Minnesota Broadband Availability

Minnesota Broadband
Availability and
Adoption Statistics
An Initial Working Report
on the Current State of Minnesota’s
Broadband Landscape
Connect Minnesota
January 2011 connectmn.org
Table of Contents
Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview of the Broadband Market in Minnesota.................................................................................................. 2
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................. 8
The Broadband Adoption Gap.................................................................................................................................. 11

2.1 Broadband Adopters and Non-Adopters........................................................................................................ 12
2.2 Barriers to Adoption........................................................................................................................................ 13
2.3 Broadband Applications and Uses ................................................................................................................ 15
Connect Minnesota Broadband Inventory and Analysis....................................................................................... 16

3.1 Broadband Availability in Minnesota – A State Bird’s-eye View..................................................................... 16
3.1.1 Fixed Broadband Inventory................................................................................................................... 16
3.1.2 Broadband Availability by Technology Platform.................................................................................... 19
3.1.3 Household Density across Unserved, Underserved, and Served Areas .............................................. 20
3.1.4 All Terrestrial Broadband Inventory – Including Mobile Wireless Networks ......................................... 21
3.2 Broadband in Minnesota Counties................................................................................................................. 22
3.2.1 Terrestrial, Fixed Broadband Availability by County.............................................................................. 22
3.2.2 Fixed Broadband Availability across Rural and Non-Rural Counties.................................................... 30
3.2.3 Minnesota’s Underserved Households across Counties...................................................................... 33
3.2.4 Broadband Availability by Platform, by County..................................................................................... 35
3.3 Federal and Tribal Lands................................................................................................................................. 38
3.3.1 Federal land in Minnesota..................................................................................................................... 38
3.3.2 Tribal land in Minnesota......................................................................................................................... 40
3.4 Universal Service Funding in Minnesota ....................................................................................................... 42
3.5 Broadband Stimulus Investments in Minnesota through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act..... 44
3.6 FCC and Connect Minnesota Availability Estimates – A Comparative Analysis............................................. 47
3.7 Connectivity across Community Anchor Institutions in the State of Minnesota............................................ 53
The National Broadband and the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report:
Policy Recommendations to Combat Broadband Availability and Adoption Gaps............................................ 54
4.1 Strategies to Close the Availability Gap.......................................................................................................... 54
4.2 Strategies to Close the Adoption Gap............................................................................................................ 58
4.3 The 2009 Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report........................................................................... 60
4.3.1 Broadband Availability........................................................................................................................... 60
4.3.2 Broadband Adoption............................................................................................................................. 61
4.3.3 Infrastructure Security........................................................................................................................... 61
4.3.4 Cyber security....................................................................................................................................... 61
4.3.5 e-Government....................................................................................................................................... 62
4.3.6 e-Economic development..................................................................................................................... 62
4.3.7 e-Health................................................................................................................................................. 62
4.3.8 e-Learning............................................................................................................................................. 63
Appendix A: Connect Minnesota Residential Technology Assessment, June 2010......................................... A-1
Appendix B: List of Participating and Non-Participating

Providers in Connect Minnesota’s Broadband Inventory.................................................................................... B-1
1 Connect Minnesota
Executive Summary
This assessment of the broadband market in Minnesota is conducted by Connect Minnesota in partnership with
the Minnesota Broadband Task Force and the Minnesota Department of Commerce as part of the State Broad-
band Data and Development grant program (SBDD) funded by the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA). This report aims to provide a detailed review of the current state of broadband in Minnesota
that will spark discussion across multiple broadband stakeholders in the state on key policy and strategies to ex-
pand and enhance the broadband experience for all Minnesotans.
The SBDD grant program was created by the Broadband Data Improvement Act (BDIA), unanimously passed by
Congress in 2008, and funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in 2009. As part of the
SBDD grant program, in May and October 2010, Connect Minnesota produced updated maps of broadband avail-
ability to identify served and unserved areas across the state. Additionally, Connect Minnesota undertook survey
research in the spring of 2010 to understand broadband demand trends across the state. The purpose of this
research is to better understand the drivers and barriers to technology and broadband adoption and estimate the
“Broadband Adoption Gap” across the state of Minnesota. Appendix A of this report presents extensive results of
this research.
The demand-side survey data complements the mapping inventory information describing the state of broadband
supply in Minnesota. This report analyzes this complementary demand-side and supply-side research and con-
trasts the data with national benchmarks released by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as part of
the National Broadband Plan (NBP).1 Following the spirit of the NBP, as well as a 2009 report by the Minnesota
Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force, and based on the broadband availability and adoption data collected by
Connect Minnesota, this report proposes a series of recommendations intended to spur discussion and feedback
among key stakeholders across Minnesota. To account for feedback to this report, the Minnesota Broadband
Task Force, working with Connect Minnesota, seek feedback through multiple means across the state to ensure all
voices are heard and included. This process will ensure fully informed Broadband Action Planning to be developed
and released by the Minnesota Broadband Task Force and Connect Minnesota in 2011 and beyond.
Overview of the Broadband Market in Minnesota

