the prioritization of BEAD funds.
2.4.5 Text Box: The proposed subgrantee selection process is expected to demonstrate to
subgrantees how to comply with all applicable Environmental and Historic Preservation (EHP)
and Build America, Buy America Act (BABA)
6
requirements for their respective project or
projects. Describe how the Eligible Entity will communicate EHP and BABA requirements to
prospective subgrantees, and how EHP and BABA requirements will be incorporated into the
subgrantee selection process.
The Eligible Entity must describe how it will
communicate EHP and BABA requirements to
prospective subgrantees. Additionally, the Eligible
Entity must describe how EHP and BABA
requirements will be incorporated into the
subgrantee selection process. The Eligible Entity will
also be responsible for monitoring subgrantees’
compliance with EHP requirements over the
duration of its specific projects.
For EHP requirements, the Eligible Entity may refer to the
EHP and Climate Resiliency
Preparation Checklist for additional information on engaging prospective subgrantees on this
topic.
The Eligible Entity must provide a description of how they plan to work with prospective
subgrantees to obtain EHP-related information and review it for completeness and technical
sufficiency prior to delivering it to NTIA for review and next steps.
6
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, Division G, Public Law 117-58, 135 Stat. 429 (Nov. 15,
2021).
Looking Ahead
The Eligible Entity will be required
to provide environmental
documentation associated with all
eligible activities and a description
of how the Eligible Entity will
comply with applicable EHP
requirements in its Final Proposal.
Page | 46
Further guidance around BABA will be finalized at a later date. However, the Eligible Entity
must still describe its understanding of BABA requirements and how it will integrate these
requirements into its subgrantee selection process.
Last-Mile Broadband Deployment Project Areas
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, page 38:
7. The Eligible Entity may solicit proposals from prospective subgrantees at the geographic
level of its choosing—for example, on a per-location basis, per-census block basis, per-town,
per-county or another geographic unit. An Eligible Entity may alternatively solicit proposals
for project areas it defines or ask prospective subgrantees to define their own proposed
project areas. If the Eligible Entity allows prospective subgrantees to define proposed project
areas, it must develop a mechanism for de-conflicting overlapping proposals (for example, by
de-scoping some locations from a provider’s proposed project area) to allow for like-to-like
comparison of competing proposals. Whatever process is selected, the Eligible Entity must
ensure it has a plan for serving all unserved and (where it has sufficient funding) underserved
locations. …
9. If, after soliciting proposals, the Eligible Entity has received no proposals to serve a
location or group of locations that are unserved, underserved, or a combination unserved and
underserved, the Eligible Entity may engage with existing providers and/or other prospective
subgrantees to find providers willing to expand their existing or proposed service areas. An
Eligible Entity may consider inducements such as use of state funding toward the match
requirement set forth in Section III.B or benefits during the grant selection process (e.g.,
points or credits). The Eligible Entity shall, in this circumstance, work to ensure that its
approach is as transparent as possible. For the avoidance of doubt, this provider-specific
outreach is only appropriate after the Eligible Entity has solicited proposals and failed to
obtain one or more proposals to serve the location or locations at issue.
Looking Ahead
EHP requirements are a critical path issue as no construction or deployment may begin until
they are fulfilled, therefore Eligible Entities are strongly encouraged to begin engaging in
and documenting the following activities:
• Coordination with federal land-and resource managing agencies, including but not
limited to the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of
Land Management, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S Forest Service, and others, to understand any
restrictions or special conditions that may apply to infrastructure proposed on federal
land, or that may impact federally managed resources such as wetlands, threatened or
endangered species, navigable waterways, and others.
• Coordination with state agencies that may have a role in EHP requirements, such as the
State Historic Preservation Office, as well as state agencies that may need to issue their
own permits for any proposed projects.
• Exploring contracting vehicles to retain EHP-related subject matter expertise and
technical support if such resources are not currently available within the existing
organization to support compliance activities, including EHP program management
support and possibly the preparation of EHP documentation for subgrantees, if desired.
Page | 47
2.4.6 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will define project areas from which they will
solicit proposals from prospective subgrantees. If prospective subgrantees will be given the
option to define alternative proposed project areas, describe the mechanism for de-conflicting
overlapping proposals to allow for like-to-like comparisons of competing proposals.
The Eligible Entity must describe how it intends to solicit proposals at a geographic level of its
choosing for project areas it defines or if the Eligible Entity intends to ask prospective
subgrantees to define the proposed project areas. Geographic levels may be chosen, per project,
on a per-location basis, per-census block basis, per-town, per-county, or another geographic
unit that the Eligible Entity may define. An “Unserved Service Project” or “Underserved Service
Project” may be as small as a single unserved or underserved location, respectively.
If the Eligible Entity allows prospective subgrantees to define proposed project areas, it must
develop a mechanism for de-conflicting overlapping proposals to allow for like-to-like
comparison of competing proposals (e.g., by de-scoping some locations from a provider’s
proposed project area). Eligible Entities may solicit proposals at multiple geographic levels
(e.g., per-location in certain circumstances and per-census block in others).
2.4.7 Text Box: If no proposals to serve a location or group of locations that are unserved,
underserved, or a combination of both are received, describe how the Eligible Entity will engage
with prospective subgrantees in subsequent funding rounds to find providers willing to expand
their existing or proposed service areas or other actions that the Eligible Entity will take to
ensure universal coverage.
The Eligible Entity must describe how the Eligible Entity will engage in outreach to specific
existing providers or to other prospective subgrantees willing to expand their existing or
proposed service areas only if it receives no proposals to serve a location or group of locations
that are unserved or underserved.
The Eligible Entity must ensure transparency by clearly explaining the steps it will take in the
described situation, including the methods it will use to make prospective subgrantees aware of
the “no response” situation, and any changes of rules it will make to get a response, including
but not limited to inducements to serve all unserved and underserved locations, such as the use
of state funding toward the match requirement or other benefits. If an Eligible Entity decides to
use inducements, the Eligible Entity must describe when and what inducements will be offered,
and how the Eligible Entity will ensure that all interested parties were made aware of them.
Other actions that the Eligible Entity may take to ensure universal coverage could include
conducting multiple funding rounds for areas not selected initially or structuring bidding or
application areas in ways that group higher cost areas with lower cost areas.
2.4.8 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity intends to submit proof of Tribal
Governments’ consent to deployment if planned projects include any locations on Tribal Lands.
Page | 48
To the extent an Eligible Entity encompasses federally recognized Tribal lands, Eligible Entities
must describe how it intends to submit a Resolution of Consent or other formal demonstration
of consent from each Tribal Government, from the Tribal Council or other governing body, upon
whose Tribal Lands the infrastructure will be deployed. The Eligible Entity should consider
when the consent documentation will be collected (e.g., with the applications or bids to serve
these areas or after preliminary selection of a project) and describe the approach it intends to
take. The Eligible Entity is encouraged to discuss this process with Tribal Governments during
the consultation and engagement process. Refer to page 48, footnote 70 of the BEAD NOFO for
more information on Resolution of Consent, particularly related to consent for projects deployed
on Tribal lands in Hawaii and Alaska.
Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold
2.4.9 Text Box: Identify or outline a detailed process for identifying an Extremely High Cost
Per Location Threshold to be utilized during the subgrantee selection process. The explanation
must include a description of any cost models used and the parameters of those cost models,
including whether they consider only capital expenditures or include the operational costs for
the lifespan of the network.
The Eligible Entity must identify or outline a detailed process for identifying an Extremely High
Cost Per Location Threshold to be used during the subgrantee selection process. This includes
the identification of data to be used in determining the threshold and the threshold to applied
against this data. An Eligible Entity that intends to use the functionality within the Eligible
Entity Planning Tool to support the identification of the Extremely High Cost Per Location
Threshold (available Summer 2023) may indicate that they intend to use NTIA’s data set.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, page 13:
An Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold is a BEAD subsidy cost per location to be
utilized during the subgrantee selection process described in Section IV.B.7 of the BEAD
NOFO above which an Eligible Entity may decline to select a proposal if use of an alternative
technology meeting the BEAD Programs technical requirements would be less expensive.
6
6
Each Eligible Entity must establish its Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold in a
manner that maximizes use of the best available technology while ensuring that the program
can meet the prioritization and scoring requirements set forth in Section IV.B.6.b of the BEAD
NOFO. NTIA expects Eligible Entities to set the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold
as high as possible to help ensure that end-to-end fiber projects are deployed wherever
feasible.
Looking Ahead
The Final Proposal requires an Eligible Entity to submit a Resolution of Consent from each
Tribal Government, from the Tribal Council or other governing body, upon whose Tribal
Lands the infrastructure will be deployed.
Page | 49
An Eligible Entity that does not plan to use the Eligible Entity Planning Tool must identify or
include a detailed process for identifying the data set to be used in determining their Extremely
High Cost Per Location Threshold to be used during the subgrantee selection process. The
explanation must include a description of any cost models used and the parameters of those cost
models, including whether they consider only capital expenditures or include the operational
costs for the lifespan of the network.
The Eligible Entity is given discretion to
determine the threshold that is
appropriate for its jurisdiction and should
consider the competing goals of
encouraging fiber deployment to as many
areas as possible and ensuring universal
coverage. NTIA expects that an Eligible
Entity with a surplus of funding to achieve
universal coverage would set a higher
threshold to ensure greater fiber coverage. Conversely, NTIA recommends that an Eligible
Entity with tighter budget constraints should set a lower threshold to ensure universal coverage.
2.4.10 Text Box: Outline a plan for how the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold will
be utilized in the subgrantee selection process to maximize the use of the best available
technology while ensuring that the program can meet the prioritization and scoring
requirements set forth in Section IV.B.6.b of the BEAD NOFO. The response must describe:
a. The process for declining a subgrantee proposal that exceeds the threshold where an
alternative technology is less expensive.
b. The plan for engaging subgrantees to revise their proposals and ensure locations do not
require a subsidy.
c. The process for selecting a proposal that involves a less costly technology and may not
meet the definition of Reliable Broadband.
The Eligible Entity must explain how the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold will be
implemented in the subgrantee selection process, including the process for each of the
following:
• Declining a proposal that requires a BEAD subsidy that exceeds the Extremely High Cost
Per Location Threshold for any location to be served in the proposal if use of an
alternative technology meeting the BEAD program’s technical requirements for Reliable
Broadband Service would be less expensive;
• Engaging with a prospective subgrantee to revise the proposal to ensure that no location
requires a subsidy; and
• Selecting a proposal involving a less costly technology and may not meet the BEAD
program's requirements for Reliable Broadband Service (while otherwise satisfying the
Program's technical requirements) because no technology meeting the Reliable
Broadband Service requirements can be deployed for less than the Extremely High Cost
Per Location Threshold at a given location.
IMPORTANT
The Extremely High Cost Per Location
Threshold is distinct from High-Cost Area.
NTIA will release further information
regarding the identification of high-cost
areas for purposes of BEAD funding
allocations at a later date.
Page | 50
The Eligible Entity has the opportunity (but is not required) to decline to fund projects that
exceed the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold. In this circumstance, the Eligible
Entity may instead fund a different Reliable Broadband Technology that can be provided at a
lower cost or a technology that does not
meet the definition of reliable but will
provide service at a minimum of
100/20 and latency less than or equal
to 100 milliseconds at a lower cost. The
Eligible Entity must explain the process
that will be followed in exercising this
discretion and any planned
engagement with providers to reduce
the cost of a project below the
Extremely High Cost Per Location
Threshold.
Deployment Subgrantee Qualifications
2.4.11 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure prospective subgrantees
deploying network facilities meet the minimum qualifications for financial capability as outlined
on pages 72-73 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials
related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to
outline alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to certify that they are
qualified to meet the obligations associated with a Project, that prospective subgrantees
will have available funds for all project costs that exceed the amount of the grant, and
that prospective subgrantees will comply with all Program requirements, including
service milestones. To the extent the Eligible Entity disburses funding to subgrantees
only upon completion of the associated tasks, the Eligible Entity will require each
prospective subgrantee to certify that it has and will continue to have sufficient financial
resources to cover its eligible costs for the Project until such time as the Eligible Entity
authorizes additional disbursements.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity plans to establish a model letter of credit substantially
similar to the model letter of credit established by the FCC in connection with the Rural
Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF).
c. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit audited
financial statements.
d. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit business
plans and related analyses that substantiate the sustainability of the proposed project.
2.4.11.1 Optional Attachment: As an optional attachment, submit application materials
related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, such as drafts of the Requests for Proposals
for deployment projects, and narrative to crosswalk against requirements in the Deployment
Subgrantee Qualifications section.
IMPORTANT
Reliable Broadband Service refers to
broadband service that the National Broadband
Map shows is accessible to a location via: (i)
fiber-optic technology; (ii) Cable Modem/
Hybrid fiber-coaxial technology; (iii) digital
subscriber line (DSL) technology; or (iv)
terrestrial fixed wireless technology utilizing
entirely licensed spectrum or using a hybrid of
licensed and unlicensed spectrum.
Page | 51
The Eligible Entity must articulate how it will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the minimum qualifications for financial capability. The Eligible
Entity must explain the information it will require of subgrantees, how it will collect or require
this information, and how it will assess this information during the subgrantee selection
process. As a best practice, the Eligible Entity should also consider including information on
how they will revise certifications/terms and conditions, as needed, due to a potential Special
Award Conditions (SACs). For information on how to successfully create a plan to revise terms
and conditions, please see Figure 5.
