Home / Blogs

NTIA's New Broadband Map

NTIA's Indicators of Broadband Need uses several different data sources to show broadband availability within the United States. (Source: NTIA)

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration surprised the broadband industry by issuing a new broadband map for the whole U.S. The map differs in dramatic ways from the FCC's broadband map, which is derived from broadband speeds that are reported by the ISPs in the country. It's commonly understood that the FCC broadband map overstates broadband coverage significantly. The NTIA map draws upon varied sources in an attempt to create a more accurate picture of the availability of broadband.

The NTIA map was created by overlaying layers from various data sources over Google Maps. This includes speed test data from both Ookla and M-Lab. The map shows the results from Microsoft measurements of speeds experienced during software updates. There are two layers of data from the American Community Survey showing homes that report having no Internet access at home and also homes that have no computer, smartphone, or tablet. The NTIA also includes the FCC Form 477 data that is the only basis for the FCC broadband map. The NTIA map then offers an additional layer that shows high poverty areas have 20% or more households below the national poverty level. The data in the map can be viewed at both the Census tract and Census block level.

The data on the map is eye-opening. I live in Asheville, North Carolina. The map shows that broadband adoption varies widely across the city. In my Census tract, there are 6% of homes without broadband access. The neighboring tracts have broadband access in between 6% and 10% of households. But there is also a part of the city where 43% of homes don't have broadband. This is clearly an issue of poverty and not availability because, in the rural areas surrounding the city where there is little option except slow DSL, the percentage of homes without broadband access is around 20%.

The NTIA map sticks it in the eye of the FCC for being so slow to change its broadband maps. The exaggerated coverage in the FCC maps first became obvious to me in 2009 when clients were seeking ARRA stimulus grants that defined homes as either served, unserved or underserved for the first time. It was clear then that some of the ISP reporting to the FCC were pure fantasy. Since then, there has been a loud call to fix the FCC maps that has largely gone unheeded until a recent effort to begin the process of modifying the maps. That effort is expected to take a year or two.

The NTIA is making a point that there are many other sources of broadband data than just the FCC data. For example, we all know that speed test data isn't perfect — but taken in mass, speed tests create a pretty accurate picture of broadband speeds. One of the most interesting data points is from Microsoft — one can argue that the speeds encountered when downloading a big data file like a software update is the best measurement of actual speed. The Microsoft data shows that actual download speeds are far below what ISPs claim in most of the country.

There are even more data points that could be layered onto the NTIA maps. For example, I wish the NTIA has also layered on maps created by State broadband offices because the States have taken a stab at undoing the worse fictions in the FCC mapping.

As might be expected, the industry reacted almost immediately to the new maps. The NCTA — The Internet and Television Association quickly blasted the NTIA maps. The big trade associations probably have a good reason to hate the maps after the Department of Treasury said just last week that cities and counties could rely on mapping data from any federal agency when deciding where ARPA grant funding can be spent. Localities will find these maps interesting and useful as they consider spending money on broadband infrastructure.

Hopefully, the NTIA will continue to update these maps as new data becomes available. You probably know by reading this blog that I am not a fan of using speed definitions when allocating broadband grants. I think it would be far easier, as an example, to say that grants can always be used to overbuild rural DSL. But if the government continues to base grants upon something like the 25/3 Mbps definition of broadband, then maps like this new one are extremely helpful by showing more realistic speed numbers while also reminding is that there are a lot of other factors like poverty and broadband adoption rates to considere when deciding which parts of the country need grant assistance.

By Doug Dawson, President at CCG Consulting – Dawson has worked in the telecom industry since 1978 and has both a consulting and operational background. He and CCG specialize in helping clients launch new broadband markets, develop new products, and finance new ventures. Visit Page

CircleID Newsletter The Weekly Wrap

More and more professionals are choosing to publish critical posts on CircleID from all corners of the Internet industry. If you find it hard to keep up daily, consider subscribing to our weekly digest. We will provide you a convenient summary report once a week sent directly to your inbox. It's a quick and easy read.

I make a point of reading CircleID. There is no getting around the utility of knowing what thoughtful people are thinking and saying about our industry.

Co-designer of the TCP/IP Protocols & the Architecture of the Internet


Nice article - one nit - What *is* "Broadband" By Karl Auerbach  –  Jun 22, 2021 1:13 pm PDT

Thanks for your article.

However, I do question this statement: "speed tests create a pretty accurate picture of broadband speeds"

For non-conversational flows, such as most web browsing or watching streamed videos the tools from Okla and elsewhere are almost adequate.

Those tools tend to measure TCP streams.

But the net is used for conversational and highly interactive applications as well.

And those applications are highly affected by things that those tools do not measure - things like variation in delay ("jitter"), path MTU, packet loss, packet reordering (which can really do a number on many voice applications), and the burst behavior (i.e. are these things spread evenly or do they happen in short lived burst).  And there is our old nemisis, excessive buffering, aka "bufferbloat".

We really need a much better definition of network service quality.  The word "broadband" has been overused to the point of being almost useless and perhaps even somewhat deceptive.

A full definition of network service quality and capacity would have to incorporate much more than some average bit/second over TCP.  Such a definition would require measures of the things I mentioned above.  The expression would tend to be complex - things like burst loss behavior require statistical expressions.

And one would also want to include information about filtering policies (such as whether TCP port 25 is blocked, as it is by some consumer ISPs), what congestion algorithms are in use in switch and routing points, etc etc.

I wrote a couple of short notes about the weakness of some popular tools:

Why You Shouldn't Believe Network Speed Tests

Does IPERF Tell White Lies?

Even the issue of counting bits for bit-per-second calculations is troublesome:

Counting Bits

Nice article and commnt -- yet another nit -- consumer choice By Larry Press  –  Jul 06, 2021 8:20 pm PDT

I live on a 25/3 broadband street, but only one company offers landline connectivity on my block.  It would be interesting to track the number of broadband providers.

Add Your Comments

 To post your comments, please login or create an account.



Brand Protection

Sponsored byAppdetex

Domain Management

Sponsored byMarkMonitor

IPv4 Markets

Sponsored byIPXO

Domain Names

Sponsored byVerisign


Sponsored byVerisign

Threat Intelligence

Sponsored byWhoisXML API