National Broadband Map Accuracy Subject to Close Scrutiny, Ongoing Improvement

"There is no other comprehensive map that exists,” said Anne Neville, NTIA state broadband data and development program director. She said the map, last updated in July, will likely be updated again by the end of January. NTIA said its last update (http://xrl.us/bn8xdv) was “powered by a new set of data from 1,865 broadband providers nationwide -- more than 20 million records” and providing information for 650,000 users. Comments were due to the FCC Wednesday on potentially unserved census blocks in the map.

"As far as Mississippi is concerned, the map is totally messed up,” said Mississippi Public Service Commissioner Brandon Presley. The National Broadband Map shows far more coverage than exists in his state, he said, citing anecdotal evidence. He said he and fellow PSC members lament what he calls an “unfair” disadvantage to Mississippi that will result in “less funding” and may “set our state back years.” The PSC shared those sentiments in FCC comments. The filing said (http://xrl.us/bn9379) the map shouldn’t include coverage from resellers or business-only providers. The map “just paints way too rosy a picture,” Presley told us. Gov. Phil Bryant (R) told the FCC the National Broadband Map “grossly misrepresents the wireline broadband coverage in Mississippi” (http://xrl.us/bn94fi).

Mississippi’s mapping featured inaccuracies, Neville said. The state submitted data “they later determined to be inaccurate,” she said. “But it’s fixed now.” The state’s new data will show “a fairly significant decrease” in availability, she said. The current national map shows December 2011 data, said BroadMap Senior Director of Program Management Kris Rousseau. The company maps Mississippi along with three other U.S. states and several territories. Its December 2011 data -- still the most current posted on NTIA and FCC websites -- included a provider that BroadMap was then trying to verify and ultimately excluded. “We were still learning,” Rousseau said, describing the validation and categorization challenges of more than a year ago. BroadMap receives data from all known broadband providers in Mississippi, she said.

"That’s a problem Mississippi can fix,” said Connected Nation Chief Policy Counsel Tom Koutsky of the state’s complaints. Connected Nation handles broadband mapping for nine states and one territory. Koutsky described states’ roles in securing diligent mapping partners: “We stand behind the entries in our maps.” The group collects data from over 95 percent of known broadband providers in their states as part of its on-the-ground verification and examination process, he said. “The national map itself is the best data we've ever had on broadband availability in the United States."

Mapping consistency varies from state to state, depending on who’s in charge, said those who assemble the maps. “We do not change any data that the states send us,” Neville said. NTIA has broad standards, but allows for differing verification methods depending on the state and mapping entity, she said. NTIA then conducts its own analysis and questions a state if anything looks amiss, Neville said. Wisconsin’s broadband mapping is “pretty accurate,” said State Broadband Director Tithi Chattopadhyay of the Wisconsin Public Service Commission. The state receives broadband data, according to NTIA parameters, from about 80 percent of Wisconsin providers. State partner LinkAmerica, which handles four states, is “really good at working with providers” and the PSC staff “try our best to validate that data,” Chattopadhyay said. She’s fond of the mapping, she said, calling it an “important tool” and “a good launching point” for broadband initiatives, with map accuracy improving over time.

Others have doubts similar to Presley’s, which they voiced at October’s NATOA meeting (CD Oct 1 p13). Behavioral economics expert Sara Wedeman contracted with NTIA in late 2009 for several months to help develop the National Broadband Map and was “astonished” by what she described as “rotten” mapping that was “methodologically and scientifically wrong.” She runs a Philadelphia-based behavioral economics consulting firm. Wedeman had critiqued methods when she was an NTIA contractor, she said. “That’s going to produce inaccurate information -- and it did.” The states shouldn’t have control if the government wants uniform measures, she said.

Koutsky disagreed. The mapping efforts’ purpose goes beyond national data and is also “to enable and empower” broadband initiatives within the different states, he said. Neville praised “state-specific knowledge” and underscored the state role: “The broadband landscape in each state is so different.” It’s “crucial” that mapping includes local control, coordination and choice, Koutsky said, citing municipalities as “the primary beneficiaries” of efforts and ones facing the risks.

Such mapping is “not an easy task,” NATOA President Joanne Hovis said. She and others are “always in conversation” with NTIA on improving the process and data, she said. “The map is a tremendous step forward and represents a significant amount of work” and illustrates “good intentions” from NTIA and the FCC, she said. But there needs to be “a rational process in place” for correcting errors, Koutsky said, saying the FCC comments now provide one of the first opportunities for dissatisfied stakeholders to weigh in. A fall report (http://xrl.us/bn9wto) from the Wilson Center, written by Research Assistant Zachary Bastian and FCC Geographic Information Officer Michael Byrne, painted the map as a triumph of data-driven policy and transparency.

This year will feature “increased intensity” geared toward mapping accuracy, said Koutsky. He pointed to all the telcos that will receive funding based on these efforts. There’s $185 million now in one-time unclaimed Connect America USF funding for broadband, but before long the FCC will give about $2 billion a year, largely based on this mapping, he said. That’s when “the rubber will hit the road,” Koutsky said. The FCC will need to determine the level of proof involved in showing an area’s mapping, he added. “For our local programs to be successful, our data needs to be accurate.” Rousseau described the next year’s challenge as getting down to “address-level granularity.” Nailing down the data is partly a challenge due to how much it changes, Neville said: “It’s always a moving target.”