The Eligible Entity must detail how it is prepared to gather and assess prospective subgrantees’
certifications that they are financially qualified to meet the obligations associated with a Project,
letters of credit, audited financial statements, and sustainability/ pro forma analyses of a
proposed Project.
The Eligible Entity may refer to the RDOF sample letters of credit
and other resources to help
detail its plans for establishing a similar model letter of credit. The Eligible Entity may satisfy
this requirement by uploading guidelines for the program and/or application materials using
the “Optional Attachment” feature in 2.4.11.1 and providing reference to page numbers that are
responsive to this question.
For the optional attachment, an Eligible Entity may provide supplementary materials, such as
application questions or Requests for Proposals (RFPs), to help demonstrate that the Eligible
Entity is planning to employ subgrantees that meet the qualifications set by the BEAD NOFO
.
This attachment will apply to all questions in the Deployment Subgrantee Qualifications section,
and the Eligible Entity should reference page numbers in the attachment to show the
information that they will require from prospective subgrantees to demonstrate their
qualifications.
2.4.12 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee
deploying network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for managerial capability as
outlined on pages 73 – 74 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application
materials related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference
those to outline alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit resumes for
key management personnel.
b. Detail how it will require prospective subgrantees to provide a narrative describing their
readiness to manage their proposed project and ongoing services provided.
The Eligible Entity must clearly articulate how it will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the minimum qualifications for managerial capability. The Eligible
Entity must explain the information it will require of subgrantees, how it will collect or require
this information, and how it will assess this information during the subgrantee selection
process.
The Eligible Entity must detail how it is prepared to gather and assess prospective subgrantees’
narratives for describing the experience and qualifications of its key management, their
experience undertaking projects of similar size and scope, recent and upcoming organizational
changes including mergers and acquisitions, and relevant organizational policies.
Page | 52
2.4.13 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee
deploying network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for technical capability as
outlined on page 74 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application
materials related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference
those to outline alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to certify that they are
technically qualified to complete and operate the Project and that they are capable of
carrying out the funded activities in a competent manner, including that they will use an
appropriately skilled and credentialed workforce.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit a network
design, diagram, project costs, build-out timeline and milestones for project
implementation, and a capital investment schedule evidencing complete build-out and
the initiation of service within four years of the date on which the entity receives the
subgrant, all certified by a professional engineer, stating that the proposed network can
deliver broadband service that meets the requisite performance requirements to all
locations served by the Project.
The Eligible Entity must clearly articulate how it will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the minimum qualifications for technical capability. The Eligible
Entity must explain the information it will require of subgrantees, how it will collect or require
this information, and how it will assess this information during the subgrantee selection
process. Example responses may include:
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will ensure that the prospective subgrantees are
licensed and in good standing with governing bodies (e.g., safety violations) and have a
demonstrated experience designing and delivering similar projects.
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will ensure that the engineer who certifies the
design, diagram, project costs, etc., holds a current, applicable license in the state or
territory in which the network is being constructed.
• A description of how the project plan will clearly identify the steps (planning, design,
implementation, and operation) to which the capital investment schedule will cross
reference to.
As a best practice, when requesting plans from prospective subgrantees, and in order to
guarantee the adherence to the predetermined standards of technical capabilities, the Eligible
Entity should undertake the responsibility to establish specific criteria for technical capability,
corresponding to industry standards, BEAD NOFO requirements and best practices.
Page | 53
The prospective subgrantees should be subjected to rigorous evaluations, which include but are
not limited to, assessment of their previous project performances, analysis of their technical
project plan (encompassing network design, diagrams, project costs, build-out timeline, and
milestones for the project), and an appraisal of their technical workforce's proficiency.
2.4.14 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee
deploying network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for compliance with applicable
laws as outlined on page 74 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application
materials related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference
those to outline alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to demonstrate that
they are capable of carrying out funded activities in a competent manner in compliance
with all applicable federal, state, territorial, and local laws.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to permit workers to
create worker-led health and safety committees that management will meet with upon
reasonable request.
The Eligible Entity must clearly articulate how it will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the minimum qualifications for compliance with all applicable
federal, state, territorial, and local laws. For example, the Eligible Entity must ensure that
prospective subgrantees adhere to relevant federal and state or territory procurement laws.
To foster a successful sub-granting process, Eligible Entities should understand the critical
components related to procurement. Both legally binding regulations and agency-specific
policies work together to create a process unique to each Eligible Entity. Before creating a
competitive selection process, Eligible Entities should work to recognize existing federal, state or
territory, and local requirements, document relevant procedures, and develop new policies,
where needed. For further guidance on federal and state or territory procurement components,
including how they work together, please reference the Subgrantee Selection Primer
.
The Eligible Entity must detail how it is prepared to gather and assess prospective subgrantees’
submission of its network design, diagram, project costs, build-out timeline and milestones for
project implementation, and a capital investment schedule evidencing complete build-out and
the initiation of service within four years of the date on which the entity receives the subgrant.
The Eligible Entity must also detail how it will require prospective subgrantees to permit
workers to create work-led health and safety committees. The Eligible Entity must explain the
To connect with a professional engineer in their states, the Eligible Entity is
encouraged to reach out to the following resources:
• State Licensing Board: Each state in the U.S. has a separate engineering
licensing board. These boards can provide information about licensed
professional engineers in their respective states.
• National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE): The NSPE has state
societies in all 50 states as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and
Guam. These societies can often assist in providing information about
professional engineers in their respective regions.
Page | 54
information it will require of subgrantees, how it will collect or require this information, and
how it will assess this information during the subgrantee selection process. For additional
information and best practices on working with labor groups, please reference the
NTIA
Internet For All: Workforce Planning Guide.
2.4.15 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee
deploying network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for operational capability as
outlined on pages 74 – 75 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application
materials related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference
those to outline alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to certify that they
possess the operational capability to qualify to complete and operate the Project.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit a
certification that have provided a voice, broadband, and/or electric transmission or
distribution service for at least two (2) consecutive years prior to the date of its
application submission or that it is a wholly owned subsidiary of such an entity, attests to
and specify the number of years the prospective subgrantee or its parent company has
been operating.
c. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees that have provided a
voice and/or broadband service, to certify that it has timely filed Commission Form 477s
and the Broadband DATA Act submission, if applicable, as required during this time
period, and otherwise has complied with the Commission’s rules and regulations.
d. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees that have operated
only an electric transmission or distribution service, to submit qualified operating or
financial reports, that it has filed with the relevant financial institution for the relevant
time period along with a certification that the submission is a true and accurate copy of
the reports that were provided to the relevant financial institution.
e. In reference to new entrants to the broadband market, detail how the Eligible Entity will
require prospective subgrantees to provide evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the
newly formed entity has obtained, through internal or external resources, sufficient
operational capabilities.
The Eligible Entity must clearly articulate how it will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the minimum qualifications for operational capability. The Eligible
Entity must explain the information it will require of subgrantees, how it will collect or require
this information, and how it will assess this information during the subgrantee selection
process. Please refer to Figure 5 for additional best practices on incorporating information on
strong processes in this response. For additional guidance on record retention for certifications,
reference the BIL Grant File Management Guide Best Practices document.
2.4.16 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure that any prospective subgrantee
deploying network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for providing information on
ownership as outlined on page 75 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide
Page | 55
application materials related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may
reference those to outline alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to provide ownership
information consistent with the requirements set forth in 47 C.F.R. § 1.2112(a)(1)-(7).
The Eligible Entity must clearly
articulate how it will ensure
prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the
minimum qualifications for providing
information on ownership. The
Eligible Entity must explain the
information it will require of
subgrantees, how it will collect or
require this information, and how it
will assess this information during
the subgrantee selection process. For
most Eligible Entities, this
information will be included in the
subgrantees’ standard terms and
conditions. For information on how to write strong terms and conditions to include in this
question’s response, see Figure 5.
2.4.17 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee
deploying network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for providing information on
other public funding as outlined on pages 75 – 76 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts
to provide application materials related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible
Entity may reference those to outline alignment with requirements for this section. The
response must:
a. Detail how it will require prospective subgrantees to disclose for itself and for its
affiliates, any application the subgrantee or its affiliates have submitted or plan to
submit, and every broadband deployment project that the subgrantee or its affiliates are
undertaking or have committed to undertake at the time of the application using public
funds.
b. At a minimum, the Eligible Entity shall require the disclosure, for each broadband
deployment project, of: (a) the speed and latency of the broadband service to be provided
(as measured and/or reported under the applicable rules), (b) the geographic area to be
covered, (c) the number of unserved and underserved locations committed to serve (or, if
the commitment is to serve a percentage of locations within the specified geographic
area, the relevant percentage), (d) the amount of public funding to be used, (e) the cost
of service to the consumer, and (f) the matching commitment, if any, provided by the
subgrantee or its affiliates.
The Eligible Entity must clearly articulate how it will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying
network facilities will meet the minimum qualifications for providing information on other
public funding. The Eligible Entity must explain the information it will require of subgrantees,
How to Write Strong Terms and Conditions
For each qualification, or amendment to a
qualification, the Eligible Entity should ensure
terms and conditions:
1. Are specific and clearly defined;
2. Are measurable in whether or not they are
achieved;
3. Have a specific timeframe; and
4. Note the reviewing party and associated
responsibilities.
Figure 5: Terms and Conditions Best Practices
Page | 56
how it will collect or require this information, and how it will assess this information during the
subgrantee selection process.
The Infrastructure Act defines Reliable Broadband Service as “broadband service that meets
performance criteria for service availability, adaptability to changing end-user requirements,
length of serviceable life, or other criteria, other than upload and download speeds, as
determined by the Assistant Secretary in coordination with the Commission.” This definition is
incorporated into the BEAD NOFO, which defines the minimum criteria for speed and latency
for subgrantees. When reviewing subgrantee applications, Eligible Entities are strongly
encouraged to explain how they will specifically meet the performance measurement
requirements of the Program.
Page | 57
Non-Deployment Subgrantee Selection (Requirement 9)
The purpose of this section is to outline non-deployment eligible activities an Eligible Entity
may support using BEAD Program funds. Non-deployment eligible activities are important
because they help provide the information technology capacity, educational resources, and skills
necessary to adopt broadband and advance digital inclusion.
Eligible Entities may only fund non-deployment eligible activities if they have a plan to ensure
deployments to all unserved and
underserved locations and can
demonstrate the effectiveness of that plan
to satisfaction of the Assistant Secretary.
An Eligible Entity that proposes to use
BEAD funds to pursue non-deployment
objectives in lieu of the deployment of
service to eligible CAIs must provide a strong rationale for doing so. An Eligible Entity that has a
plan to deploy service to all unserved and underserved locations within its jurisdiction may
pursue eligible non-deployment uses prior to its last-mile deployment projects being completed.
Where an Eligible Entity has sufficient funding to pursue non-deployment uses, Eligible Entities
are encouraged to begin non-deployment activities as soon as is feasible, before or while
deployment projects are underway. For example, while an Eligible Entity is only permitted to
pursue a device-subsidy program using BEAD funds if it has a plan to deploy service to all
unserved and underserved locations within its jurisdiction, an Eligible Entity approved for such
a program is both permitted and encouraged to implement it as soon as is feasible once its
Initial Proposal has been approved.
An Eligible Entity should consider the list of eligible non-deployment activities in Figure 6.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
With respect to non-deployment eligible activities, explain any preferences the Eligible Entity
will employ in selecting the type of initiatives it intends to support using BEAD Program
funds, the means by which subgrantees for these eligible activities will be selected, how the
Eligible Entity expects the initiatives it pursues to address the needs of the Eligible Entity’s
residents, the ways in which engagement with localities and stakeholders will inform the
selection of eligible activities, and any efforts the Eligible Entity will undertake to determine
whether other uses of the funds might be more effective in achieving the BEAD Program’s
equity, access, and deployment goals.
IMPORTANT
An Eligible Entity may use non-deployment
funds to support the implementation of
Digital Equity Plans.
Page | 58
Figure 6: Examples of Eligible Non-Deployment Uses
2.5.1 Text Box: Describe a fair, open, and competitive subgrantee selection process for eligible
non-deployment activities. Responses must include the objective means, or process by which
objective means will be developed, for selecting subgrantees for eligible non-deployment
activities. If the Eligible Entity does not intend to subgrant for non-deployment activities,
indicate such.
If the Eligible Entity does not anticipate engaging in non-deployment activities or anticipates
engaging in non-deployment activities directly as opposed to subgranting, the Eligible Entity
may indicate as such in response to this question. If the Eligible Entity is not yet able to
determine if they will have sufficient funds to engage in non-deployment activities after
completing their deployment activities to achieve universal coverage, they should indicate such
and must respond to the prompts to indicate their plan for non-deployment subgrantee
selection, should they have the ability to do so.
When selecting subgrantees for non-deployment uses of BEAD Program funds, an Eligible
Entity must adhere to the Infrastructure
Act’s requirement that subgrants be
awarded competitively. Apart from this,
NTIA does not prescribe any specific
framework for selecting subgrantees
given that the breadth of potential non-
deployment eligible activities could
necessitate a broad range of subgrantee
selection processes, even within a single
Eligible Entity, and that such processes might require the Eligible Entity to compare and choose
among very different proposals. As with deployment projects, NTIA encourages the Eligible
Entity to promote participation of minority-owned businesses and other socially or economically
disadvantaged individual-owned businesses.
IMPORTANT
An Eligible Entity may carry out non-
deployment initiatives as a recipient without
making a subgrant. Refer to Eligible Entity
Implementation Activities (Requirement 10)
for more information.