Minnesota’s broadband marketplace is interesting when comparing the few urban areas of the state with their rural
counterparts. Geographically large, 60% of Minnesota’s population resides in the Twin Cities metropolitan area.
Because three-fifths of Minnesotans reside in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, broadband inventory data shows
high availability of upper speed tier broadband in the state. The outlook, however, for the state’s remaining house-
holds indicates fewer choices and slower speeds. Furthermore, while only available to less than 4% of Minnesota
households, fiber to the home broadband is available in more than 50 of Minnesota’s 87 counties.
It is estimated that as of October 2010, terrestrial, fixed broadband providers offer service to 96.59% of all Min-
nesota households.2,3 This implies that an estimated 66,647 Minnesota households (3.41%) lack basic broadband
service and remain unserved by terrestrial, fixed broadband. It is further estimated that approximately 93.76%
of Minnesota households have broadband available at download speeds of 3 Mbps or more. This implies that
an estimated 118,313 Minnesota households have basic broadband available but lack fixed broadband service
of at least 3 Mbps downstream – a service level now often considered necessary for effectively conducting many
1 Broadband is defined according to current NTIA definition of at least 768 Kbps download and 200 Kbps upload speeds.
2 Ibid.
3 Broadband data collected from 42 Minnesota broadband providers. See Appendix B.
2
Internet applications. The NTIA classifies broadband service at download speeds below 3 Mbps as “underserved.”
Furthermore, broadband availability at a speed of at least 6 Mbps downstream (advertised) is available to 90.79%
of Minnesota households – an important data point considering that the FCC’s National Broadband Plan considers
broadband at actual speeds of 4 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream to be a threshold level of service for most
broadband activity.
Table 1 – Estimate Of Broadband Service Availability In The State Of Minnesota –

By Speed Tier Among Fixed Platforms
Percent Households
SBDD Download Speed Tiers Unserved Households Served Households
By Speed Tier
At Least 768 Kbps 64,647 1,830,480 96.59%
At Least 1.5 Mbps 77,353 1,817,774 95.92%
At Least 3 Mbps 118,313 1,776,814 93.76%
At Least 6 Mbps 174,467 1,720,660 90.79%
At Least 10 Mbps 301,312 1,593,815 84.10%
At Least 25 Mbps 850,309 1,044,818 55.13%
At Least 50 Mbps 937,613 957,514 50.53%
At Least 100 Mbps 1,006,996 888,131 46.86%

