Rex Miller

E-Rate 2.0 UpdateAugust 2014

Introduction

E-Rate 2.0 has arrived• Today’s session is focused on the changes enacted by the recent

E-Rate 2.0 FCC order• We will have future sessions closer to the filing window to

discuss updates and more detailed filing instructions, tips, etc.• Seek out experienced assistance as you prepare and work

through the next E-Rate season

Q & A• At the end of the presentation• ENA is available at your convenience• Webinar will be available on the ENA website at www.ena.com

ENA Background

Customer service and education focus• K-12 customized service• E-Rate expertise

• E-Rate Program Service Provider since Year 1 (1998)• Experienced E-Rate team

• Rex Miller, April Scott, Kris Vivrette, Madeline Dusenberry, Ward Chaffin

E-Rate Service Provider Leader • A Top-10 E-Rate Service Provider• Over $500M in E-Rate funded• Over $144M in 2014 E-Rate filings

E-Rate 2.0 Things to Remember

All of this subject to - • Further releases by FCC –

Additional orders and clarifications• Eligible Services List –

Draft released 8/4 – consistent with Order• SLD –

Fall Training + 40 short videos + Webinar• E-Rate form changes –

SLD plans new 470 and 471 at least• WCB/USAC interpretation –

Where they are tasked to figure things out• PIA Review 2015 –

Where the things they don’t always tell us will be implemented re: testing• New FCC Strike Force to combat waste fraud and abuse

And don’t forget – ALL of this is considered a two year TEST – that could be undone (at least the eligibility parts) – after two years

Stay tuned for more changes and updates

Goals

E-Rate 2.0 has three main goals:

1.Affordable access to high speed broadband

2.Maximizing cost effectiveness

3.Making E-Rate fast, simple and efficient

Goal 1 – Affordable Access to High Speed Broadband

• Affordable access to high speed broadband

Created Category 1 and Category 2

– Category 1 – Broadband – this is funded first» ENA – no other changes to IA/Broadband

apparent» Discount rates remain same matrix

– Category 2 – Internal Connections

Category 2

Category 2 – Internal Connections• $1 B target for internal connections

This not just Wi-Fi Shortened list of eligible items

– Routers, Switches, Wi-Fi– Added caching– Cloud services OK– Basic maintenance of eligible items is OK as

part of the per student cap

• ENA – even if districts have Wi-Fi, they still get to spend $150 on basic maintenance, routers, switches, etc. for LAN

Category 2

• Managed Wi-Fi Eligible – Renamed Managed Broadband Internal Connections by FCC Third party service allowed for LAN and WLAN management

• Eliminated – Circuit cards/components Interfaces Gateways Antennas Servers Telephone components Video components VOIP and Video over IP components Data protection other than firewall and UPS

– Such as VPN

Category 2 Funding

• 90% discount reduced to 85% All other discount levels unchanged

• $150 per student available over 5 years ($2.30 per square foot for libraries)

Can be received all in year 1 Ordered by discount rate 5 year applicant “budget” $9,200 funding floor per school/library NIFs will typically not be eligible for WiFi No extra funding for rural remotes – all equal

• Current 2 in 5 rule removed

• Student Counts – Can use estimate for new buildings Can count students at 2 buildings if attend multiple schools

• Category 2 Installation can begin on April 1st

Category 1 Services

• Phase down support for Voice, VoIP and other legacy services Voice including VoIP and cellular/mobile

– 20% discount rate reduction per year starting 2015

• Items removed 2015 – no phase-down» Web Hosting» Voice Mail» E-Mail» Paging» Texting» Directory Assistance

Category 1 Services

• Items removed 2015 – no phase-down Cell Service data plans and Air Cards – unless they can be cost

effective vs. other internal broadband or external broadband– USAC will have a presumption that data plans and Air

Cards are not cost effective and you will have to prove otherwise

Custom Calling Plans Direct Inward Dialing 900/976 Call Blocking Inside wire maintenance plans

• ENA – some pieces of currently eligible voice are immediately ineligible and some are phased out

Need to watch how PIA treats this as some of these items are normal components of voice service – like a phone number/DID

• No exceptions or grandfathering for existing multi-year contracts

Measurements

• Measurements – used SETDA targets Internet Access – 100 Mb per 1,000 users today Internet Access – 1,000 Mb per 1,000 users long-

term WAN/Last mile – no short-term target WAN/Last mile – 10 Gb per 1,000 users long-term

• FCC says “1 Gb fiber can be readily scaled to 10 Gb with upgraded networking equipment”

• IA/WAN Affordability – price per Mb and per user/device to be tracked and reported Also price by physical layer type, service type,

geography, carrier, carrier type and purchasing mechanism

Measurements – LAN/WLAN

• LAN/WLAN – FCC is going to do a survey to determine how to measure and then set goals/track affordability

Paragraph 54 – contradictory – measure pricing as a function of number of users

Track pricing by eligible components including management

Track utilization and performance

Track replacement and upgrade cycles and architectures to measure cost effectiveness

Measurements - Networks

• Bandwidth utilization and network performance statistics FCC assigned the Wireline Competition Bureau