Page | 59
If the Eligible Entity intends to subgrant for non-deployment activities, the Eligible Entity must
provide a detailed description of the selection process that is fundamentally fair, open, and
competitive.
The Eligible Entity must describe the safeguards to ensure the subgrantee selection process is
fair, including safeguards against each of the following:
• Collusion
• Bias
• Conflicts of interest
• Arbitrary decisions
The Eligible Entity must ensure the proposed subgrantee selection process is open by
describing how the Eligible Entity will provide adequate public notice, at the discretion of the
Eligible Entity, to potential subgrantees to enable participation by a wide variety of potential
applicants, to ensure an open and competitive process and to prevent favoritism, collusion, and
abuse.
The Eligible Entity must also describe how it ensured the subgrantee selection process is
competitive, such as by using a competitively neutral evaluation criteria that does not favor
one type of provider over another, except certain preferences expressed neutrally and in advance
(e.g., giving more weight to Tribally or municipally-owned ISPs, or small businesses). Such
preferences may only be included as secondary criteria.
2.5.2Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s plan for
the following:
a. How the Eligible Entity will employ preferences
in selecting the type of non-deployment
initiatives it intends to support using BEAD
Program funds;
b. How the non-deployment initiatives will
address the needs of residents within the
jurisdiction;
c. The ways in which engagement with localities
and stakeholders will inform the selection of eligible non-deployment activities;
d. How the Eligible Entity will determine whether other uses of the funds might be more
effective in achieving the BEAD Program’s equity, access, and deployment goals.
If the Eligible Entity does not anticipate engaging in any non-deployment activities, it may
indicate as such in response to this question. If the Eligible Entity is not yet able to determine
whether it will have sufficient funds to engage in non-deployment activities after completing
deployment activities to achieve universal coverage, it should indicate as such in response to this
question and should still describe its plan for non-deployment activities, should it have the
ability to implement them.
2.5.1.a: The Eligible Entity must describe the preferences employed in selecting the type of
initiatives it intends to support.
Looking Ahead
An Eligible Entity will be
required to provide a detailed
description of all planned uses of
BEAD funding that are not last-
mile broadband deployment
projects in its Final Proposal.
Page | 60
2.5.2.b: The Eligible Entity is required to justify how the non-deployment initiatives will
address the needs of residents within its jurisdiction. An Eligible Entity proposing multiple non-
deployment initiatives may describe how needs vary by resident demographics. For example,
residents in a more rural area may require different programs than residents living in another
part of the Eligible Entity.
2.5.2.c: The Eligible Entity is required to describe how local coordination and engagement has
or will inform the selection of eligible non-deployment activities. The Eligible Entity must select
eligible non-deployment activities that will address local broadband needs. The Eligible Entity
may consider the data collected as part of the Local Coordination Tracker (
Requirement 4: Local
Coordination) to inform the selection of eligible activities.
2.5.2.d: If the Eligible Entity chooses to fund non-deployment activities other than those
outlined in the BEAD NOFO, it must describe how those uses are more effective in achieving the
BEAD Program’s equity, access, and deployment goals. This response should reference the
unique needs of the residents within the Eligible Entity’s jurisdiction to justify why the non-
deployment activities other than those outlined in the BEAD NOFO should receive BEAD
Program funding.
2.5.3 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s plan to ensure coverage to all unserved and
underserved locations prior to allocating funding to non-deployment activities.
The Eligible Entity must describe how it will award funding in a manner that ensures the
deployment of service to all unserved and underserved locations prior to allocating funds to
non-deployment activities. An Eligible Entity must submit Initial Proposals and Final Proposals
that will result in coverage for all unserved locations, and (to the extent funds are available) all
underserved locations.
If the Eligible Entity does not anticipate engaging in non-deployment activities, they may
indicate such in response to this question. The Eligible Entity may also indicate that they are not
yet able to determine if they will have sufficient funds to engage in non-deployment activities
after completing their deployment activities to achieve universal coverage.
The requirement that an Eligible Entity has a plan to ensure deployment to all unserved and
underserved locations before contemplating non-deployment uses of funds does not impose any
temporal requirement as to the order in which BEAD-funded initiatives are undertaken or
completed.
2.5.4 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure prospective subgrantees meet the
general qualifications outlined on pages 71 – 72 of the NOFO.
If the Eligible Entity does not anticipate subgranting for non-deployment activities, the Eligible
Entity may indicate as such in response to this question. If the Eligible Entity is not yet able to
determine if they will have sufficient funds to engage in non-deployment activities after
completing their deployment activities to achieve universal coverage, it should indicate such and
must respond to the prompts to indicate their plan for non-deployment subgrantee selection,
should it have the ability to do so.
Page | 61
The Eligible Entity must ensure that prospective subgrantees meet the three general
qualifications below:
• Can carry out activities funded by the subgrant in a competent manner in compliance
with all applicable federal, Eligible Entity, and local laws;
• Have the financial and managerial capacity to meet the commitments of the subgrantee
under the subgrant, the requirements of the Program and such other requirements as
have been prescribed by the Assistant Secretary or the Eligible Entity; and
• Have the technical and operational capability to provide the services promised in the
subgrant in the manner contemplated by the subgrant award.
The Eligible Entity must describe the following for each of the three qualifications
separately:
• The minimum standards applied to determine compliance;
• Methods used to determine a prospective subgrantee meets the necessary standards;
and
• Evidence the Eligible Entity will accept in making its determination.
Page | 62
Eligible Entity Implementation Activities (Requirement 10)
2.6.1 Text Box: Describe any initiatives the Eligible Entity proposes to implement as the
recipient without making a subgrant, and why it proposes that approach.
In this section, the Eligible Entity must describe any initiatives it proposes to implement as the
recipient. Examples of initiatives the Eligible Entity may propose include administrative
activities to manage the grant, implementation of the Challenge Process, implementation of the
subgrantee selection process, workforce development related to the deployment of broadband,
digital equity, or broadband adoption activities (as long as the Eligible Entity has sufficient
funding for unserved and underserved areas), and mapping or data collection. An Eligible Entity
may not propose broadband deployment projects without conducting a competitive sub-
granting process.
The Eligible Entity may also decide to carry out non-deployment activities itself as a recipient.
Examples of non-deployment activities can be found in
Requirement 9: Non-Deployment
Subgrantee Selection.
The Eligible Entity is required to outline why it proposes to implement the initiative without
making a subgrant. For example, an Eligible Entity may justify implementing pre-existing
activities as a recipient if the Eligible Entity is already running them, such as mapping or data
collection.
If the Eligible Entity does anticipate implementing any initiatives without making a subgrant, it
may indicate such in response to this question.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Describe any initiatives the Eligible Entity proposes to implement as the recipient without
making a subgrant, and why it proposes that approach.
Page | 63
Labor Standards and Protection (Requirement 11)
The purpose of this section is to ensure jobs created by BEAD investments create good jobs and
safe work environments. The Eligible Entity must explain how they will account for and oversee
subgrantee adherence to federal labor and employment laws that mandate minimum safety,
wage, anti-discrimination, and other workplace standards for all businesses in the United States.
The Eligible Entity must outline its approach to comply with and oversee subgrantee adherence
to the laws listed in the BEAD NOFO and the Workforce Planning Guide
. States, territories, and
Tribal entities may have additional applicable labor and employment requirements which
Eligible Entities and subgrantees alike must follow.
2.7.1 Text Box: Describe the specific information that prospective subgrantees will be required
to provide in their applications and how the Eligible Entity will weigh that information in its
competitive subgrantee selection processes. Information from prospective subgrantees must
demonstrate the following and must include information about contractors and subcontractors:
a. Prospective subgrantees’ record of past compliance with federal labor and employment
laws, which:
i. Must address information on these entities’ compliance with federal labor and
employment laws on broadband deployment projects in the last three years;
ii. Should include a certification from an Officer/Director-level employee (or
equivalent) of the prospective subgrantee evidencing consistent past compliance
with federal labor and employment laws by the subgrantee, as well as all
contractors and subcontractors; and
iii. Should include written confirmation that the prospective subgrantee discloses
any instances in which it or its contractors or subcontractors have been found to
have violated laws such as the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, or any other applicable labor and employment laws for the
preceding three years.
b. Prospective subgrantees’ plans for ensuring compliance with federal labor and
employment laws, which must address the following:
i. How the prospective subgrantee will ensure compliance in its own labor and
employment practices, as well as that of its contractors and subcontractors,
including:
1. Information on applicable wage scales and wage and overtime payment
practices for each class of employees expected to be involved directly in
the physical construction of the broadband network; and
2. How the subgrantee will ensure the implementation of workplace safety
committees that are authorized to raise health and safety concerns in
connection with the delivery of deployment projects.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Detail how the Eligible Entity will ensure that subgrantees, contractors, and subcontractors
use strong labor standards and protections, such as those listed in Section IV.C.1.e, and how
the Eligible Entity will implement and apply the labor related Subgrantee Selection criteria
described below in Section IV.C.1.e of this NOFO.
Page | 64
2.7.1.a: The Eligible Entity must describe what specific information it will require subgrantees
to provide in their applications, specifically as it relates to the prospective subgrantees’ record of
past compliance with federal labor and employment laws, as well as the records of any other
entities that will participate in the project, including contractors and subcontractors. This
information must include, at a minimum, information on these entities’ compliance with federal
labor and employment laws on broadband deployment projects in the last three years. New
entrants without a record of labor and employment law compliance must be permitted to
mitigate this fact by making specific, forward-looking commitments to strong labor and
employment standards and protections with respect to BEAD-funded projects (BEAD NOFO pg.
43).
2.7.1.b: Additionally, the Eligible Entity must describe what specific information it will require
subgrantees to provide in their applications to demonstrate their plans for ensuring compliance
with federal labor and employment laws. These plans must address, at a minimum, how the
prospective subgrantee will ensure compliance in its own labor and employment practices, as
well as that of its contractors and subcontractors, including:
• Information on applicable wage scales and wage and overtime payment practices for
each class of employees expected to be involved directly in the physical construction of
the broadband network, and
• How the subgrantee will ensure the implementation of workplace safety committees that
are authorized to raise health and safety concerns in connection with the delivery of
deployment projects.
The Eligible Entity must describe
how the subgrantees’ record of
compliance with federal labor and
employment laws will be weighed in
the competitive subgrantee
selection process. When evaluating
subgrantee applications, NTIA
requires that Eligible Entities give
priority to fair labor practices, based on records of and plans to be in compliance with federal
labor and employment laws.
IMPORTANT
The subgrantee selection scoring rubric submitted
in Requirement 8 must include how the
subgrantees’ record of compliance with Federal
Labor and employment laws will be weighed.
Page | 65
2.7.2 Text Box: Describe in detail whether the Eligible Entity will make mandatory for all
subgrantees (including contractors and subcontractors) any of the following and, if required,
how it will incorporate them into binding legal commitments in the subgrants it makes:
a. Using a directly employed workforce, as opposed to a subcontracted workforce;
b. Paying prevailing wages and benefits to workers, including compliance with Davis-Bacon
and Service Contract Act requirements, where applicable, and collecting the required
certified payrolls;
c. Using project labor agreements (i.e., pre-hire collective bargaining agreements between
unions and contractors that govern terms and conditions of employment for all workers
on a construction project);
d. Use of local hire provisions;
e. Commitments to union neutrality;
f. Use of labor peace agreements;
g. Use of an appropriately skilled workforce (e.g., through Registered Apprenticeships or
other joint labor-management training programs that serve all workers, particularly
those underrepresented or historically excluded);
h. Use of an appropriately credentialed workforce (i.e., satisfying requirements for
appropriate and relevant pre-existing occupational training, certification, and licensure);
and
i. Taking steps to prevent the misclassification of workers.
The Eligible Entity must describe in detail whether it will make any of the labor standards and
protections listed on page 57 of the BEAD NOFO mandatory for all subgrantees (including
contractors and subcontractors), and if required, how it will incorporate them into binding legal
commitments in the subgrants it makes. The Eligible Entity may respond by indicating that they
do not intend to make any labor standards and protections mandatory for subgrantees.
While the above actions are not required, an Eligible Entity that is taking this approach can
reduce the showing that prospective subgrantees need to make in their applications regarding
their plans to incorporate labor standards and protections. This response should comport with
the Eligible Entity’s responses for Requirements 8 and 9 regarding the consideration of
prospective subgrantee’s commitments to labor standards and protections during the
subgrantee selection process.
Page | 66
Workforce Readiness (Requirement 12)
The purpose of this section is to outline how the Eligible Entity will ensure an available, diverse,
and highly skilled workforce. A highly skilled workforce is essential in ensuring job applicants
have the skills and training they need to be competitive in the telecommunications labor market,
while creating a strong talent pool for prospective subgrantees. The Eligible Entity is encouraged
to refer to the Workforce Planning Guide
for support in defining skilled workforce requirements
and guidance for their subgrantees that will shape the experiences of workers on job sites
building and servicing broadband infrastructure.
These requirements may vary by state or territory, and each Eligible Entity can set requirements
for subgrantee participation and evaluation for BEAD funding that will be approved by NTIA
throughout the BEAD submission process. Setting strong requirements for skilled workforce in
areas such as pay and credentialing will ensure that Internet For All projects balance worker
competence, training, and certifications with a competitive and attractive environment for
workers in local and regional markets.
