According to the article, just $45.6 billion of the $787 billion in economic stimulus money has actually been spent so far (with a third of that going to the states to assist in paying Medicaid expenses). Of course, for agencies like NTIA that have been asked to develop and implement entirely new programs for which there exists little internal infrastructure, delays are understandable. And, the trickle of funding should soon increase. The article quotes Vice President Biden as saying “I think that what you’re going to see happen here is the velocity of this will increase not just arithmetically, but geometrically here. At least, we’ve got to make that happen.”
Which brings us back to the RUS and NTIA broadband stimulus programs. It has been close to a month since comments were submitted in response to their joint Request for Information, and despite earlier predictions of May NoFAs, recent comments from RUS and NTIA personnel have made clear that we will not be seeing the release of NoFAs this month. So, when can we expect the broadband stimulus process to start in earnest? The short answer is that we still don’t know for certain, but we appear to be 5-6 weeks away at best.
I had the pleasure of moderating a panel on the stimulus package last week at the Wireless Communications Association’s Policy Summit. Among the panelists were David Villano of RUS and Bernadette McGuire-Rivera from NTIA. Taking what they said at the conference, reading between the lines a bit and adding in what has been reported elsewhere, it is clear that the two agencies are working together to develop an approach to administering their respective portions of the ARRA in as “seamless” a manner as possible. The White House, through its Office of Science and Technology Policy, is directly supervising those efforts. As part of that effort, the agencies are hoping to release their NoFAs simultaneously.
Whether that will occur or not likely will depend in large measure on whether NTIA will be ready to release a NoFA by late June or early July. While RUS said at the Policy Summit that it is planning to release its NoFA in late June, NTIA was unwilling to say more than it plans to release its NoFA during “the summer.” Whether this merely reflects more caution on the part of NTIA in making public statements on timing, or whether there is a real possibility that NTIA cannot make a June NoFA release date, is unknown.
However, given how much NTIA must do to implement ARRA and how few people it has to do it, the latter possibility cannot be discounted. If NTIA is not ready to proceed in late June, the question for the Obama Administration then will be whether to delay the RUS NoFA, or to allow RUS to proceed solo to kick-start the flow of stimulus funds for broadband. The Times article confirms what we already know -- there is tremendous pressure to get the stimulus funds flowing. So, there could be a short delay in the projected June RUS NoFA in the interest of having both agencies proceed in tandem. But if NTIA cannot proceed by mid-July, the Administration will have to give serious thought to starting the RUS process.
Stay tuned!
[ add comment ] ( 272 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 114 )The importance of broadband can sometimes be overstated. Sure, its use in professional and personal life is profound and most of us think we can’t live without it. But sometimes that statement is both figurative and literal.
One of the key aspects of the broadband stimulus program is telemedicine. The ARRA specifically states, among other things, that broadband infrastructure be used for the purposes of “advancing consumer welfare, civic participation, public safety and homeland security, community development, health care delivery, energy independence and efficiency…”
How can broadband address care delivery? At first glance, it may be that broadband can be used to simply transfer medical information. While broadband can certainly enable health care, in and of itself, it’s more a means of putting the right information in front of the right doctor or medical technician so that they can make a diagnosis.
But what if broadband could be used as a preventative tool to reduce or eliminate certain health conditions? During a recent search for broadband related health statistics, I came across a recent study that linked remote monitoring of heart attack patients to preventative steps that could be taken to reduce the number of heart related hospital readmissions. The research from the New England Healthcare Institute studied the impact of remote physiological monitoring on heart failure patients.
The research stated that “remote patient monitoring has the potential to prevent between 460,000 and 627,000 heart failure-related hospital readmissions each year.” Further, the research shows that remote patient monitoring can save an average of ~$3700 in disease management costs and ~$5000 in standard care costs when comparing heart related care in a traditional sense versus care administered in combination with remote monitoring.
What’s preventing remote monitoring of heart failure patients as standard practice? There are a number of barriers to entry cited in this study but there are two I’ll highlight. The first is “spotty adoption of electronic medical records (a health information technology system that, many experts argue, should be a prerequisite for RPM adoption).” The second is “the lack of infrastructure in rural areas.”
As service providers, you can help promote the use of innovative healthcare techniques by providing the infrastructure needed to make electronic medical records easy to transfer and remote monitoring widespread. This is needed both at medical facilities as well as to rural homes. Of course it’s easier said than done but you have a bigger role in modernizing healthcare in the US than you realize.