(WCB) to determine measurement methods– ENA – potential for time-consuming/expensive

reporting requirements? FCC assigned WCB/USAC to develop and

maintain best practices and benchmarks for network utilization, architecture, performance, optimization and management– ENA – No indication re who is going to do this

at WCB/USAC at this time

E-Rate 2.0 Break

Goal 2- Maximizing Cost Effectiveness

• Adopt Cost Transparency to share cost and connectivity data

• Encourage Consortia Purchasing

• Emphasize Lowest Corresponding Price

Cost Transparency

• Adopt transparency to share cost and connectivity data

Item 21s to be standardized and available to public» WCB assigned to make this happen

Contracts requiring no price disclosure will be ignored in the future

FCC decided not to require disclosure of other data at this time

» For example – no disclosure of all bid prices» FCC decided not to require all bids to be

submitted to SLD• ENA - Thank goodness

Encourage Consortia Purchasing

• Preferred Master Contract (PMC)

For Category 2 equipment only

Nationwide contracts only» ENA – no idea what these are yet/is this

GSA?

Selected by WCB based on “excellent” pricing

WCB can decide whether 470 can be waived and whether the preferred contract must be evaluated by all applicants in any 470

Encourage Consortia Purchasing

• Preferred Master Contract (con)

FCC declined to force applicants to use preferred master contracts “at this time”

Applicants who have 470s for items on the preferred master contracts must include the PMC in their bid eval

» ENA - How is that possible for an RFP situation?

» ENA - Where is the list of these contracts?

» ENA - How will applicants know that a certain model on the preferred list is compatible with what they want to buy when applicants must accept bids for “and equivalents”

Encourage Consortia Purchasing

• Consortium Purchasing

FCC did not address any other consortium purchasing incentives in this section

FCC included further requests for comment on consortium incentive items including – – Providing 5% consortium incremental discount– Changing consortium discount rate to

weighted average– Allowing states to appoint consortia– Criteria to earn 5% incentive– Require consideration of state master

contracts in all bid evaluations

Goal 3 – Making E-Rate Fast Simple and Efficient

• Streamline application process

• Simplify discount rates

• Simplify invoicing/disbursement

• All appeals must be first filed with USAC

• Additional measures to improve SLD administration

• Protect against fraud, waste and abuse

Streamline Application Process

• Simplify multi-year contracts File 471 in first year File Form TBD in second year to explain

» Continuation of multi-year contract» Identify and explain changes to

application such as• Discount rate• Membership of consortium• Services ordered• Changes must be consistent with

scope of original 470 and contract• ENA – SLD will get to decide this

Streamline Application Process

• Exempt low-cost high-speed broadband from competitive bidding Can buy $3,600 per year 100 Mb down/10 Mb up

commercially available broadband– No 470 required

» ENA - Does not impact local procurement laws» ENA – have to be prepared to defend that you

bought from a commercially available offering• SLD will decide whether you did this

correctly• Will this save small applicants time?

FCC can change the minimum speed requirements to qualify each year

» Even if you are in a multi-year contract for a fixed speed

Streamline Application Process

• Ease the signed contract requirement Signed contract is no longer the only accepted way to

prove a legally binding agreement before filing 471» However, you still have to prove a legally binding

agreement• Contract is still best way to do that per FCC• They may accept e-mails indicating an “offer”

from the vendor that was “accepted” by the applicant• ENA – very risky to rely on this “easing” of

the rules – better to just start early enough to get a signed contract done in time

• ENA – not sure if the FCC’s simple concept of what is legally binding is consistent with state and local law – be wary of that issue as well before relying on anything other than a signed contract

Streamline Application Process

• No E-Rate tech plan required going forward

• Requires electronic filings ENA - No indication yet of whether the PIN issuance

method will change and how that impacts this requirement

• Enables direct connections between schools and libraries “We allow rural schools and libraries to establish direct

connections”» ENA - The FCC states that to get approval of

direct connection that an FCC waiver must be filed

» ENA – they changed many rules in this Order, why did they not fix the rules to allow this – filing a waiver just to get approval seems an odd simplification

Streamline Application Process

• Measurement of USAC/SLD performance –

Goal to fund all “workable” applications by 9/1

Workable = not subject to investigation, audit or similar reason for delay

» ENA – it appears USAC determines what is workable?

» ENA – this appears to be a soft target with no disclosed enforcement penalties for USAC

Simplify Discount Rates

• Require district-wide discount rate Total NSLP/Total Students based on district wide

numbers not school by school– Per FCC, this will allow SLD to let you add sites as

needed to your applications

• New source of urban/rural designation FCC moving to US Census Bureau data

– Can go to US Census Bureau website to check your schools now» ENA – be alert for more specifics regarding how

to find this info – watch SLD website for how to use/tools

» District is “rural” if majority of schools are rural• No indication what to do if 50% rural• No indication if size/student count matters

Simplify Discount Rates

• National School Lunch program changes – CEP option New detailed calculation standards available