2.8.1 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity and their subgrantees will advance equitable
workforce development and job quality objectives to develop a skilled, diverse workforce. At a
minimum, this response should clearly provide each of the following, as outlined on page 59 of
the BEAD NOFO:
a. A description of how the Eligible Entity will ensure that subgrantees support the
development and use of a highly skilled workforce capable of carrying out work in a
manner that is safe and effective;
b. A description of how the Eligible Entity will develop and promote sector-based
partnerships among employers, education and training providers, the public workforce
system, unions and worker organizations, and community-based organizations that
provide relevant training and wrap-around services to support workers to access and
complete training (e.g., child care, transportation, mentorship), to attract, train, retain,
or transition to meet local workforce needs and increase high-quality job opportunities;
c. A description of how the Eligible Entity will plan to create equitable on-ramps into
broadband-related jobs, maintain job quality for new and incumbent workers engaged in
the sector; and continually engage with labor organizations and community-based
organizations to maintain worker voice throughout the planning and implementation
process; and
d. A description of how the Eligible Entity will ensure that the job opportunities created by
the BEAD Program and other broadband funding programs are available to a diverse
pool of workers.
The Initial Proposal is required to describe how the Eligible Entity and its subgrantees will make
appropriate investments to develop a skilled, diverse workforce. At a minimum, this includes
providing each of the following:
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Detail how the Eligible Entity will ensure an available, diverse, and highly skilled workforce
consistent with Section IV.C.1.e of this NOFO.
Page | 67
Example responses may include:
• A description of how the Eligible Entity plans to support subgrantee programs that
promote diversity in hiring practices, including the promotion of Registered
Apprenticeship, pre-apprenticeship, training, and/or mentoring programs targeting
underrepresented groups in the industry (e.g., women, people of color).
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will form partnerships with minority-serving
institutions to create a pipeline of workforce candidates.
• A description of how Eligible Entities will give preference to subgrantees that prioritize
hiring local workers and are committed to recruiting underrepresented populations.
The Eligible Entity may refer to Section IV.C.1.e of the BEAD NOFO
for more examples of how
the Eligible Entity and its subgrantees can invest in a skilled and diverse workforce.
The Eligible Entity is also encouraged to implement requirements for subgrantees, such as those
that prioritize the hiring of local workers and/or require robust plans to recruit historically
underrepresented populations facing labor market barriers to ensure that they have reasonable
access to the job opportunities created by subgrantees.
2.8.2 Text Box: Describe the information that will be required of prospective subgrantees to
demonstrate a plan for ensuring that the project workforce will be an appropriately skilled and
credentialed workforce. These plans should include the following:
a. The ways in which the prospective subgrantee will ensure the use of an appropriately
skilled workforce, e.g., through Registered Apprenticeships or other joint labor-
management training programs that serve all workers;
b. The steps that will be taken to ensure that all members of the project workforce will have
appropriate credentials, e.g., appropriate and relevant pre-existing occupational
training, certification, and licensure;
c. Whether the workforce is unionized;
Page | 68
d. Whether the workforce will be directly employed or whether work will be performed by a
subcontracted workforce; and
e. The entities that the proposed subgrantee plans to contract and subcontract with in
carrying out the proposed work.
If the project workforce or any subgrantee’s, contractor’s, or subcontractor’s workforce is not
unionized, the subgrantee must also provide with respect to the non-union workforce:
a. The job titles and size of the workforce (FTE positions, including for contractors and
subcontractors) required to carry out the proposed work over the course of the project
and the entity that will employ each portion of the workforce;
b. For each job title required to carry out the proposed work (including contractors and
subcontractors), a description of:
i. Safety training, certification, and/or licensure requirements (e.g., OSHA 10,
OSHA 30, confined space, traffic control, or other training as relevant depending
on title and work), including whether there is a robust in-house training program
with established requirements tied to certifications, titles; and
ii. Information on the professional certifications and/or in-house training in place
to ensure that deployment is done at a high standard.
To ensure that subgrantees have the technical and operational capacity to carry out the
subgrant, the Eligible Entity must require prospective subgrantees to have a plan for ensuring
that the project workforce will be appropriately skilled and credentialed (including by the
subgrantee and each of its contractors and subcontractors). Section IV.C.1.e. of the BEAD NOFO
highlighted below provides specific information required from prospective subgrantees as it
relates to a plan for a highly skilled and credentialed workforce. The Eligible Entity must ensure
that each of the following NOFO requirements are included in its subgrantees’
plans.
Page | 69
Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs/ Women’s Business
Enterprises (WBEs)/ Labor Surplus Area Firms Inclusion
(Requirement 13)
The purpose of this section is to outline how the Eligible Entity will promote recruiting, utilizing,
and retaining minority business enterprises (MBEs), women’s business enterprises (WBEs), and
labor surplus area firms, when possible. This is a critical step to promote MBE, WBE, and labor
surplus area firm inclusion and to help curb contracting disparities that historically exist. The
Eligible Entity is encouraged to refer to the Workforce Planning Guide
for additional support in
fulfilling this requirement.
2.9.1 Text Box: Describe the process, strategy, and the data tracking method(s) the Eligible
Entity will implement to ensure that minority businesses, women-owned business enterprises
(WBEs), and labor surplus area firms are recruited, used, and retained when possible.
The Eligible Entity is required to describe a strategy and detailed plan to take each of the steps
detailed in Figure 7 to ensure that MBEs, WBEs, and labor surplus area firms are recruited,
used, and retained when possible.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Describe the process, strategy, and data tracking method(s) that the Eligible Entity will
implement to ensure that minority businesses, women-owned business enterprises, and labor
surplus area firms are recruited, used, and retained when possible.
NOFO Section VII.D.7:
Minority Businesses Enterprises (MBEs) and Women’s Business Enterprises (WBEs) are
major catalysts for economic growth and job creation. However, data shows that MBEs and
WBEs historically face significant contracting disparities compared to other businesses.
Pursuant to 2 C.F.R. § 200.321, Eligible Entities must take all necessary affirmative steps to
assure that minority businesses, women's business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms
are used when possible. Affirmative steps must include:
• Placing qualified small and minority businesses and women's business enterprises on
solicitation lists;
• Assuring that small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises are
solicited whenever they are potential sources;
• Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or
quantities to permit maximum participation by small and minority businesses, and
women's business enterprises;
• Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage
participation by small and minority businesses, and women's business enterprises;
• Using the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations as the Small
Business Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency of the
Department of Commerce; and
• Requiring subgrantees to take the affirmative steps listed above as it relates to its
subcontractors.
Eligible Entities are strongly encouraged to establish MBE and WBE utilization plans
consistent with their Initial and Final Proposals.
Page | 70
Figure 7: Affirmative Steps Towards Inclusion of MBEs, WBEs, and Labor
Surplus Area Firms
As part of the requirement to use the services and assistance, as appropriate, of organizations
such as the Small Business Administration (SBA) and the Minority Business Development
Agency (MBDA), the Eligible Entity may describe its plans to consult with SBA’s
Small Business
Development Centers and MBDA’s State-Based Business Centers for more information on
multiple SMA contracting assistance programs, including:
• Small Disadvantaged Business
• Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract program
The Eligible Entity may reference current policies or procedures to ensure minority-owned
business, women-owned enterprises and labor surplus area firms are included in sub-granting
practices. The Eligible Entity may also include strategies it may reference in its response to the
workforce readiness requirement, such as a description of how the Eligible Entity will form
partnerships with minority-serving institutions to create a pipeline of workforce candidates.
The Eligible Entity must include a description of its current tracking methods. The data tracking
method(s) described should reasonably demonstrate a methodology that can be validated. The
Eligible Entity’s response may reference existing processes or tracking methods used in its
jurisdictions for contracting purposes. For example, the Eligible Entity may describe how it will
leverage a small business agency or local database to obtain a list of MBEs, WBEs, or Labor
Surplus Area firms that it can reference when soliciting proposals.
Page | 71
2.9.2 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will take all necessary affirmative steps to
ensure minority businesses, women’s business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms are used
when possible, including the following outlined on pages 88 – 89 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. Placing qualified small and minority businesses and women’s business enterprises on
solicitation lists;
b. Assuring that small and minority businesses, and women’s business enterprises are
solicited whenever they are potential sources;
c. Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities
to permit maximum participation by small and minority businesses, and women’s
business enterprises;
d. Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage
participation by small and minority businesses, and women’s business enterprises;
e. Using the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations as the Small
Business Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency of the
Department of Commerce; and
f. Requiring subgrantees to take the affirmative steps listed above as it relates to
subcontractors.
The Eligible Entity must certify, by checking a box, that it plans to take necessary affirmative
steps to ensure MBEs, WBEs, and labor surplus area firms are recruited, used, and retained,
when possible.
Page | 72
Cost and Barrier Reduction (Requirement 14)
The purpose of this section is to identify steps that the Eligible Entity will take to reduce costs
and barriers to deployment through promoting the use of existing infrastructure and promoting
and adopting dig-once policies, streamlined permitting processes, and cost-effective access to
poles, conduits, easements, and rights of way, including the imposition of reasonable access
requirements. Identifying steps to reduce costs and barriers is critical to ensuring that the
Eligible Entity is utilizing BEAD Program funds efficiently, while also reducing unnecessary
delays.
2.10.1 Text Box: Identify steps that the Eligible Entity will take to reduce costs and barriers to
deployment. Responses may include but not be limited to the following:
a. Promoting the use of existing infrastructure;
b. Promoting and adopting dig-once policies;
c. Streamlining permitting processes;
d. Streamlining cost-effective access to poles, conduits, easements; and
e. Streamlining rights of way, including the imposition of reasonable access requirements.
The Eligible Entity must identify steps to reduce costs and barriers to deployment, including
through the following: promoting the use of existing infrastructure and/or promoting and
adopting dig-once policies, streamlined permitting processes, and cost-effective access to poles,
conduits, easements, and rights of way, including the imposition of reasonable access
requirements. The Eligible Entity is not required to address each of these; rather, the
Eligible Entity may indicate which barriers it intends to address. The Eligible Entity should
identify steps that are specific to its jurisdiction including its unique geography, demographics,
political landscape, and regulatory environment, among other factors.
Example responses may include, but are not limited to the following:
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will establish an interagency working group to
coordinate with different governmental bodies on permitting issues;
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will track permit applications and identify delays
or other issues for escalation;
• A description of how the Eligible Entity plans to enhance consistency in permit
application processes and requirements across State and local permitting authorities;
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Identify steps that the Eligible Entity will take to reduce costs and barriers to deployment,
promote the use of existing infrastructure, promote and adopt dig-once policies, streamlined
permitting processes and cost-effective access to poles, conduits, easements, and rights of
way, including the imposition of reasonable access requirements.
42
42
Consistent with the goal that Eligible Entities seek to minimize the BEAD funding outlay on
a particular project, Eligible Entities and their political subdivisions are strongly encouraged
to remove time and cost barriers associated with BEAD projects, including by expediting
permitting timelines and waiving fees where applicable, where doing so does not undermine
other critical policy goals.
Page | 73
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will identify common standards of
documentation for common elements of permitting applications;
• A description of how the Eligible Entity will identify any early coordination efforts that
have taken place to understand requirements across permitting jurisdictions, how they
intersect, and opportunities for change;
• A description of how permitting agencies will coordinate across state or territory, local,
Tribal, and federal jurisdictions;
• A description of steps that the Eligible Entity will take to ensure subrecipients and other
rights-of-way applicants are in current compliance on rights-of-way already granted at
the local, state or territory, and federal levels; or
• A description of how rights-of-way grant holders will be provided an opportunity to
come into compliance regarding issues of trespass, non-payment of rents, revised
purpose, etc., on private, state or territory, local, federal, and tribal lands.
It is also acceptable for the Eligible Entity to identify other ways to reduce costs and barriers to
deployment that are not listed above. The Eligible Entity can refer to the permitting resources
on the NTIA BEAD website, including the Permitting Best Practices: Case Studies
and
Permitting Needs Assessment documents, for additional information to incorporate in its
response.
The Permitting Best Practices: Case Studies outlines case studies and examples of streamlining
permitting, including Broadband Ready Communities, E-Permitting, and Rights-of-Way.
The Permitting Needs Assessment contains a checklist of four major permitting categories,
including Rights-of-Way, Pole Attachments, Conduit Access, and Environment
Planning/Historic Preservation.
Page | 74
Climate Assessment (Requirement 15)
The purpose of this section is for an Eligible Entity to sufficiently account for and provide an
assessment of current and future weather and climate-related risks to new broadband
infrastructure. These risks include, but are not limited to, wildfires, extreme heat and cold,
inland and coastal flooding, and the extreme winds produced by tornadoes and hurricanes.
Communities that lack broadband are also most vulnerable to extreme weather and climate
events. Thus, it is important for the Eligible Entity to assess these risks to build climate-resilient
broadband infrastructure.
The Eligible Entity must complete the following sections to complete a climate assessment and
fulfill this requirement. It is permissible for the Eligible Entity to provide a climate assessment
that it has conducted previously in the last five years if the assessment covers the requirements
outlined in the BEAD NOFO.
2.11.1 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s assessment of climate threats and proposed
mitigation methods. If an Eligible Entity chooses to reference reports conducted within the past
five years to meet this requirement, it may attach this report and must provide a crosswalk
narrative, with reference to page numbers, to demonstrate that the report meets the five
requirements below. If the report does not specifically address broadband infrastructure,
provide additional narrative to address how the report relates to broadband infrastructure. At a
minimum, this response must clearly do each of the following, as outlined on pages 62 – 63 of
the BEAD NOFO:
a. Identify the geographic areas that should be subject to an initial hazard screening for
current and projected future weather and climate-related risks and the time scales for
performing such screenings;
b. Characterize which projected weather and climate hazards may be most important to
account for and respond to in these areas and over the relevant time horizons;
c. Characterize any weather and climate risks to new infrastructure deployed using BEAD
Program funds for the 20 years following deployment;
d. Identify how the proposed plan will avoid and/or mitigate weather and climate risks
identified; and
e. Describe plans for periodically repeating this process over the life of the Program to
ensure that evolving risks are understood, characterized, and addressed, and that the
most up-to-date tools and information resources are utilized.
