The USDA RUS "Rural eConnectivity Program:" grant writing and rural broadband infrastructure

New LinkedIn Newsletter from Seliger + Associates: Go to?www.seliger.com?to sign up for FREE WEEKLY GRANT ALERTS and click on BLOG to read more than 600 posts about grant writing at Grant Writing Confidential.

The Department of Agriculture's "Rural Utility Service" (RUS) has a large, $300 million grant and loan program to improve broadband Internet services in rural areas via its "Rural eConnectivity Program." Grant writers should know about this program, and other rural broadband initiatives, because rural broadband Internet infrastructure remains inadequate, and the new Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) was released in August 2022, with an application deadline of November 2. Curiously, too, the Dept. of Agriculture calls Rural eConnectivity the "ReConnect Loan and Grant Program:" we're not sure why the naming disparity exists, but it does. In addition, it appears that the RUS's "Rural eConnectivity Program" is also a first-come, first-serve grant program, which means that getting an application in is useful, which is not true for most federal grant programs. That also means you should call us at 800.540.8906 ext. 1, or send us an email ([email protected]), if you're ready to make sure your "Rural eConnectivity Program" application shines. As experienced grant writers, we'll make sure that your application is as competitive as possible, and we have extensive experience in working for a wide array of rural organizations.

In the "Rural eConnectivity Program," there is $150 million available for loans and $150 million for pure grants, so, at $300 million, the program is very large. Funding goes as high as $35 million, which is obviously enormous for an individual project, but funding can be as low as $100,000, which is tiny for any sort of infrastructure project. Building things in the real world tends to be expensive; building things in rural areas may be cheaper than building them in cities (which tend to be filled with NIMBYs and veto holders), but, conversely, there are fewer people to share the cost of the things being built, as well as transportation issues to be considered. Consequently, cost-per-person is likely to be higher in rural areas, even if fewer of those veto players are likely to prevent building anything, anywhere, at all, as tends to happen in urban and suburban localities.

Although the "Rural eConnectivity Program" may look like it's part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Legislation (BIL), it actually came from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. Three previous FOAs have been released, so the earliest projects should have been completed by now. We don't see any references in the FOA to satellite-based broadband, even though, with the advent of SpaceX, that's a logical way to provide some broadband services to the most-remote areas. Satellites also have the advantage of covering huge amounts of ground (literally), and that aids their cost-per-user numbers.

In terms of the review criteria, there are five total: rurality of PFSA ("Proposed Funded Service Area"; we have no idea why the RUS decided to invent yet another acronym, instead of using common terms like "target area" or "service area"); level of existing service; economic need of the community being targeted; affordability (of the actual Internet access—note that many applications will propose lower affordability levels than are actually implemented); and "labor standards." The needs assessment challenges will mostly come from the "economic need of the community" and the "level of existing service" sections. There are some other points available, in categories like "Socially Vulnerable Communities" and "net neutrality," the last one being an easy place to scoop up points: promise you'll do net neutrality. Done. Applicants will also get extra points for promising to create more "equity" in hiring decisions; this push towards "equity" is just the modern term for "diversity." We've seen it appearing in other infrastructure-related grant applications, too.

Some of our clients tell us that there are now "equity consultants" of various kinds, and those "equity consultants" are owned by demographically correct persons who, for an appropriate amount of money, will provide cover and even "workers" who will also be demographically appropriate for enhancing "equity." If your organization is not sure how you will fulfill equity and Labor Standards requirements, know that there are straightforward ways of making this work. Organizations that are used to providing technical services and not used to dealing with the challenges of federal contracing politics should still consider applying.

Rural areas need broadband access. Until satellite Internet is truly ubiquitous, most broadband will need to be terrestrial. From what we've seen so far, the FOA itself is silent on the technical means to be deployed to provide broadband services. An applicant should be able to propose 5G services primarily for broadband purposes, if said applicant has the technical capabilities to deploy 5G towers and service. Right now, for example, Verizon claims to offer 1GB maximum bandwidth via its "5G Home Internet and Wifi" product. There's little reason, from what I can tell, that such technologies can't be deployed at the last mile, which will likely reduce total costs for users. The big challenge may be building the towers and ensuring maximum line-of-sight to the end users. I also don't know what the cellphone companies's hardware is like; from what I understand, 5G signals don't penetrate walls and other barriers effectively, so it may be necessary or at least useful to put some hardware outside of buildings. In rural areas, this should be relatively straightforward, but these technological needs may increase the total complexity of projects.