Industry Leader in Telecom Data Analytics and Revenue Assurance

Broadband nutrition labels are a game changer for consumers, empowering them to make informed choices based on clear information about advertised speeds versus real-world performance.

However, for ISPs, these labels represent a significant challenge. Meeting the FCC's data requirements for accurate data hinges on reliable testing methodologies.

It doesn't help that the FCC hasn't released a clear framework for speed testing similar to what they did for CAF Performance Testing, nor how they plan to keep ISP's accountable for the speed data they submit.

Without independent, objective performance testing, ISPs risk not only running afoul of regulations but also, more importantly, eroding consumer trust – a critical factor in the increasingly competitive broadband market. 

This blog will dive into the data needed for these labels, and why we think third-party testing is the best solution. 

The fourth quarter's contribution factor has been announced by the FCC to be the highest ever at 34.5 percent. How exactly does that affect your Universal Service Fund (USF) fees for this quarter? This post will dive into case examples to demonstrate the potential cost savings achievable through traffic studies.

Last week, the FCC announced the proposed Universal Service Fund Contribution Factor for the fourth quarter of 2023. At a staggering 0.345, or 34.5 percent, this figure marks an unprecedented high in the history of this vital telecommunications fund.

The Universal Service Fund (USF) has become a topic of concern in the telecommunications industry, and rightly so. This crucial fund plays a pivotal role in ensuring that telecommunications services are accessible and affordable for all Americans. To comprehend why this factor has been on the rise, let's delve into the various programs it supports and why it's in dire need of reform. 

The federal government has been investing big-time into nationwide broadband access for underserved communities. With the passage of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), state governments are beginning to develop plans to connect local communities with high speed, affordable broadband. 

Historically, broadband funding has been distributed and managed by federal entities such as the USAC, with programs such as the Connect America Fund, which dispersed funds directly to internet providers. This time, state governments are managing grants and making sure that their local communities have access to high speed and affordable broadband. 

Time after time, carriers contact us about wanting to do something to lower their skyrocketing USF Fees.

Some carriers may feel like they are at the mercy of an endless cycle of a volatile contribution factor that has risen drastically in the past decade -from 15.5 percent in the first quarter of 2011 to 31.8 percent in 2021.

A solution that carriers overlook is their ability to reduce their Federal USF tax by means of a Traffic Study.

By using the Safe Harbor Rate, you can be spending twice as much as you should on USF Fees when filing your 499s. With the deadline for carriers to submit their 499As around the corner, the time to complete a Traffic Study is now.

Here's a direct quote from a recent USAC Webinar;

The best (easiest) time to switch from using the Safe Harbor percentage to traffic studies is with the 1st quarter filing of the year ... Keeping methodology consistent for all quarters simplifies annual revenue reporting on the applicable Form 499-A due the following April.

These spikes in USF fees can be managed by ditching the Safe Harbor rate when you file your 499s, and instead performing a traffic study.

"A person doesn’t know how much they have to be thankful for - until they have to pay taxes on it."

Whether you’re a large ILEC, or a small rural voice provider, with every 499 submitted to the FCC carriers and their customers contribute a percentage of their international or interstate calls to the USF. While the USF has proven it’s importance with the introduction of rural broadband support and other funding grants, there’s an ongoing dilemma in regards to how carriers contribute to the USF.

Much of this dilemma stems from the FCC’s Contribution Factor and Safe Harbor Rate that many providers default to using to file their 499s.

Complying with the USAC’s requirements can be stressful. However, being non-compliant during the pre-testing phase isn’t the end of the world. In fact - it’s part of the process in most providers' deployment journeys. 

As we jump into the fourth quarter of ACAM-I pretesting and prepare for the upcoming 2022 official testing, it’s important that providers determine what tactics they used to be successful this past year.

If your company received a lawful request for specific Call Detail Record from three years ago to help with a current criminal investigation, would you be able to fulfill the request?

In our regulatory work, we’ve worked with carriers who get many subpoena requests, and we’ve had carriers that can’t remember the last time they got one. We’ve found that smaller providers don’t receive too many warrants or requests, but larger ISPs are routinely asked for this information. 

It's no question that the Universal Service Fund (USF) has proven it's value in creating an all-inclusive broadband network. However, the rising costs of USF fees have caused many industry professionals to call for a change in how service providers contribute to the fund. 

In our regulatory work, we're often shocked at how many providers don’t know that there are ways to cut their overall USF contribution to be a fraction of what it is now. 

To give a brief overview of the USF, it’s split between four separate funds;

• Low-income Lifeline fund
• Rural Healthcare fund (RHC)
• E-Rate: For Schools and Libraries
• High-cost fund
  

Did you know that the costs of complying with federal, state and local subpoenas can be passed along to the requesting authorities?

The big providers of telephone, cable, and data services process hundreds of law enforcement requests for data every month. If you are a smaller provider, you may not get that many requests but when you do it’s a major disruption to your operation. We have had several requests from smaller clients to support them in their efforts to comply with subpoena requests so we thought we would summarize how the CALEA process works.