2.11.1.1 Optional Attachment: As an optional attachment, submit any relevant reports
conducted within the past five years that may be relevant for this requirement and will be
referenced in the text narrative above.
2.11.1.a: First, the Eligible Entity must provide a narrative on general geographic areas that are
subject to an initial hazard screening, specifically areas that are susceptible to significant
weather and climate related risks. The Eligible Entity does not need to provide specific location
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30 - 32:
Provide an assessment of climate threats within the Eligible Entity and proposed mitigation
methods consistent with the requirements of Section IV.C.1.h of this NOFO.
Page | 75
IDs for this section but should broadly reference recognizable geographic areas within the
jurisdiction of its Eligible Entity.
2.11.1.b: Second, the Eligible Entity must characterize which weather and climate hazards may
be most important to account for and respond to in these areas and over the relevant time
horizons. The Eligible Entity is strongly encouraged to leverage the resources and tools provided
in Table 1 or other resources available to the Eligible Entity to understand and account for
weather and climate-related risks. For example, the Eligible Entity may describe how it referred
to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) 2022 State Climate
Summaries to research information on current and projected climate conditions and risks in
their jurisdiction.
Table 3: Climate Resources and Tools
Title
Purpose
Link
2018 National
Climate
Assessment
Provides Eligible Entities a
broad, coarse-level screening of
current and projected future
weather- and climate-related
risks
•
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/
NOAA’s 2022
State Climate
Summaries
Provides Eligible Entity-specific
information on current and
projected climate conditions
and risks
•
https://statesummaries.ncics.org/
NOAA’ Disaster
and Risk
Mapping Tool
Provides an assessment of
current weather-related risks
for specific regions
• https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billion
s/mapping
NOAA’s Climate
Explorer and
Digital Coast
Tools
Provides Eligible Entities an
ability to research historic and
future projected environmental
variables (e.g., changes in
temperature thresholds, sea
level rise) for their region
• https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast
/tools/climate-explorer.html
• https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast
/tools/
FEMA’s National
Risk Index
Provides a composite risk index
for all regions across the United
States, incorporating a range of
natural hazards (most of which,
but not all, are weather- and
climate-related)
•
https://hazards.fema.gov/nri/learn
-more
FEMA’s Flood
Map
Provides flood hazard
information and current
conditions for specific locations
•
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
Federal Flood
Risk
Management
Standard
Provides Federal Flood Risk
Management Standard and
Implementing Guidelines
established through Executive
Orders
•
https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-
management/intergovernmental/fe
deral-flood-risk-management-
standard
Climate Mapping
for Resilience and
Adoption
Provides real-time statistics
and maps documenting where
•
https://resilience.climate.gov/
Page | 76
Title
Purpose
Link
climate-related hazards are
impacting infrastructure
USGS
Earthquake
Hazards by
Region
Provides state-specific
information on earthquake
seismicity and hazard
•
https://www.usgs.gov/programs/e
arthquake-hazards/information-
region
Relevant centers
of expertise at
State and
regional levels
Provides climate and weather-
related information and
programs at the state and
regional levels
•
https://www.weather.gov/srh/nws
offices
• https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/region
al/regional-climate-centers
• https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/region
al/regional-climate-services-
directors
• https://cpo.noaa.gov/Meet-the-
Divisions/Climate-and-Societal-
Interactions/RISA/RISA-Teams
• https://stateclimate.org/state_pro
grams/
2.11.1.c: The Eligible Entity must describe any projected weather and climate risks to new
infrastructure deployed using BEAD Program funds. The Eligible Entity may use the resources
and tools provided in Table 1 to characterize these risks. The Eligible Entity should particularly
emphasize those weather and climate risks that are the most likely in these areas. For example,
the Eligible Entity may describe how rising sea levels and coastal flooding may impact
broadband infrastructure.
2.11.1.d: The Eligible Entity must identify how the proposed climate readiness plan will address
the weather and climate risks identified through measures including, but not limited to:
• Choice of a technology platform suitable to the
climate risks of the region, reliance on
alternative siting of facilities (e.g., underground
construction where appropriate);
• Retrofitting or hardening of existing assets that
are critical to BEAD-funded projects;
• Additional onsite and in-home power resources;
• Use of established plans and processes to deal
with extreme weather-related risks;
• The speed of restoration of service in the case of an outage; and
• Use of network and facility redundancies to safeguard against threats to infrastructure.
2.11.1.e: Last, the Eligible Entity should describe a plan for identifying and addressing weather
and climate-related risks over the life of the Program to ensure that evolving risks are
IMPORTANT
In the subgrantee selection
process, an Eligible Entity may give
preferential weight to subgrantees
that plan to address or mitigate
weather and climate risks.
Page | 77
understood, characterized, and addressed, and that the most up-to-date tools and information
resources are used. This includes a plan for periodically repeating (e.g., every 20 years or as
needed to respond to observed changes in climate conditions) the climate assessment process.
Eligible Entities must outline their approach for determining a cadence that is appropriate for
their jurisdiction and climate risks therein.
Page | 78
Low-Cost Broadband Service Option (Requirement 16)
Relevant Instructions from NOFO Section IV.B.5:
Describe the low-cost plan(s) that must be offered by subgrantees consistent with the
requirements of Section IV.C.2.c.i of this NOFO.
Relevant Instructions from NOFO Section IV.C.2.ii.c.i:
Eligible Entities must propose low-cost broadband service option parameters that best serve
the needs of residents within their jurisdictions. Low-cost broadband service options must
remain available for the useful life of the network assets. In crafting proposals, NTIA
emphasizes that access to affordable broadband is among the Infrastructure Act’s objectives.
In determining whether to approve an Eligible Entity’s proposed definition of “low-cost
broadband service option,” the Assistant Secretary will consider, among other factors, (1)
whether prospective subgrantees will be required to participate in the Affordable Connectivity
Program, any successor program, and/or any other household broadband subsidy programs;
(2) the expected cost (both monthly and non-recurring charges) to an Eligible Subscriber for a
typical broadband internet access service plan after the application of any subsidies; and (3)
the performance characteristics of the proposed options, including download and upload
speeds, latency, data caps, and reliability commitments.
A definition of low-cost broadband service option should address, at a minimum: (1) all
recurring charges to the subscriber, as well as any non-recurring costs or fees to the
subscriber (e.g., service initiation costs); (2) the plan’s basic service characteristics (download
and upload speeds, latency, any limits on usage or availability, and any material network
management practices, (3) whether a subscriber may use any Affordable Connectivity Benefit
subsidy toward the plan’s rate; and (4) any provisions regarding the subscriber’s ability to
upgrade to any new low-cost service plans offering more advantageous technical
specifications […] NTIA recognizes, however, that different Eligible Entities face different
circumstances. NTIA will review and consider any definition proposed by an Eligible Entity in
accordance with the terms of the BEAD statute. In all cases, an Eligible Entity must explain in
its Initial and Final Proposal why the selected definition best effectuates the purposes of the
program. NTIA may provide additional guidance to Eligible Entities on the development of
the low-cost broadband service option definition.
For example, a definition of low-cost broadband service option could be as follows:
1. The proposed service option:
a. Costs $30 per month or less, inclusive of all taxes, fees, and charges if the subscriber
does not reside on Tribal Lands, or $75 per month or less, inclusive of all taxes, fees,
and charges if the subscriber resides on Tribal Lands, with no additional non-recurring
costs or fees to the consumer;
b. Allows the end user to apply the Affordable Connectivity Benefit subsidy to the service
price;
c. Provides the greater of (a) typical download speeds of at least 100 Mbps and typical
upload speeds of at least 20 Mbps, or the fastest speeds the infrastructure is capable of
Page | 79
The purpose of this section is to outline how the Eligible Entity plans to ensure that all residents
within its jurisdiction will have access to affordable broadband service options. The Eligible
Entity must develop a low-cost broadband service option using the guidelines provided by NTIA
in the BEAD NOFO.
Developing an equitable and robust low-cost service option promotes the uptake of BEAD-
funded broadband networks among residents of varying socioeconomic and geographic
backgrounds. Eligible Entities must ensure that services offered over BEAD Funded Networks
allow subscribers in the service area to use the FCC’s Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). A
well-designed low-cost service option will also allow the residents of an Eligible Entity to take
advantage of other federal programs aimed at easing the burden of broadband service
connection.
2.12.1 Text Box: Describe the low-cost broadband service option(s) that must be offered by
subgrantees as selected by the Eligible Entity, including why the outlined option(s) best services
the needs of residents within the Eligible Entity’s jurisdiction. At a minimum, this response
must include a definition of low-cost broadband service option that clearly addresses the
following, as outlined on page 67 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. All recurring charges to the subscriber, as well as any non-recurring costs or fees to the
subscriber (e.g., service initiation costs);
b. The plan’s basic service characteristics (download and upload speeds, latency, any limits
on usage or availability, and any material network management practices);
c. Whether a subscriber may use any Affordable Connectivity Benefit subsidy toward the
plan’s rate; and
d. Any provisions regarding the subscriber’s ability to upgrade to any new low-cost service
plans offering more advantageous technical specifications.
The Eligible Entity is strongly encouraged to adopt the example low-cost broadband service
option definition as outlined in the BEAD NOFO and provided in Figure 8 to fulfill this
requirement.
if less than 100 Mbps/20 Mbps or (b) the performance benchmark for fixed terrestrial
broadband service established by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant
to Section 706(b) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended;
d. Provides typical latency measurements of no more than 100 milliseconds; and
e. Is not subject to data caps, surcharges, or usage-based throttling, and is subject only to
the same acceptable use policies to which subscribers to all other broadband internet
access service plans offered to home subscribers by the participating subgrantee must
adhere;
f. In the event the provider later offers a low-cost plan with higher speeds downstream
and/or upstream, permits Eligible Subscribers that are subscribed to a low-cost
broadband service option to upgrade to the new low-cost offering at no cost
2. Subgrantees are required to participate in the Affordable Connectivity Program or any
successor program, and Eligible Subscribers that are eligible for a broadband service subsidy
can apply the subsidy to the proposed service option.
Page | 80
Figure 8: NOFO Example - Definition of Low-cost Broadband Service Option
In designing the low-cost broadband service option definition, the Eligible Entity must include:
1. Cost: The plan’s expected cost (both monthly and non-recurring charges) to an Eligible
Subscriber for a typical broadband Internet access service plan after the application of
any subsidies;
• If the Eligible Entity does not adopt the example low-cost broadband service
option definition in the BEAD NOFO, the Eligible Entity must also provide the
exact cost of the low-cost broadband service option, or the state/territory-derived
formula based on objective economic data to be used.
2. Basic Service Characteristics: The plan’s basic service characteristics, including
download and upload speeds, latency, any limits on usage or availability such as data
caps, any material network management practices, and reliability.
3. Affordable Connectivity Benefits Application: A description of whether the plan
will allow a subscriber to use any Affordable Connectivity Benefit subsidy toward the
plan’s rate; and
4. Available Technical Upgrades: A description of whether there are any provisions
regarding the subscriber’s ability to upgrade to any new low-cost service plans offering
more advantageous technical specifications.
Page | 81
2.12.2 Checkbox: Certify that all subgrantees will be required to participate in the Affordable
Connectivity Program or any successor program.
The Eligible Entity must certify, by checking a box, that all subgrantees will be required to
participate in the Affordable Connectivity Program
7
or any successor program.
7
The Affordable Connectivity Program was established in the Infrastructure Act as the successor to a
previous program that has since been discontinued. The Commission in 2022 issued the Affordable
Connectivity Program Report and Order, which sets out details regarding the ACP’s operation. See
Affordable Connectivity Program, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC
22-2, (rel. Jan. 21, 2022).
Page | 82
Middle Class Affordability Plans (Requirement 20)
The purpose of this section is to outline how the Eligible Entity will adopt strategies as part of a
middle-class affordability plan. The middle-class affordability plan will support the BEAD
Program’s goal of ensuring every resident has access to a reliable, affordable, high-speed
broadband connection.
2.13.1 Text Box: Describe a middle-class affordability plan that details how high-quality
broadband services will be made available to all middle-class families in the BEAD-funded
network’s service area at reasonable prices. This response must clearly provide a reasonable
explanation of how high-quality broadband services will be made available to all middle-class
families in the BEAD-funded network’s service area at reasonable prices.
The Eligible Entity must articulate a middle-class affordability plan designed to ensure that a
BEAD-funded network’s service area provides high-quality broadband service to all middle-class
households at reasonable prices, though the Eligible Entity has a wide degree of discretion in
detailing an “affordable” standard.
The Eligible Entity’s middle-class affordability plan may include the following:
• Requiring providers receiving BEAD funds to offer low-cost, high-speed plans to all
middle-class households using the BEAD-funded network;
• Providing consumer subsidies using BEAD funding, if the Eligible entity has surplus
funds after meeting its obligation to connect all unserved and underserved areas;
• Using regulatory authority to promote structural competition
such as eliminating barriers
to entry, opening access to multi-dwelling units, or promoting alternative technologies;
• Promoting consumer pricing benchmarks that provide consumers an objective criterion
to use in determining whether the rate offerings of broadband service providers are
reasonable and to encourage providers to adopt affordable pricing; and
Relevant Instructions from NOFO Section IV.C.2.i.c:
Accordingly, each Eligible Entity must include in its Initial and Final Proposals a middle-class
affordability plan to ensure that all consumers have access to affordable high-speed internet.