Source: Connect Minnesota, October 2010.
Finally, the State of Minnesota has a statutory goal of ubiquitous broadband service at speeds of at least 10 – 20
Mbps downstream/5 – 10 Mbps upstream by the year 2015, and current estimates show that 84.10% of Minnesota
households have access to broadband at speeds of at least 10 Mbps but that only 55.13% of households can ac-
cess broadband service at speeds of at least 25 Mbps.4
The data necessary to compile these broadband inventory estimates were collected on a voluntary basis from
broadband providers serving the state of Minnesota. Appendix B of this report details which providers did, and did
not, allow the use of their data in the creation of Minnesota’s broadband inventory map.
Statewide estimates do not necessarily reflect the reality faced by each Minnesota community. Connect Minne-
sota county-level availability estimates reveal variances, in some cases large, in measured broadband inventory
across counties, highlighting the importance of granular data in order to identify gaps in infrastructure and adop-
tion at the community level. County-level as well as more granular, street-level broadband inventory data is avail-
able through Connect Minnesota’s interactive, online broadband inventory map at http://www.connectmn.org.
Significant variance in broadband availability across rural and non-rural counties is measured at different speed
tiers. Further, availability at the county level by different broadband platforms similarly varies greatly (for example,
fixed wireless availability in rural counties varies from 0% in Carlton and Cook counties (among others), to 99.90%
of households served in McLeod County). What is important to understand when considering broadband avail-
ability in the state of Minnesota is that approximately 60% of the state’s population resides in the Twin Cities. The
4 https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=277&doctype=chapter&year=2010&type=0
3 Connect Minnesota
disparity of the broadband market across counties suggests that ongoing investment in broadband capacity is af-
fected by local factors. Understanding these local dynamics is essential to developing pragmatic policy solutions
tailored to the broadband challenges facing each community.
Connect Minnesota survey research shows that as of March 2010, just less than three-quarters (72%) of Minneso-
ta residents have a broadband connection in the home (see Figure 1), which implies an adoption gap for the state
of Minnesota of 28% of households, smaller than the national adoption gap measured by the FCC.5 This implies
that approximately one-quarter of Minnesota households have basic broadband available but, for various reasons,
are choosing not to subscribe to the service in their home. Of the approximately one-quarter of Minnesotans with-
out a home broadband connection, 48% report a lack of interest in broadband, 35% report a lack of a computer
as the primary barrier to broadband, 31% say broadband is too expensive, and 16% report lack of broadband
availability to their home.
Figure 1: Minnesota Technology Adoption Summary
Use dial-up from home 7%
Use the Internet someplace other than home 10%
Use broadband Don’t know if home Internet

from home 72% service is dial-up or broadband 2%
Do not use the Internet 9%
Connect Minnesota survey data also show that 15% of Minnesota residents do not own a home computer. This
translates to more than 588,000 adults without a home computer, with 73% of those without a computer saying
they do not believe they need one.
FCC national data indicates that non-adopters are generally senior citizens, members of ethnic minorities, rural
dwellers, people with disabilities, people of low income, and/or people with less education, and these data are
largely in line with estimated adoption rates by these same demographic groups in the state of Minnesota, with
broadband adoption rates for seniors, low-income households, low-income households with children, minorities,
those with disabilities, and rural households all falling below the statewide broadband adoption average of 72%.6
This report also details the current impact of key components of the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) program.
The FCC Universal Service Fund reforms currently underway are likely to have important implications across the
state, and further examination of the impact of comprehensive USF disbursements across Minnesota communities
5 Broadband Adoption and Use in America: OBI Working Paper Series No. 1, J. Horrigan, Federal Communications Commission, February 2010.
6 Ibid.
4
is recommended in order to assess the historical and ongoing impact of this federal program upon the broadband
market in Minnesota and evaluate the implications of proposed reforms.
The extent of broadband stimulus funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that has been obli-
gated to Minnesota is detailed in Section 3.5. To date, over $250 million has been announced for projects in Min-
nesota, with an additional $179 million provided to projects serving multiple U.S. states of which Minnesota is one.
Connect Minnesota’s broadband availability estimates are compared to county-level availability estimates derived
in the FCC study “The Broadband Availability Gap,” part of the NBP.7 This study informs the national debate over
Universal Service Fund reform currently led by the FCC. Connect Minnesota estimates that 93.76% of Minnesota
households have broadband available at download speeds of 3 Mbps or more. By contrast, the FCC estimates
that nationwide, approximately 95% of households have broadband available at download speeds of 4 Mbps or
more. A county-level comparison of the two studies reveals and explains disparities in broadband availability esti-
mates, particularly in counties with lower population density.
Disparities evident at the local level between the Connect Minnesota broadband inventory and the FCC Availability
Gap simulation for the state of Minnesota likely result from regional or locally specific factors not evident in the ag-
gregated estimates of the FCC. It is important to continue gathering and validating broadband inventory and adop-
tion data in the state of Minnesota – particularly in rural areas – in order to accurately measure the broadband gaps
across the state and inform the ongoing Universal Service Fund reform debate currently underway at the FCC.
Policy Considerations
The FCC’s NBP recommends a series of strategies to ensure that broadband is more affordable and accessible to
all Americans. The NBP recommends a holistic approach to address the availability and adoption gaps by tackling
key barriers to adoption including relevance, affordability, digital literacy, and availability. The holistic approach
includes programs aimed to encourage adoption in the home, as well as the strengthening of public computing
and Internet access capacity at community anchor institutions (schools, libraries, hospitals, etc.). This approach
is consistent with the programs that Congress unanimously mandated in the BDIA. The NBP and BDIA call for a
series of principles and programs to be implemented at the federal, state, and local levels for achieving pragmatic
solutions to the broadband availability and adoption gaps. Key among these are the following recommendations
and activities that Connect Minnesota believes to be particularly relevant to the state of Minnesota and its com-
munities.8
Strategies to Address the Broadband Availability Gap

