Show us the Data: Better Information Collection for a Better E-Rate

It’s surprisingly difficult to find usable information about a huge federal program that helps schools and libraries pay for the high-speed Internet access.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is currently in the process of modernizing E-rate, a multi-billion dollar program which subsidizes Internet connectivity for schools and libraries across the country. Much of the conversation has focused on what type of technology is needed to meet the President’s ConnectED goals, and where the FCC will get the money to fund significant upgrades to our schools’ and libraries’ broadband infrastructure. But streamlining the application process, collecting better data, and making that data available in a format that’s useful for researchers and the public is also a critically important element of the ongoing reforms. As the program evolves to meet today’s digital learning needs, we clearly need to be able to study and evaluate E-rate better.

In October 2012, the FCC took an unprecedented step by releasing some of its 2010 E-rate data to the public, offering insight into what schools and libraries request for telecommunications and broadband service and how much they pay in total. While data can clearly serve as a powerful tool, not all data sets are created equal. For example, because the FCC relies on forms with free form response fields and that do not identify schools and libraries according to other commonly used codes, it’s difficult to do much meaningful analysis with the data. What’s more, deciphering the disbursement information to get a clear picture of what schools and libraries are paying for various speeds is not easy.

It’s surprisingly difficult to find usable information about a huge federal program that helps schools and libraries pay for the high-speed Internet access.

There are immediate benefits to better E-rate data and increased transparency. In May 2012, for example, ProPublica revealed that some schools were being charged up to 325 percent more than others in the region for very similar services. The disparities documented by the investigation suggested that carriers like AT&T and Verizon had violated FCC’s lowest corresponding price rule (which requires that telecom companies receiving E-rate cannot charge schools higher rates than those available to other similarly situated non-residential customers in an area). But because of the lack of transparency about prices and services, schools and libraries receiving E-rate funds did not necessarily know that they were overpaying or have the ability to hold service providers accountable for their actions.

Better and more transparent E-rate data could also be of tremendous, long-term value to the research community. Researchers could integrate data on speeds and prices into assessments of surrounding communities to determine which community anchor institutions are in a position to support broadband adoption in the area. Coupled with other FCC data on residential broadband options, this research could increase our understanding of the digital divide in America and the role of libraries and schools in closing that gap.

That’s why we’ve urged the FCC to give more deliberate consideration to the type of information it collects from schools and libraries each year (as well as the format). The agency can also to shift some of the reporting requirements off of the E-rate applicant. Information about prices and speeds, for example, could be collected in a simpler and more direct way from the Internet service providers that receive the subsidies, which would streamline the process. And, to be clear, our proposal isn’t just about asking for more information. It’s about figuring out how to collect better information that reduces the paperwork burden across the board while improving the accuracy and usability of program data. And if the FCC used existing unique identifiers like codes from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) on its forms, for example, researchers could also combine FCC data with a treasure trove of additional resources for much more robust and innovative analysis of the E-rate program, making it possible to look for positive correlations between high speed broadband and high-performing school administrations or negative correlations between broadband access and truancy rates. Few studies exist that meaningfully analyze up-to-date information about high-speed Internet access and how it affects learners of all ages.

Of course, encouraging better data collection and more thorough analysis of the program does not mean that this information should be used to penalize schools whose students do worse academically. Since a variety of factors beyond high-speed Internet access impact educational outcomes in schools, it would be illogical and problematic to tie E-rate funding directly to student performance measures or other educational benchmarks. As we’ve emphasized repeatedly, connectivity requirements are about ensuring that schools and libraries have the tools they need to help students succeed—but that there should be no expectation that faster Internet necessarily correlates to higher test scores or other end results. Today, we should view the Internet more like a basic resource that every school should have (akin to textbooks or electricity in the classroom) rather than a magical ingredient that instantly leads to better outcomes.

As the debates about the big, bold proposals for restructuring and modernizing the E-rate program continue, it’s important that we don’t overlook essential reforms like streamlining and improving data collection practices within the administration of the fund.

This post is the third of a four-part series, covering New America’s priorities for modernizing the FCC’s E-rate program. The first focuses on the need to build out fiber infrastructure, and the second looks at how the program can support connected communities. Given the size and complexity of the E-rate program—a more than $2 billion a year disbursement of funds to subsidize Internet connectivity at schools and libraries across the country—it is critical that the FCC improves its data collection practices, particularly around what service providers are charging, to better inform schools and libraries, their communities, and policymakers.