We expect that Eligible Entities will adopt diverse strategies to achieve this objective. For
example, some Eligible Entities might require providers receiving BEAD funds to offer low-
cost, high-speed plans to all middle-class households using the BEAD-funded network. Others
might provide consumer subsidies to defray subscription costs for households not eligible for
the Affordable Connectivity Benefit or other federal subsidies. Others may use their regulatory
authority to promote structural competition. Some might assign especially high weights to
selection criteria relating to affordability and/or open access in selecting BEAD subgrantees.
Ultimately, however, each Eligible Entity must submit a plan to ensure that high-quality
broadband services are available to all middle-class families in the BEAD-funded network’s
service area at reasonable prices. Eligible Entities will be required to ensure that services
offered over Funded Networks allow subscribers in the service area to utilize the ACP.
Page | 83
• Establishing a regime of continued monitoring and public reporting to ensure that high-
speed Internet connections are affordable for middle-class households in their state or
territory.
Whether these, a combination of these, or other strategies are used, the Eligible Entity is
encouraged to develop a plan for affordability which recognizes the specific circumstances of its
jurisdiction.
Page | 84
Use of 20 Percent of Funding (Requirement 17)
The purpose of this section is to identify
whether the Eligible Entity intends to access
Initial Proposal funding and describe how the
Eligible Entity intends to use the funding
allocation that is made available upon
approval of the Initial Proposal, contingent
on specific guidelines outlined in the BEAD
NOFO.
The Eligible Entity will have the opportunity
to pursue one of three funding scenarios, which are detailed in Table 2 below.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30-32:
Describe the intended use of the 20 percent of total funding allocation that is made available
upon approval of the Initial Proposal consistent with Section IV.B.8 of this NOFO.
Relevant Instructions from NOFO Section IV.B.8:
If the Assistant Secretary determines that the Initial Proposal meets the standards set forth in
Section IV.B.5.c, the Assistant Secretary shall make available to the Eligible Entity 20 percent
of the grant funds that were allocated to the Eligible Entity, or a higher percentage at the sole
discretion of the Assistant Secretary, for uses as described in Section IV.B.3 of this NOFO.
Upon completion of the challenge process described in Section IV.B.6 and the Subgrantee
Selection Process described in Section IV.B.7, an Eligible Entity may use the funds made
available under this Section to fully fund deployment projects that: 1. Consist of at least 80
percent unserved locations; and 2. Are in a location in which the percentage of individuals
with a household income at or below 150 percent of the poverty line applicable to a family of
the size involved (as determined under Section 673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant
Act (42 U.S.C. § 9902(2)) that is higher than the national percentage of such individuals. An
Eligible Entity may use the funds made available under this Section of the NOFO for other
eligible uses described under Section IV.B.7 of this NOFO (i.e., for uses other than
deployment of last-mile broadband infrastructure to unserved and underserved locations or
eligible CAIs) only if the Eligible Entity is able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Assistant Secretary that the Eligible Entity has a plan to meet the unserved and underserved
location broadband deployment commitments set forth in the Eligible Entity’s Final Proposal,
in which case the Assistant Secretary may waive, in whole or in part, limitations on the use of
this funding round.
69
69
Additional information on how to request the use of funds for other purposes and the
associated documentation required to demonstrate such plan will be provided at a later date.
IMPORTANT:
If the Eligible Entity indicates in Volume
II that they do not wish to request
funding during the Initial Proposal
phase, the Eligible Entity cannot change
this determination once Volume II is
submitted and under review.
Page | 85
Table 2: Funding Scenarios
Funding Requested
Use of Funding
No funding
requested
• Eligible Entities may elect to not request funding during the
Initial Proposal round. These Eligible Entities will defer funding
until after the approval of the Final Proposal.
Less than or equal
to 20 percent of
funding allocation
•
Eligible Entities may request less than or equal to 20 percent of
funding allocation during the Initial Proposal round. These
Eligible Entities will defer the request for their remaining
allocation until after the approval of the Final Proposal.
Greater than 20
percent of funding
allocation
•
Eligible Entities may request more than 20 percent of funding
allocation during the Initial Proposal round, which must be
accompanied by a rationale for requesting funds greater than 20
percent of the funding allocation. Approval of such a request is
at the sole discretion of the Assistant Secretary. Eligible Entities
that request less than 100 percent of their funding allocation will
defer the request for their remaining allocation until after the
approval of the Final Proposal.
2.14.1 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s planned use of any funds being requested,
which must address the following:
a. If the Eligible Entity does not wish to request funds during the Initial Proposal
round, it must indicate no funding requested and provide the rationale for not
requesting funds.
b. If the Eligible Entity is requesting less than or equal to 20 percent of funding
allocation during the Initial Proposal round, it must detail the amount of funding
requested for use upon approval of the Initial Proposal, the intended use of funds,
and how the proposed use of funds achieves the statutory objective of serving all
unserved and underserved locations.
c. If the Eligible Entity is requesting more than 20 percent (up to 100 percent) of
funding allocation during the Initial Proposal round, it must detail the amount of
funding requested for use upon approval of the Initial Proposal, the intended use of
funds, how the proposed use of funds achieves the statutory objective of serving all
unserved and underserved locations, and provide rationale for requesting funds
greater than 20 percent of the funding allocation.
The Eligible Entity must follow the guidance for the sub-requirement relevant to their Initial
Proposal Funding Request among 2.14.1.a, 2.14.1.b, or 2.1.14.c. For example, if the Eligible
Entity is not requesting funding during this round, the Eligible Entity should refer to the
guidance under 2.14.a to complete this text box.
2.14.1.a: If the Eligible Entity does not wish to request Initial Proposal funds, the Eligible
Entity must indicate no funding requested and provide the rationale for not requesting funds
and deferring the allocation to after the approval of the Final Proposal.
For example, an Eligible Entity may respond by explaining that they are not requesting Initial
Proposal funds and that they are doing so because they have sufficient funding for their
challenge and subgrantee selection processes without utilizing funding from this round and that
Page | 86
they do not have state/territory law requirements in place that would require the obligation of
all funding prior to conducting a sub-granting process.
2.14.1.b: If the Eligible Entity is requesting less than or equal to 20 percent of funding
allocation during the Initial Proposal round, it must detail the amount of funding requested
upon approval of the Initial Proposal, the intended use of funds, and explain how the proposed
use of funds achieves the statutory objective of serving all unserved and underserved locations.
NTIA will prioritize ensuring funding for all unserved and underserved locations before other
uses of funding when assessing the Eligible Entity’s justification for their ability to serve all
unserved and underserved locations.
The use of funds includes (i) administrative costs, (ii) programmatic costs, such as funding the
challenge or subgrantee selection processes, funding last-mile broadband deployment projects,
and funding non-deployment uses, or (iii) a combination of these uses.
i. Administrative costs may include expenses incurred by the grant recipients or
subrecipients in support of the day-to-day operations, not directly tied to a specific
programmatic purpose or activity. Approved funding for administrative expenses may be
expended prior to the completion of the challenge and subgrantee selection processes.
ii. Programmatic costs are costs that are directly tied to the delivery of a particular project,
service, or activity undertaken by a grantee to achieve an outcome intended by the
funding program. Approved funding for programmatic costs may be expended prior to
the completion of the challenge and subgrantee selection processes.
o Funding for the challenge and subgrantee selection processes may include
personnel costs specifically to conduct these processes (e.g., a digital equity
specialist who will charge a set number of hours to support the subgrantee
selection process from a digital equity lens); contractor(s) to carry out these
processes; technology costs (e.g., website services to carry out these processes);
and costs related to communications or awareness specifically for these
processes). Approved funding for programmatic costs may be expended prior to
the completion of the challenge and subgrantee selection processes.
o Funding for deployment projects may include any of the eligible costs outlined in
Section IV.B.7.a.ii and in line with Section IV.B.8 of the BEAD NOFO. Approved
funding for programmatic costs may be expended prior to the completion of the
challenge and subgrantee selection processes.
o Funding for non-deployment projects may include any of the eligible costs
outlined in Section IV.B.7.a.iii and in line with Section IV.B.8 of the BEAD
NOFO. Approved funding for programmatic costs may be expended after the
completion of the challenge and subgrantee selection processes.
iii. The Eligible Entity may use funds for a combination of administrative and programmatic
costs. For example, an Eligible Entity may indicate that it will use 2 percent of funds for
administrative costs, and 1 percent of funds to implement their challenge and subgrantee
selection processes (e.g., through hiring a contractor), and the remaining 17 percent to
fully fund last-mile deployment projects outlined in Section IV.B.7.a.ii and in line with
Section IV.B.8 of the BEAD NOFO.
Page | 87
2.14.1.c: If the Eligible Entity is requesting more than 20 percent (up to 100 percent) of funding
allocation during the Initial Proposal funding round, it must detail the amount of funding
requested upon approval of the Initial Proposal, the intended use of funds, and how the
proposed use of funds achieves the statutory objective of serving all unserved / underserved
locations. As noted in 2.14.b, the use of funds may include (i) administrative costs, (ii)
programmatic costs, such as funding the challenge or subgrantee selection processes, funding
last-mile broadband deployment projects, and funding non-deployment uses, or (iii) a
combination of these uses.
The Eligible Entity must also provide a rationale for requesting funds greater than 20 percent of
the funding allocation. The NOFO details that the Assistant Secretary shall make available 20
percent of the grant funds that are available to the Eligible Entity upon approval of the Initial
Proposal, or a higher percentage if requested, but at the sole discretion of the Assistant
Secretary. In this instance, the Eligible Entity must detail the amount of funding intended to be
used after the Initial Proposal is approved and before the Final Proposal. Eligible Entities that
request less than 100 percent of their funding allocation will defer the request for their
remaining allocation until after the approval of the Final Proposal.
For example, the Eligible Entity may elect to request the full amount (100 percent) of their
funding allocations in the Initial Proposal round if they demonstrate a specific need, such as a
state or territory requirement (e.g., anti-deficiency clause) that would require the obligation of
all funding prior to conducting the subgrantee selection process.
2.14.2 Financial Data Entry: Enter the amount of the Initial Proposal Funding Request. If
not requesting initial funds, enter ‘$0.00.’
The Eligible Entity should enter the total dollar amount of funding requested in the Initial
Proposal Funding Request. This value should match the amount intended to be included in the
Initial Proposal Funding Request.
2.14.3 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will adhere to BEAD Program requirements
regarding Initial Proposal funds usage. If the Eligible Entity is not requesting funds in the Initial
Proposal round and will not submit the Initial Funding Request, note “Not applicable.”
The Eligible Entity must certify, by checking a box, that it will adhere to BEAD Program
requirements regarding Initial Proposal funds usage, including reporting requirements and
conditions specific to the requested use of funds.
For costs related to the administration of the Eligible Entity’s grant, this certification indicates
that the Eligible Entity will not exceed the two percent statutory cap for costs related to the
administration of the Eligible Entity’s grant, including any subcontracts or subawards made to
assist in the administration of the Eligible Entity’s grant. Please note that the two percent
statutory cap does not apply to funds allocated during the Initial Planning Funds phase of the
BEAD Program. Otherwise, the two percent statutory cap applies to all other BEAD Program
funding. Please refer to the BEAD FAQs
7.9 t0 7.16 for more information on costs related to the
administration of the Eligible Entity’s grant.
Page | 88
For a requested use of funds for non-deployment projects, this certification indicates that the
Eligible Entity will ensure that funding initiated before the approval of the Final Proposal will
not imperil the Eligible Entity’s ability to achieve universal service for all unserved and
underserved locations within its jurisdiction.
For a requested use of funds for deployment projects, this certification indicates that the Eligible
Entity will only use 20 percent of funds (unless requesting above 20 percent of funds) before the
Final Proposal funding allocation to fully fund deployment projects that: (i) consist of at least 80
percent unserved locations; and (ii) are in a location in which the percentage of individuals with
a household income at or below 150 percent of the poverty line applicable to a family of the size
involved (as determined under Section 673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42
U.S.C. § 9902(2)) that is higher than the national percentage of such individuals. This
certification also indicates that funds for this purpose will not be distributed until after the
challenge process and subgrantee selection process are complete. The Assistant Secretary may
waive this restriction on the Initial Proposal funding round if the Eligible Entity is able to
demonstrate that is has a plan to meet the unserved and underserved location broadband
deployment commitments set forth in its Final Proposal.
If the Eligible Entity requests use of funds for non-deployment projects, this certification
indicates that the Eligible Entity will ensure that funding initiated before the approval of the
Final Proposal will not imperil the Eligible Entity’s plan to achieve universal service for all
unserved and underserved locations within its jurisdiction.
Additionally, this certification indicates that the Eligible Entity will comply with all relevant
EHP and BABA requirements if the Eligible Entity intends to fund projects before the approval
of the Final Proposal.
Page | 89
Eligible Entity Regulatory Approach (Requirement 18)
The purpose of this section is to disclose whether the Eligible Entity will waive all laws of the
Eligible Entity concerning broadband, utility services, or similar subjects that either preclude
certain public sector providers from participation in the subgrant process or impose specific
requirements and limitations on public sector entities.