[ add comment ] ( 231 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 85 )Last week I posted a blog entry about the smart grid initiative and how it was allocated more than $3B in ARRA funds. This was in response to Mr. Howard-Anderson’s position that a successful applicant will look to leverage their project with other ARRA initiatives – smart grid being one program which can certainly benefit from ubiquitous broadband availability.
This week I wanted to focus on what interfaces are going to be required to support the smart grid. If you are a service provider looking to maximize your application’s value in the eyes of the NTIA or RUS, you need to be able to have confidence that you can say -“The network I intend to put in place will fully interface to the smart grid to support two-way data communications for intelligent consumption, transmission, switching and generation of electrical power.” But many of us don’t know what it take to interface to the smart grid.
The Dept. of Energy’s smart grid introduction pamphlet gave me the best starting point when, on page 29, it said that NIST is responsible for identifying and evaluating existing standards and technology for use in the smart grid. A quick search led me to the NIST web pages on the smart grid project. I was impressed by the amount and quality of the information available to me. What I eventually came to was a page about an Interim Roadmap with a statement that reads:
The Contractor shall deliver an Interim Roadmap no later than May 28, 2009, that describes the high-level Smart Grid architecture, principles and interface design; describes the current status, issues and priorities for interoperability standards development and harmonization.
In other words, it has not been decided what standards and technologies have been chosen for the smart grid. However, diving into the draft of the Interim Roadmap, you do get a sense for the complexity of the situation. Section 3.6 of the roadmap document starts by illustrating the interface problem using the Smart Grid Interface Cube. The cube is defined by three dimensions- Environments (horizontal x axis), Cross-Cutting Functions (vertical y axis) and Applications (depth z axis).
;)
The worst case scenario would be where each element in this matrix represented a unique interface standard. Luckily this is not likely to be the case the smart grid. Figure 4 in the Interim Roadmap shows the cube from a different perspective which reflects the notion that many of the interfaces will be the same.
;)
Overtly, this diagram shows that different environments may have different connectivity options but that connectivity will ideally serve all smart grid applications within an environment. It also shows that each application will likely have its own unique data access method (information model). What is most interesting to me is that many of the cross cutting functions (e.g., security and time synch) are expected to use the same interfaces regardless of environment or application. Moreover, implied by the shades of gray, it seems expected that there will be some level of commonality for the interfaces that serve these cut-through functions. This is borne out further by the fact that each of these cut through functions could, ideally, be accommodated by the TCP/IP protocols developed by the IETF. For instance, it is possible to use NTP for time synch or to use SNMP for network management. The two functions are different but they are both IETF standards and as such are depicted in a shade of gray, meaning from the same family of protocols. Of course this is just conjecture and only time will determine the preferences shown by the NIST as they evaluate their options. It is not a big stretch to believe that TCP/IP will play a huge role in the smart grid; the DOE brochure pretty much told us that Internet Protocols are going to be used.
Interestingly, if you have heard me speak before, you may have heard me tout the benefits of IP as being capable of supporting all applications (voice, data, video) and it is capable of running over all forms of transport (T1, Ethernet, Coax RF, radio, IR). Isn’t that exactly what the Idealized Smart Grid Interface Cube shows?
At this time, there isn’t any guideline in the NIST document that suggests what connectivity method will be used for given Environments but there is a notion that adaptors will be used. One adaptor type called out in the paper converts Ethernet to wireless so we know they are already considering Ethernet as a fundamental network interface. Even so, according to the plan presented recently by Dr. George Arnold, it appears that we will need to wait until the end of September before we know what interfaces will be adopted for use in the smart grid.
Considering what we know right now about the smart grid’s connectivity standards, do you think you can say that the broadband network which you deploy using Stimulus funds can serve the communications needs of the smart grid? I hope your answer is yes. I personally believe that any access network deployed with Occam Networks equipment will be able to deliver IP/Ethernet connectivity that will meet the needs of all aspects of smart grid with the resilience and quality of service required of this critical application.
One thing that I have seen is that about 5 or 6 technologies seem to be positioning themselves as ideal for home sensor networks. Has anyone looked into these competing technologies? I am curious about which technology is best and why. Have an opinion? I’d like to hear it.