– Based on 1.6x certified See Order or watch for updates on SLD website

• F/R survey changes Surveys can no longer be extrapolated to schools

population if you get more than 50% back You can only compare the received surveys to

the total student count for the school» ENA – death blow for surveys to a large

extent

Simplify Invoicing/Disbursement

• Direct Bear invoicing by Applicants and disbursement to Applicants

Service providers not required to sign the Bear forms

Applicants will have to provide USAC with electronic disbursement instructions – no paper checks

No payments to consultants – only directly to applicants

ENA – Make sure you evaluate impact of this new process on historical Bear use

Simplify Invoicing/Disbursement

• Adopting an invoice deadline

Invoice deadline codified – but not changed– 120 days after last day to receive service or – 120 days after Form 486 notification date– Whichever is later

Extensions streamlined– Only allowed 1 extension of 120 days

» No reason required for extension

These changes will allow FCC/SLD to de-obligate funds more quickly and do rollovers of unused funds more quickly

Additional Measures

• All Appeals must be filed first with USAC/SLD No loss of ability to appeal to FCC if USAC denies

appeal Waiver requests still go direct to FCC

• Additional measures to improve SLD administration Speeding review of applications, commitments

and disbursements Modernizing USAC IT systems Adopting open data policies Improving communications with applicants and

providers

Protect Against Waste, Fraud and Abuse

• Increase Document Retention from 5 to 10 years

Recent FCC appeal indicated that they can go back even beyond 10 years if circumstances merit

» ENA – consider keeping all E-Rate documents effectively “forever”

Must allow auditors and investigators on premises

• New FCC Strike Force on Waste Fraud and Abuse Covers all USF programs

E-Rate Rest Stop

Further NPRM

• FCC asking for more comments on:

Funding for E-Rate

Whether to limit contracts to 5 years» Other than for high cap ex contracts to install new facilities

Requirement to use state reported NSLP data only» As reported to FNS» ENA - No changes to Pre-K – still ineligible – so not sure how

that impacts this

Consortium discount rate calculations» Use weighted average

Consortium incentives» As described earlier

Things We Think We Know

• Test your discount rate now so that it is not a surprise

Could have changes due to district wide average and CEP

• Start thinking about your budget

Can you get $ for new Category 2 Impact of Voice and other changes

• Expect more enforcement

Even some of the FCC Commissioners suggest that the FCC will be looking for money

Things We Think We Know

• Simplification looks very complex Preferred price lists for Category 2 items Different forms for different years of multi-year

contract Lots of assignments to SLD and WCB to track

pricing and gather data from applicants in more pervasive manner

• Lots of items with different treatment New discount rates for Category 2 Different discount rates for Voice vs. Internet Lots of miscellaneous charges are now ineligible

and have to be cost allocated out

Things We Think We Know

• Change your policies for E-Rate 2.0

Document retention to 10 years» ENA - recommend you never throw it out» Consider electronic file retention vs. paper

Technology plan elimination– However expected requirements to show

network plans, utilization, etc. to USAC

Things We Think We Know

• Expect more FCC/WCB/SLD involvement Preferred National Contracts FCC/SLD developing lists of best network practices More and more information appears to be required

for SLD to review and publish» Pricing and service levels among others

Very close to having FCC require purchasing off of national or state master contracts

Very close to having to submit all bid responses to USAC/SLD

Much of this is “assigned” to WCB and SLD and still to be designed/released– Be alert for form changes, surveys and new

forms

Timing of 2015 Approvals

• 2014 Year has been a great year for approvals – much improvement

2014 year had unique circumstances» No P2 funding for two years leading to significantly

fewer applications to review» More staffing hired to make sure process was faster

• 2015 year is much more complex New Category 2 funding to be approved Integration of significant changes in eligible services Up to three different discount rate matrixes to apply New Discount Rate formula – can’t test one school, will they

test the whole district Additional items requiring changes to forms and practices

• Expect significant slowdown in approvals – especially if FCC wants to push Category 2 approvals faster or at equal speed as Category 1 funding requests

What Now?

• Be alert for additional information to flow Eligible Service List – draft to be finalized More FCC updates, orders, clarifications Changes to FCC Forms to match the Order Additional changes from FCC/USAC on items that

were assigned to WCB/USAC

• Be careful on 470s and bids Make sure you check rules on Preferred Contracts and

other changes before you do your bids

• Use resources SLD website, fall training and News Brief Third party, state, vendor and other district resources You are not alone!

Resources

Contact ENA• Rex Miller – rmiller@ena.com• April Scott – ascott@ena.com• Kris Vivrette – kvivrette@ena.com• Ward Chaffin – wchaffin@ena.com• Madeline Dusenberry – mdusenberry@ena.com

SLD News Brief – make sure your are signed up for these e-mails

• Go to the SLD website’s training section to sign up• Key info provided on changes to the program all year long

Websites • SLD – main E-Rate rule site – training/WebEx

www.universalservice.org/sl/ Separate section of SLD website for E-Rate 2.0 updates Fall training slides will be posted if you cannot attend

Until we talk E-Rate again

www.ena.com@ENAconnects ⎜ facebook.com/ENAconnects

Contact ENA TodayRex Miller

rmiller@ena.com - 615.312.6000