This could include new laws that have the effect of excluding providers from offering broadband
service or rendering them incapable of effectively competing for subgrants. The Eligible Entity
may not exclude cooperatives, nonprofit organizations, public-private partnerships, public or
private utilities, public utility districts, or local governments (“potential providers”) from
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30-32:
Disclose (1) whether the Eligible Entity will waive all laws of the Eligible Entity concerning
broadband, utility services, or similar subjects, whether they predate or postdate enactment of
the Infrastructure Act, that either (a) preclude certain public sector providers from
participation in the subgrant competition or (b) impose specific requirements on public sector
entities, such as limitations on the sources of financing, the required imputation of costs not
actually incurred by the public sector entity, or restrictions on the service a public sector
entity can offer; and (2) if it will not waive all such laws for BEAD Program project selection
purposes, identify those that it will not waive and describe how they will be applied in
connection with the competition for subgrants.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 50-51:
Competition among broadband providers has the potential to offer consumers more
affordable, high-quality options for broadband service. As required by the Infrastructure Act,
in awarding subgrants for the deployment of a broadband network using grant funds, Eligible
Entities may Notice of Funding Opportunity – 51 not exclude cooperatives, nonprofit
organizations, public-private partnerships, private companies, public or private utilities,
public utility districts, or local governments (“potential providers”) from eligibility for grant
funds. In determining whether to approve an Eligible Entity’s Initial or Final Proposal, NTIA
will consider whether the Eligible Entity has, after the enactment of the Infrastructure Act,
adopted new laws, regulations, policies, procedures or any other form of rule or restriction
that, in the determination of NTIA, seeks to exclude or has the effect of excluding any
potential providers from eligibility for its subgrant competition. This could include new laws
that have the effect of excluding providers from offering broadband service or rendering them
incapable of effectively competing for subgrants.
Some laws of Eligible Entities concerning broadband, utility services, or similar subjects that
predate the enactment of the Infrastructure Act may either preclude certain public sector
providers from participation in the subgrant competition or may impose specific
requirements on public sector entities, such as limitations on the sources of financing, the
required imputation of costs not actually incurred by the public sector entity, or restrictions
on the service a public sector entity can offer. NTIA strongly encourages Eligible Entities to
waive all such laws for purposes of the Program. If an Eligible Entity does not do so, the
Eligible Entity must identify all such laws in its Initial Proposal and describe how the laws will
be applied in connection with the competition for subgrants. Such Eligible Entity must, in its
Final Proposal, disclose each unsuccessful application affected by such laws and describe how
those laws impacted the decision to deny the application.
Page | 90
eligibility for BEAD Program funds. An example of such law could include a ban on municipal
broadband or co-op providers.
2.15.1 Text Box
a. Disclose whether the Eligible Entity will waive all laws of the Eligible Entity concerning
broadband, utility services, or similar subjects, whether they predate or postdate
enactment of the Infrastructure Act that either (a) preclude certain public sector
providers from participation in the subgrant competition or (b) impose specific
requirements on public sector entities, such as limitations on the sources of financing,
the required imputation of costs not actually incurred by the public sector entity, or
restrictions on the service a public sector entity can offer.
b. If the Eligible Entity will not waive all such laws for BEAD Program project selection
purposes, identify those that it will not waive (using the Excel attachment) and their date
of enactment and describe how they will be applied in connection with the competition
for subgrants. If there are no applicable laws, note such.
2.15.1.1 Optional Attachment: As a required attachment only if the Eligible Entity will not
waive laws for BEAD Program project selection purposes, provide a list of the laws that the
Eligible Entity will not waive for BEAD Program project selection purposes, using the Eligible
Entity Regulatory Approach template provided.
NTIA strongly encourages the Eligible Entity to waive all laws that preclude or
limit public sector participation. If an Eligible Entity does not waive all relevant laws, the
Eligible Entity must disclose this, identify the laws that it will not waive (using the template
provided), and describe how the laws will be applied in connection with the competition for
subgrants.
If the Eligible Entity will waive all relevant laws, the Eligible Entity must disclose this, but does
not need to submit the optional attachment.
If there are no laws of the Eligible Entity concerning broadband, utility services, or similar
projects that hinder the participation of public sector entities, please write “Not applicable.”
If the Eligible Entity does not waive all laws of the Eligible Entity that either preclude or impose
specific requirements and limitations on public sector entities, the Eligible Entity must attach a
list of the laws it will not waive using the template provided. This attachment must include the
name of the law, a publicly accessible link, brief description, the date on which it was enacted,
and a description of how the law will be applied in connection to competition for the subgrants.
To download a copy of the NTIA Template for Eligible Entity Regulatory Approach,
please see the files named “BEAD Initial Proposal_Volume II_Eligible Entity Regulatory
Approach.xlsx”
Page | 91
Certification of Compliance with BEAD Requirements
(Requirement 19)
The purpose of this section is to ensure that the Eligible Entity intends to comply with statutory
requirements of the BEAD Program,
including the reporting requirements and
subgrantee accountability procedures. It is
critical for the Eligible Entity and its
subgrantees to remain compliant for the
success of the Program; failure to do so
may result in delays or cancellation of any
award and/or recoupment of funds already
disbursed.
2.16.1 Check Box: Certify the Eligible Entity’s intent to comply with all applicable
requirements of the BEAD Program, including the reporting requirements.
The Eligible Entity must certify, by checking a box, that it intends to comply will all applicable
requirements of the Program, including the reporting requirements. Future reporting
requirements for the BEAD Program include those outlined in NOFO Section VII.E. In advance
of reporting due dates NTIA will provide additional instructions, including formatting
requirements and other information on how to satisfy the reporting requirements.
2.16.2 Text Box: Describe subgrantee accountability procedures, including how the Eligible
Entity will, at a minimum, employ the following practices outlined on page 51 of the BEAD
NOFO:
a. Distribution of funding to subgrantees for, at a minimum, all deployment projects on a
reimbursable basis (which would allow the Eligible Entity to withhold funds if the
subgrantee fails to take the actions the funds are meant to subsidize);
b. The inclusion of clawback provisions (i.e., provisions allowing recoupment of funds
previously disbursed) in agreements between the Eligible Entity and any subgrantee;
c. Timely subgrantee reporting mandates; and
d. Robust subgrantee monitoring practices.
Subgrantee accountability procedures enable the Eligible Entity to ensure the integrity of its
BEAD projects. NTIA expects the Eligible Entity to proactively monitor their subgrantees
throughout the duration of their projects to ensure compliance with all BEAD Program
requirements.
Relevant Requirements from the NOFO, pages 30-32:
Certify the intent of the Eligible Entity to comply with all applicable requirements of the
Program, including the reporting requirements, and describe subgrantee accountability
procedures.
Looking Ahead
The Eligible Entity will be required to include
the processes for oversight and accountability
to ensure the proper use of the BEAD
Program funds in their Final Proposals.
Page | 92
At a minimum, the Eligible Entity will employ each of the practices outlined on Page 51 of the
BEAD NOFO. The Eligible Entity may also have additional standard contracting procedures to
describe in this section.
Example responses may include providing:
• A description of financial management practices that include distribution of funding
exclusively through reimbursement
• A description of claw back provisions in subgrantee contracts
• An explanation of reporting requirements to include frequency and content of reports,
• An overview of monitoring processes to be implemented to include risk assessment and
ongoing interaction with grantees corresponding to the risk level of each grantee.
2.16.3 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will account for and satisfy authorities
relating to civil rights and nondiscrimination in the selection of subgrantees.
The Eligible Entity must certify, by checking a box, that their selection of subgrantees will
account for and satisfy each of the following authorities:
• Parts II and III of Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity
• Executive Order 13166, Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English
Proficiency
• Executive Order 13798, Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty
Additionally, prior to distributing any BEAD funding to a subgrantee, the Eligible Entity must
require the subgrantee to agree, by contract or other binding commitment, to abide by the non-
discrimination requirements set forth in the following legal authorities, to the extent applicable,
and to acknowledge that failure to do so may result in cancellation of any award and/or
recoupment of funds already disbursed:
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
• The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
• The Age Discrimination Act of 1975
• Any other applicable non-discrimination law(s)
IMPORTANT
NTIA will reject Initial Proposals and Final Proposals that fail to provide sufficient
recourse against subgrantees that do not fulfill their legal and contractual
responsibilities. Likewise, NTIA will pursue claw back of funds directly from an
Eligible Entity that fails to fully ensure subgrantee accountability of the law.
Page | 93
The Eligible Entity is encouraged to refer to the Workforce Planning Guide and BEAD NOFO
Section IV.C.1.g. for more information on the laws to which Eligible Entities and subgrantees
alike must adhere.
2.16.4 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will ensure subgrantee compliance with the
cybersecurity and supply chain risk management requirements on pages 70 - 71 of the BEAD
NOFO to require prospective subgrantees to attest that:
Cybersecurity
1) The prospective subgrantee has a cybersecurity risk management plan (the plan) in place
that is either: (a) operational, if the prospective subgrantee is providing service prior to
the award of the grant; or (b) ready to be operationalized upon providing service, if the
prospective subgrantee is not yet providing service prior to the grant award;
2) The plan reflects the latest version of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity (currently
Version 1.1) and the standards and controls set forth in Executive Order 14028 and
specifies the security and privacy controls being implemented;
3) The plan will be reevaluated and updated on a periodic basis and as events warrant; and
4) The plan will be submitted to the Eligible Entity prior to the allocation of funds. If the
subgrantee makes any substantive changes to the plan, a new version will be submitted
to the Eligible Entity within 30 days.
Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM)
1) The prospective subgrantee has a SCRM plan in place that is either: (a) operational, if
the prospective subgrantee is already providing service at the time of the grant; or (b)
ready to be operationalized, if the prospective subgrantee is not yet providing service at
the time of grant award;
2) The plan is based upon the key practices discussed in the NIST publication NISTIR 8276,
Key Practices in Cyber Supply Chain Risk Management: Observations from Industry and
related SCRM guidance from NIST, including NIST 800-161, Cybersecurity Supply Chain
Risk Management Practices for Systems and Organizations and specifies the supply
chain risk management controls being implemented;
3) The plan will be reevaluated and updated on a periodic basis and as events warrant; and
4) The plan will be submitted to the Eligible Entity prior to the allocation of funds. If the
subgrantee makes any substantive changes to the plan, a new version will be submitted
to the Eligible Entity within 30 days. The Eligible Entity must provide a subgrantee’s
plan to NTIA upon NTIA’s request.
The Eligible Entity must certify, by checking a box, that it will ensure subgrantee compliance
with the cybersecurity and supply chain risk management requirements on pages 70 – 71 of the
BEAD NOFO.
The Eligible Entity also must ensure that, to the extent a BEAD subgrantee relies in whole or in
part on network facilities owned or operated by a third party (e.g., purchases wholesale carriage
on such facilities), obtain the above attestations from its network provider with respect to
cybersecurity practices and supply chain risk management practices.
Page | 94
Finally, the Eligible Entity must outline any additional cybersecurity or supply chain risk
management requirements it plans to impose on subgrantees and explain why the additional
measures are necessary to safeguard networks and users falling within its jurisdiction.
Page | 95
Volume II Public Comment
2.17.1 Text Box: Describe the public comment period and provide a high-level summary of the
comments received during the Volume II public comment period and how they were addressed
by the Eligible Entity. The response must demonstrate:
c. The public comment period was no less than 30 days; and
d. Outreach and engagement activities were conducted to encourage feedback during the
public comment period.
The Eligible Entity must describe how it
conducted a public comment period for no
less than 30 days, provide a high-level
summary of the comments received, and
demonstrate how the Eligible Entity
incorporated feedback in its Initial Proposal
submission, as applicable. The Eligible Entity is not required to respond to all individual
comments but must capture where public comments impacted the contents of the Initial
Proposal submission.
The Eligible Entity must also demonstrate how it conducted outreach and engagement activities
to encourage broad awareness, participation, and feedback during the public comment period,
particularly among Tribal Governments, local community organizations, unions and worker
organizations, and other underrepresented groups. Examples of outreach mechanisms include,
but are not limited to, public meetings, informational brochures, local media, relevant social
media channels, and direct mail.
2.17.2 Optional Attachment: As an optional attachment, submit supplemental materials to
the Volume II submission and provide references to the relevant requirements. Note that only
content submitted via text boxes, certifications, and file uploads in sections aligned to Initial
Proposal requirements in the NTIA Grants Portal will be reviewed, and supplemental materials
submitted here are for reference only.
The Eligible Entity may upload additional documentation, such as formatted text, tables, or
graphics, relevant to any of the requirements in Volume II. If the Eligible Entity chooses to
upload supplemental materials, they must provide a crosswalk to the relevant requirement(s). In
the responses to Volume II requirements, the Eligible Entity may reference the materials
uploaded here to provide additional context to their responses. However, content submitted
here will not be reviewed for sufficiency in meeting Initial Proposal requirements; only
responses to requirements in previous sections of the NTIA Grants Portal will be evaluated for
meeting the standard of review required for approval.
IMPORTANT
The Eligible Entity must conduct a
public comment period for no less
than 30 days.
Page | 96
Looking Ahead: Final Proposal
Final Proposal
To receive the remaining grant funds that are allocated to the Eligible Entity, an Eligible Entity
must submit a Final Proposal no later than twelve months after the Assistant Secretary approves
both Volumes I and II of the Eligible Entity’s Initial Proposal. If the Assistant Secretary
approves Volume I prior to approving Volume II, the timing for the Final Proposal submission
will begin upon the approval of Volume II of
the Initial Proposal. NTIA will award the
remaining funds allocated to the Eligible
Entity upon approval of the Eligible Entity’s
Final Proposal, and the Eligible Entity will
initiate its subgrants for the remaining 80
percent of funding and any portion of the
original 20 percent that the Eligible Entity has not yet awarded as a subgrant (if 20 percent was
requested in the Initial Proposal Funding Request).