■■ Conduct further analysis of the impact of Universal Service Fund and Intercarrier Compensation Rules
Reform upon communities across Minnesota. Further research and analysis of FCC data and proposals is
recommended to better understand the impact of proposed reforms.
■■ Encourage coordination at the state and local level aimed to achieve economies of scale and promote ef-
ficiency of public investments, including comprehensive planning for broadband in infrastructure projects;
joint deployment of broadband conduit alongside state financed or enabled infrastructure projects; estab-
lishment of “Gigabit Communities” or “Broadband Corridors” in regions in the state; and assessing the
possibility of developing a set of state master contracts to expedite the placement of wireless towers on
state government property and buildings.
■■ Craft specific planning activities for rural and tribal areas in the state. Large, sparsely populated areas
7 The Broadband Availability Gap: OBI Technical Paper No. 1, Federal Communications Commission, April 2010.
8 These recommendations are made by the Connect Minnesota program and not necessarily the Minnesota Department of Commerce.
5 Connect Minnesota
dominate the Minnesota landscape, and any efforts to provide high-speed broadband services will require
a robust partnership between the public and private sectors.
■■ Facilitate further expansion of mobile 3G and 4G networks by streamlining local and state rules and regula-
tions affecting the cost and build-out speed of towers supporting these networks.
■■ Encourage development of statewide “smart grids” that leverage the state’s broadband infrastructure,
making Minnesota a more efficient producer and consumer of energy.
■■ Promote lower costs of access to key network inputs such as utility-owned poles, ducts, conduits, and
rights-of-way.
■■ Leverage the opportunities potentially available under the extended SBDD grant program to promote
public-private partnerships to address existing gaps in the network at the local level.
■■ Continue efforts to measure and map broadband inventory data. The May 2010 Connect Minnesota es-
timates of broadband inventory and mapping is a first-of-its-kind tool that enables a clearer picture of the
challenges and opportunities for broadband expansion in Minnesota. This report summarizes the results
of this research at the county level, and concludes that when it comes to broadband, one-size-fits-all does
not apply. It is not enough to evaluate statewide trends and broadband inventory. Granular data at the
county level and beyond is necessary to accurately measure the challenges on the ground and develop
sound, pragmatic policy to address them. Hence, continued efforts to collect, validate, and benchmark
broadband supply and demand data across the state is recommended.
Strategies to Address the Broadband Adoption Gap

■■ Promote and facilitate local community engagement aimed to address local barriers to adoption and de-
velop pragmatic solutions tailored to each community.
■■ Promote public-private partnerships at the state and local levels to build education and awareness cam-
paigns focused on the benefits of broadband technology among at-risk populations. Awareness cam-
paigns should target at-risk populations and address the concrete and pragmatic benefits that broadband
technology can afford every community, neighborhood, school, library, community center, and household.
Leverage the potential opportunity under the extended SBDD grant program to conduct statewide broad-
band awareness campaigns and local, grassroots broadband adoption stimulation strategies.
■■ Expand, improve, or create pragmatic digital literacy programs at the state and local level and leverage
digital literacy resources available via the NBP proposed National Digital Literacy Program.
■■ Encourage public-private collaboration to educate consumers and families about the reality of online risks
and promote online safety practices among children and citizens. Work with not-for-profits promoting
online safety practices and encourage online safety practices and principles across various state depart-
ments and among educators in the state of Minnesota.
■■ Leverage the proposed federal National Broadband Clearinghouse portal aimed to promote best practices
and information sharing, as well as the federal Online Digital Literacy Portal program.
■■ Promote expansion of publicly available computing and online resources leveraging federal, state, local,
and private funds. Optimize access to federal resources available through programs such as the USF
Schools and Libraries Program (E-Rate) and Rural Health Care Program as well as public funding available
through the federal Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).
■■ Monitor and assess how the proposed reform in the NBP of the Low Income Program under the Universal
Service Fund will affect Minnesotans.
■■ Coordinate with Minnesota tribal nations on broadband issues. The NBP recognizes the importance of
working with tribal nations to develop programs tailored to address the particular technology adoption
challenges faced by these communities.
6
The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force
Finally, this technical paper examines certain policy goals or recommendations made by the Minnesota Ultra High-
Speed Broadband Task Force in a report released in 2009, and provides benchmark data on where the state of
Minnesota stands with regard to these previously identified goals or policy recommendation.
7 Connect Minnesota
1. Introduction
Connect Minnesota is working in partnership with the Minnesota Broadband Advisory Task Force and the Minne-
sota Department of Commerce to implement the State Broadband Data and Development grant program (SBDD)
in the state. The SBDD grant program was created by the Broadband Data Improvement Act (BDIA), unanimously
passed by Congress in 2008 and funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in 2009.9 The
original SBDD grant program included two key components as defined in the Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA)
released by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, in
2009: the Broadband Mapping and Planning Programs.10
In April 2010, Connect Minnesota produced a map of the inventory of broadband availability across the state. The
purpose of this program is to collect comprehensive data from all broadband providers to create an inventory of
the broadband infrastructure across the state. A key goal of the mapping exercise is to identify communities and
households that remain unserved or underserved by broadband service; information that is essential to estimate
the “Broadband Availability Gap” and understand the scope and scale of providing universal broadband service
to all citizens across the state. The April 2010 Connect Minnesota Broadband Inventory Map is the first update to
the first comprehensive inventory of broadband infrastructure in Minnesota completed by Connect Minnesota in
February 2009. The inventory will be updated twice yearly with the next upcoming submission scheduled for the
spring of 2011.
The map in Figure 2 has been included for illustration purposes only. A high-quality version of this map is available
at:
ftp://ftp.connectmn.org/CMNPublic/Connect_Minnesota_Mapping/Statewide_Maps/MN_Statewide_Broadband_
Official.pdf
9 Broadband Data Improvement Act, P.L. 110-385, (“BDIA”).