[ add comment ] ( 284 views ) | permalink |
( 3.1 / 83 )By now, most of you realize you're not alone in your quest for broadband stimulus program (BSP) funds. Occam and countless others have provided you with opinions on what you can be doing to prepare for the upcoming Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) period. And while I suspect service provides who read this blog are getting information from multiple sources, I wonder how much of what you're reading is slanted towards a wireline perspective.
I recently ran across an article from Multichannel News summarizing the recent American Cable Association's annual summit in National Harbor, MD. The article describes an industry meeting of 150+ cable companies and policy makers responsible for the rules and distribution of BSP funds. Especially interesting is the insights given by Mary Campanola of RUS. For the sake of discussion, I've imported the section of the article that best summarizes Campanola's advice to ACA attendees.
"Campanola advised her audience to partner with others, including state and local authorities, and to come in prepared with a business plan, budget, system design, and to start preparing that now, even before knowing whether they qualified, she conceded. She also told operators they may want to apply for both RUS and NTIA grants (RUS is only for rural, but NTIA is for rural, urban and suburban), though she quickly added that they needed to make it clear they were applying under both programs since they would not be paying twice for the same thing.
She also suggested that given the 60-day turnaround for the first NOFA, that money would be concentrated on shovel-ready projects and likely established companies ready to dig in, though she said those could be of any size. She said RUS would comply with whatever definitions NTIA comes up with for unserved, underserved and broadband."
There is no new advice presented in this snippet from the article. But what needs to be considered is the audience hearing this message is decidedly different than the traditional wireline providers that leverage Occam equipment for advanced broadband. Cable, wireless and satellite broadband providers are preparing for what promises to be an exciting summer of policy making, grant reviews and broadband investment.
So what's the point? As any start up business venture can tell you, securing funding is all about telling a compelling story bolstered by business cases, facts and serving an addressable market. Just as important is understanding the competitive landscape and anticipating how your competitors will attempt to meet the needs of your target customers.
As Campanola suggests, you have roughly 30 days to prepare for the initial NOFA which will last approximately 60 days. Your competitors are most likely preparing in similar fashion. Know who they are, anticipate their moves and offer a compelling story as part of the application process. A story that starts with a broadband footprint that spurs immediate economic growth through infrastructure investments, job growth and the modernization of rural community education and health records.
After all, that's what the Jones' are doing.
[ add comment ] ( 235 views ) | permalink |
( 2.9 / 85 )Although we are still a few weeks away from learning exactly what will be required to apply for a grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, one step we are encouraging potential applicants to take in the interim is to make the federal registration required before applying for an ARRA grant.
Applicants for ARRA broadband stimulus grants are obligated to register at www.grants.gov (it is not clear whether registration will be required of applicants for RUS loans under the ARRA). If an ARRA applicant is already registered as a result of prior grant requests under other programs, it need not re-register. Registration can commence immediately. The process is reasonably straightforward. However, it likely will take some time for an applicant to pull together all of the information required to file. Plus, the electronic filing system has strained under the high volume of filings associated with non-broadband grant programs, and last-minute registration has been difficult. As a result, we suggest getting this step out of the way now, even if you are not sure whether you will be filing a grant request
Prior to starting the registration process, we suggest a review of the On-Line Tutorial, the Registration Checklist, and the Registration Guide. This review will allow you to identify in advance the information required to complete the request and key issues that need to be resolved before you can file. One issue that all potential filers will have to consider is to identify the entity that will actually seek the grant.
Whether to use an existing operating company, or a new entity (corporation, partnership, LLP, LLC, etc.) is a complex question. The answer likely will depend on a variety of considerations, including corporate structure, tax implications and potential impact on the prospects for receipt of an ARRA grant. You will want to consult with your corporate and tax counsel regarding the former two issues, and your NTIA/RUS counsel regarding the latter. Unfortunately, it is too early to even speculate as to whether filing via a non-operating entity, particularly a new one, will have any adverse impact on the prospects for receiving a grant (raising questions, for example, about ongoing financial viability). One option we suggest potential applicants consider is registering multiple entities so that whichever way the NTIA/RUS rules come out you are prepared to move forward. Registration at www.grants.gov is free, so the costs associated with filing multiple registration requests is minimal.
[ add comment ] ( 250 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 112 )
Archives