If the Final Proposal is incomplete or does not meet standards set forth in the BEAD NOFO, the
Assistant Secretary will notify the Eligible Entity of the deficiencies in the proposal, provide the
Eligible Entity with an opportunity to resubmit the Final Proposal, and establish a deadline for
resubmission.
Failure to submit a Final Proposal by this deadline will be treated as an application failure. The
Assistant Secretary reserves the right to extend this deadline; however, the Assistant Secretary
will not grant a waiver of the Final Proposal deadlines except in extraordinary circumstances.
The 15 Requirements for the Final Proposal can be found in the appendix.
IMPORTANT
The Final Proposal must be made
available for public comment prior to
submission to NTIA.
Page | 97
Appendices
Waiver Guidance
Eligible Entities may submit waivers for Volume I, Volume II, and the Initial Proposal Funding
Request at the time that they submit each volume in the NTIA Grants Portal. If NTIA identifies
the need for a waiver after the Eligible Entity’s submission, NTIA will coordinate with the
Eligible Entity to submit a waiver request via the NTIA Grants Portal. Eligible Entities should
work with their assigned FPO to receive further guidance on waivers.
Page | 98
The 20 Requirements of the Initial Proposal
At a minimum, the BEAD NOFO requires that an Eligible Entity’s Initial Proposal must:
1. Outline long-term objectives for deploying broadband, closing the digital divide, addressing
access, affordability, equity, and adoption issues, and enhancing economic growth and job
creation including information developed by the Eligible Entity as part of the Five-Year
Action Plan and information from any comparable strategic plan otherwise developed by the
Eligible Entity, if applicable.
8
2. Identify, and outline steps to support, local, Tribal, and regional broadband planning
processes or ongoing efforts to deploy broadband or close the digital divide and describe
coordination with local and Tribal Governments, along with local, Tribal, and regional
broadband planning processes.
9
3. Identify existing efforts funded by the federal government or an Eligible Entity within the
jurisdiction of the Eligible Entity to deploy broadband and close the digital divide, including
in Tribal Lands.
10
4. Certify that the Eligible Entity has conducted coordination, including with Tribal
Governments, local community organizations, unions and worker organizations, and other
groups, consistent with the requirements set forth in Section IV.C.1.c of this NOFO, describe
the coordination conducted, summarize the impact such coordination had on the content of
the Initial Proposal, detail ongoing coordination efforts, and set forth the plan for how the
Eligible Entity will fulfill the coordination requirements associated with its Final Proposal.
5. Identify each unserved location and underserved location under the jurisdiction of the
Eligible Entity, including unserved and underserved locations in applicable Tribal Lands,
using the most recently published Broadband DATA Maps as of the date of submission of the
Initial Proposal, and identify the date of publication of the Broadband DATA Maps used for
such identification.
6. Describe how the Eligible Entity applied the statutory definition of the term “community
anchor institution,” identified all eligible CAIs in its jurisdiction, identified all eligible CAIs
in applicable Tribal Lands, and assessed the needs of eligible CAIs, including what types of
CAIs it intends to serve; which institutions, if any, it considered but declined to classify as
CAIs; and, if the Eligible Entity proposes service to one or more CAIs in a category not
explicitly cited as a type of CAI in Section 60102(a)(2)(E) of the Infrastructure Act, the basis
on which the Eligible Entity determined that such category of CAI facilitates greater use of
broadband service by vulnerable populations.
7. Include a detailed plan to conduct a challenge process as described in Section IV.B.6.
8. Include a detailed plan to competitively award subgrants consistent with Section IV.B.7.a of
this NOFO with regard to both last-mile broadband deployment projects and other eligible
activities. With respect to last-mile broadband deployment projects, the plan must explain
how the Eligible Entity will ensure timely deployment of broadband and minimize the BEAD
8
For States and Territories that have completed Five-Year Action Plans, reference to this plan satisfies
this requirement.
9
For States and Territories that have completed Five-Year Action Plans, reference to this plan satisfies
this requirement.
10
For States and Territories that have completed Five-Year Action Plans, reference to this plan satisfies
this requirement.
Page | 99
subsidy required to serve consumers consistent with Section IV.B.7 and the other priorities
set out in this NOFO. The Initial Proposal must include identification of, or a detailed
process for identifying, an Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold to be utilized during
the Subgrantee Selection Process described in Section IV.B.7 of this NOFO. Each Eligible
Entity must establish its Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold in a manner that
maximizes use of the best available technology while ensuring that the program can meet the
prioritization and scoring requirements set forth in Section IV.B.7.b of this NOFO. NTIA
expects Eligible Entities to set the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold as high as
possible to help ensure that end-to-end fiber projects are deployed wherever feasible.
9. With respect to non-deployment eligible activities, explain any preferences the Eligible
Entity will employ in selecting the type of initiatives it intends to support using BEAD
Program funds, the means by which subgrantees for these eligible activities will be selected,
how the Eligible Entity expects the initiatives it pursues to address the needs of the Eligible
Entity’s residents, the ways in which engagement with localities and stakeholders will inform
the selection of eligible activities, and any efforts the Eligible Entity will undertake to
determine whether other uses of the funds might be more effective in achieving the BEAD
Program’s equity, access, and deployment goals.
10. Describe any initiatives the Eligible Entity proposes to implement as the recipient without
making a subgrant, and why it proposes that approach.
11. Detail how the Eligible Entity will ensure that subgrantees, contractors, and subcontractors
use strong labor standards and protections, such as those listed in Section IV.C.1.e, and how
the Eligible Entity will implement and apply the labor-related Subgrantee Selection criteria
described below in Section IV.C.1.e of this NOFO.
12. Detail how the Eligible Entity will ensure an available, diverse, and highly skilled workforce
consistent with Section IV.C.1.e of this NOFO.
13. Describe the process, strategy, and data tracking method(s) that the Eligible Entity will
implement to ensure that minority businesses, women-owned business enterprises, and
labor surplus area firms are recruited, used, and retained when possible.
14. Identify steps that the Eligible Entity will take to reduce costs and barriers to deployment,
promote the use of existing infrastructure, promote and adopt dig-once policies, streamlined
permitting processes and cost-effective access to poles, conduits, easements, and rights of
way, including the imposition of reasonable access requirements.
11
15. Provide an assessment of climate threats within the Eligible Entity and proposed mitigation
methods consistent with the requirements of Section IV.C.1.h of this NOFO.
16. Describe the low-cost plan(s) that must be offered by subgrantees consistent with the
requirements of Section IV.C.2.c.i of this NOFO.
17. Describe the intended use of the 20 percent of total funding allocation that is made available
upon approval of the Initial Proposal consistent with Section IV.B.8 of this NOFO.
18. Disclose (1) whether the Eligible Entity will waive all laws of the Eligible Entity concerning
broadband, utility services, or similar subjects, whether they predate or postdate enactment
11
Consistent with the goal that Eligible Entities seek to minimize the BEAD funding outlay on a particular
project, Eligible Entities and their political subdivisions are strongly encouraged to remove time and cost
barriers associated with BEAD projects, including by expediting permitting timelines and waiving fees
where applicable, where doing so does not undermine other critical policy goals.
Page | 100
of the Infrastructure Act, that either (a) preclude certain public sector providers from
participation in the subgrant competition or (b) impose specific requirements on public
sector entities, such as limitations on the sources of financing, the required imputation of
costs not actually incurred by the public sector entity, or restrictions on the service a public
sector entity can offer; and (2) if it will not waive all such laws for BEAD Program project
selection purposes, identify those that it will not waive and describe how they will be applied
in connection with the competition for subgrants.
19. Certify the intent of the Eligible Entity to comply with all applicable requirements of the
Program, including the reporting requirements, and describe subgrantee accountability
procedures.
20. Include a middle-class affordability plan to ensure that all consumers have access to
affordable high-speed Internet.
a. The Middle-Class Affordability Plan is not aligned to a specific Initial Proposal
Requirement as outlined in Section IV.B.5. However, it is required as part of
Initial Proposal submissions.
Page | 101
The 15 Requirements of the Final Proposal
At a minimum, the BEAD NOFO requires that an Eligible Entity’s Final Proposal must include:
1. A detailed plan that specifies the outcome of the Eligible Entity’s Subgrantee Selection
Process and how the Eligible Entity will:
a. allocate grant funds to subgrantees for the deployment of broadband networks to
unserved locations, underserved locations, and (if applicable) CAIs in accordance
with the prioritization framework described in Section IV.B.7.b of this NOFO; and
b. align the grant funds allocated to the Eligible Entity under the BEAD Program, where
practicable, with the use of other funds for broadband that the Eligible Entity
receives from the federal government, an Eligible Entity, or any other source.
2. A timeline for implementation of the detailed plan and completion of each project and other
eligible activity to be funded;
3. Processes for oversight and accountability to ensure the proper use of the grant funds
allocated to the Eligible Entity under the BEAD Program consistent with Section IX.G of this
NOFO;
4. Certification that the Eligible Entity has conducted coordination, including with Tribal
Governments, local community organizations, and unions and worker organizations,
consistent with the requirements set forth in Section IV.C.1.c of this NOFO, a description of
the coordination conducted, and a summary of the impact such coordination had on the
content of the Final Proposal;
5. Description of the results of the challenge process conducted by the Eligible Entity under
Section IV.B.6;
6. Certification that the Eligible Entity will provide service to all unserved and underserved
locations, if the Eligible Entity is seeking to use BEAD funding for deployment to CAIs or for
other eligible activities;
7. A detailed description of all planned uses of BEAD funding that are not last-mile broadband
deployment projects, including the nature of each funded initiative, how those uses are
consistent with Section V.K of this NOFO, how the Eligible Entity expects the initiative to
address the needs of the Eligible Entity’s residents, the ways in which engagement with
localities and stakeholders informed the selection of such eligible activities, and any efforts
the Eligible Entity undertook to determine whether other uses of the funds might have been
more effective in achieving the BEAD Program’s equity, access, and deployment goals;
8. The means by which subgrantees for non-deployment eligible activities were selected, if the
Eligible Entity pursued those initiatives via subgrant, or, alternatively, how the Eligible
Entity determined that it should undertake the initiative itself;
9. A description of efforts undertaken by the Eligible Entity to ensure the participation of non-
traditional broadband providers (such as municipalities or political subdivisions,
cooperatives, non-profits, Tribal Governments, and utilities), including an explanation for
awards to traditional broadband providers when one or more non-traditional providers
submitted competing proposals to serve an area consistent with the requirements of Section
IV.C.1.a;
10. Implementation status of plans described in the Initial Proposal related to:
Page | 102
a. Steps that the Eligible Entity has taken or intends to take to promote streamlined
permitting processes and cost-effective access to poles, conduits, easements, and
rights of way, including the imposition of reasonable access requirements;
b. Labor and workforce activities, including how the Eligible Entity implemented and
applied the labor-related Subgrantee Selection criterion required herein;
c. Utilization of minority businesses, women-owned business enterprises, and labor
surplus area firms;
d. Low-cost plan requirements; and
e. Climate change and resilience;
11. Information regarding specific commitments made by provisionally selected subgrantees to
warrant a project’s treatment as a Priority Broadband Project;
12. Information regarding specific commitments made by provisionally selected subgrantees to
warrant benefits in the Eligible Entity’s Subgrantee Selection Process (e.g., the primary and
secondary criteria);
13. Environmental documentation associated with any construction and/or ground-disturbing
activities and a description of how the Eligible Entity will comply with applicable
environmental and national historical preservation requirements.
14. To the extent an Eligible Entity’s Final Proposal includes plans to deploy broadband to
Unserved Service Projects or Underserved Service Projects on Tribal Lands, the Eligible
Entity must submit a Resolution of Consent from each Tribal Government, from the Tribal
Council or other governing body, upon whose Tribal Lands the infrastructure will be
deployed.
12
15. A description of (1) each unsuccessful application that was affected by laws of the Eligible
Entity concerning broadband, utility services, or similar subjects, whether they predate or
postdate enactment of the Infrastructure Act, that the Eligible Entity did not waive for
purposes of BEAD Program project selection and that either (a) preclude certain public
sector providers from participation in the subgrant competition or (b) impose specific
requirements on public sector entities, such as limitations on the sources of financing, the
required imputation of costs not actually incurred by the public sector entity, or restrictions
on the service a public sector entity can offer; and (2) how those laws impacted the decision
to deny each such application.
Additional requirements for the Final Proposal may be provided to Eligible Entities when the
approval of the Initial Proposal is granted.
12
In the case of consortiums, a Tribal resolution is required from each Tribal Government on whose Tribal
Lands the infrastructure will be deployed. For projects deploying to locations on Tribal Lands in Hawaii,
consent must be obtained from the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. For projects deploying to
locations in Alaska, with the exception of deployments on the Metlakatla Reservation, an Eligible Entity
must gain the consent (by Tribal resolution) of 51 percent or more of the federally recognized tribal
governments in the Alaska Native Region in which the infrastructure will be deployed. Consent from the
Metlakatla Reservation will not be required for deployments in the Southeast Alaska Region Village.
Conversely, deployments within the Metlakatla Reservation will require only the consent (via Tribal
resolution) of the Metlakatla Reservation’s Tribal Government. If a Tribal Government is not meeting due
to COVID-19 restrictions or will not meet between release of this NOFO and submission of the Eligible
Entity’s Initial Proposal, NTIA will allow the submission of a Letter of Consent from the Governing Body
of the Tribe with the Eligible Entity’s Final Proposal.