10 State Broadband and Development Grant Program Notice of Funding Availability, NTIA, U.S. Department of Commerce, July 9, 2009. (“SBDD
NOFA”). Available at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/frnotices/2009/FR_BBNOFA_090709.pdf
8
Figure 2
Minnesota Broadband Service Inventory
9 Connect Minnesota
The Planning program complements and builds upon this Mapping program. To complement the broadband in-
ventory and mapping data, Connect Minnesota has undertaken survey research to understand broadband demand
trends across the state. In the spring of 2010, Connect Minnesota surveyed a sample of 1,200 households across
the state to inquire about their current use of broadband and related technologies. The purpose of this research
is to better understand the drivers and barriers to technology and broadband adoption and estimate the “Broad-
band Adoption Gap” across the state of Minnesota. Key questions the data address are: Which citizens are using
broadband technology across the state of Minnesota? How and where are they using it across the state? How is
this technology impacting Minnesota households and citizens? And, importantly, who is not adopting broadband
service and why? What are the barriers that still prevent citizens from embracing this empowering technology?
The demand-side survey data and the mapping inventory describing the state of broadband supply in Minnesota
afford the first-of-its-kind comprehensive review of the state of broadband in Minnesota. Based on these data, this
report aims to provide a detailed review of the current state of broadband in Minnesota that will spark discussion
across multiple broadband stakeholders in the state on key policy goals and strategies to expand and enhance the
broadband experience for all Minnesotans. The report should be understood as a beginning - and not an end - for
a comprehensive review of matters affecting the broadband market in the state.
To this goal, the report analyzes this complementary demand-side and supply-side research and contrasts the
data with national benchmarks released by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as part of the National
Broadband Plan.11 This report also utilizes the work of the Minnesota Broadband Ultra-High Speed Task Force’s
report from 2009, which included several broadband availability and adoption goals, and provides a benchmark as
to where the state stands in meeting the same.
The state of Minnesota has obtained further federal resources under the SBDD grant program expansion of mid-
2010 that complement the Mapping and Planning SBDD grants awarded in 2009. In partnership with the Min-
nesota Broadband Advisory Task Force, Connect Minnesota submitted in July an extended application for federal
funds under the SBDD grant program. This application requested funding to finance a series of complementary
programs including: expanded broadband inventory and demand-side data collection; as well as technical assis-
tance to the state of Minnesota.
This report is structured as follows: Section II provides a summary overview of the estimated broadband adop-
tion gaps across the state of Minnesota. Section III provides a detailed analysis of the broadband availability gap
across the state. This section presents an analysis of the SBDD broadband inventory data and compares and
contrasts estimated broadband inventory in Minnesota with national benchmarks. Based on these data, Section
IV summarizes policy recommendations inspired by the principles and vision of the Minnesota Ultra-High Speed
Task Force, as well as the FCC’s NBP as they apply to the state of Minnesota. Appendix A of this report includes
the Connect Minnesota Technology Assessment, June 2010, providing detailed results from Connect Minnesota’s
spring 2010 residential survey research. Finally, Appendix B provides a list of participating broadband providers in
Minnesota’s SBDD program, without which the creation of Minnesota’s broadband inventory maps would not have
been possible.
11 Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan, Federal Communications Commission, April 2010. (“National Broadband Plan” or “NBP”).
Available at http://www.broadband.gov/plan/.
10
2. The Broadband Adoption Gap
As part of the SBDD grant program, Connect Minnesota has collected consumer survey data aimed at under-
standing demand-side trends and barriers in the Minnesota broadband market. This section summarizes the main
findings of this research, contrasts Minnesota trends with available national benchmarks, and discusses policy rec-
ommendations that stem from the data and the FCC’s NBP policy recommendations.12 Appendix A of this report
presents the Connect Minnesota Residential Technology Assessment, released in October 2010, which includes
detailed results of Minnesota’s consumer survey research.
Slightly more than one-quarter (28%) of Minnesota residents do not have broadband service in the home, an
adoption gap for the state of Minnesota that is just less than the national adoption gap measured by the FCC. The
percentage of households across Minnesota that have broadband service in the home is 72%; by comparison, na-
tional surveys show that 67% of American households subscribe to home broadband service. Statewide, 85% of
all residents own a home computer. This translates into over 588,000 adults without a home computer, with 73%
of those without a computer saying they do not believe they need one.
Seven percent of Minnesota residents use dial-up service to connect to the Internet and 2% are not certain wheth-
er they use broadband or dial-up in the home. Ten percent of adults surveyed report accessing the Internet from
places other than the home, for a total of 91% who report accessing the Internet from either the home or some-
place else. This contrasts with national estimates of 74% of adult residents who access the Internet from home or
somewhere else.13 Across Minnesota, 81% of surveyed adults report accessing the Internet from home; 44% from
work; and 16% from a library. Twenty-six percent of Minnesota residents access the Internet via a cell phone or
mobile device. Finally, 9% report that they do not use the Internet (See Figure 3).
Figure 3: Minnesota Technology Adoption Summary
Use dial-up from home 7%
Use the Internet someplace other than home 10%
Use broadband Don’t know if home Internet

from home 72% service is dial-up or broadband 2%
Do not use the Internet 9%
12 All Minnesota data in this section is based on Connect Minnesota’s consumer survey research, available in Appendix A: Connect Minnesota
Residential Technology Assessment, June 2010. All national data, unless otherwise indicated, is based on the FCC study Broadband Adoption
and Use åin America: OBI Working Paper Series No. 1, J. Horrigan, Federal Communications Commission, February 2010, (“FCC Broadband
Adoption and Use”). Available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296442A1.pdf
13 Internet, Broadband, and Cell Phone Statistics, Pew Internet and American Life Project, January 5, 2010.
11 Connect Minnesota
A 72% broadband adoption rate contrasts with the estimates of the broadband availability gap in Minnesota
presented in this report. According to Connect Minnesota broadband inventory estimates, 96.59% of all Minne-
sota households have broadband available (or are served) at the basic speeds of 768 Kbps download/200 Kbps
upload.14 This implies that just less than one-quarter of Minnesota households have broadband available but, for
various reasons, are choosing not to subscribe to the service in the home.
This adoption gap is slightly less than that measured by the FCC at the national level but still suggests that when it
comes to broadband, the old adage of “build it and they will come” does not always work. The NBP recommends
that this adoption gap needs to be tackled at the federal, state, and local level through a series of complementary
strategies. The NBP recommends that programs aimed to increase adoption rates for low-income people need
to be modernized to support broadband, improve participation in the digital economy and society, and protect
against waste, fraud, and abuse.
2.1 Broadband Adopters and Non-Adopters

FCC national data indicate that non-adopters are generally senior citizens, members of ethnic minorities, rural
dwellers, people with disabilities, people of low income, and/or people with less education.15 These data are large-
ly in line with estimated adoption rates by these demographic groups in the state of Minnesota. Figure 4 reports
Minnesota computer and broadband adoption data across these same demographic groups.16
Figure 4: Minnesota Technology Adoption by Demographic

Computer ownership Broadband adoption
85%
78% 77%
72%
69%
66%
58%
53% 53%
46%
39%
35%
Low-income
Age 65 Low-income
Statewide households Minority Rural residents
or older households
with children
14 See Section 3 of this report.

15 See FCC Broadband Adoption and Use, Exhibit 1, p. 13.
16 See Appendix A, Slide 8.
12
While the statewide average broadband adoption rate is 72%, broadband adoption rates in Minnesota are 39%
among adults age 65 and older (compared to a national average of 35%17); 35% among households with annual
incomes below $25,000 (comparable national statistics put this figure at 40%18); 53% among low-income house-
holds with children; 66% among minority households; and 58% among rural households (compared to 50% of
rural residents nationally19).
2.2 Barriers to Adoption

The FCC Broadband Adoption and Use study indicates that the main reason people do not adopt broadband is
cost of the service, with 36% of respondents who do not adopt broadband citing cost as the biggest barrier to
adoption. Fifteen percent specifically point to monthly fees for service as the biggest barrier, 10% say they can-
not afford a computer, and 9% cite activation fees and reluctance to enter into long-term contracts as a barrier to
adoption. Twenty percent of non-adopters cite digital literacy as the biggest barrier to adoption. Twelve percent
of respondents cite lack of comfort with computers and 10% cite hazards of online safety. Relevance is the third
most commonly cited barrier to adoption. Nineteen percent of non-adopters cite relevance as the biggest bar-
rier. Five percent report that they are content with existing dial-up service or don’t need more speed; 5% believe
the Internet is a waste of time; 4% report there is nothing they want to see online; and 4% don’t use the Internet
much. Other reasons measured include use of the Internet at work, with 3% of non-adopters citing this, and lack
of broadband availability reported by 5% of non-adopters.20
Figure 5 reports data collected in the state of Minnesota, which identifies similar barriers to adoption of broadband
technology.
Figure 5: Minnesota Barriers to Broadband Adoption
Percent of Minnesota residents with no home broadband service*
I don’t need broadband/the Internet

or don’t know why I don’t subscribe 48%
I don’t have a computer 35%
Too expensive 31%
I access broadband someplace else 17%
Broadband is not
available where I live
16%
Concerns about fraud or identity theft 12%
Available broadband
service is not fast enough
2%
*Percentages do not add up to 100% because individuals could give multiple responses.
17 Broadband Adoption and Use in America: OBI Working Paper Series No. 1, J. Horrigan, Federal Communications Commission, February 2010.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
20 FCC Broadband Adoption and Use. It is important to note that the FCC survey methodology is different than that of the residential technology
assessment conducted by Connect Minnesota, in that the FCC’s questions were designed to have respondents identify the single biggest
barrier to broadband adoption, as opposed to listing any barriers impacting their decision to not adopt. Thus, any comparison between Connect
Minnesota and FCC adoption statistics is not a true “apples to apples” comparison; the FCC statistics are offered to provide context for some of
the broadband adoption statistics contained in this report.
Figure 6: Minnesota Barriers to Computer Ownership
Percent of Minnesota residents with no computer at home
I don’t need a computer,

or don’t know why I need one 73%
Too expensive 32%
I use a computer someplace else 19%
Computers are too complicated 3%
Other 1%
The top barriers to adoption among Minnesota adults who do not have broadband in the home and those who do
not own a computer in the home are:
■■ Relevance: Forty-eight percent of Minnesota residents, compared to 19% nationally who cited relevance
at the biggest barrier to broadband adoption, who do not have home broadband service say at least one
barrier to broadband adoption is because they do not need Internet service or don’t understand the ben-
efits it affords. Seventy-three percent of adults who do not have a computer in the home say they don’t
need one or don’t know what they need a computer for. Among rural non computer owners, the belief that
they do not need a computer or don’t know why they need a computer is still the top barrier to adoption
(76%).21
■■ Computer Ownership: Thirty-five percent of broadband non-adopters say that the lack of a home com-
puter is a barrier to broadband adoption.
■■ Affordability: Thirty-one percent of broadband non-adopters say broadband is too expensive, compared
to 36% nationally, and 32% of those lacking a computer in the home say it is because Internet services are
too expensive.22
■■ Availability: Sixteen percent of Minnesotans who do not subscribe to home broadband service report a
lack of available broadband service.
■■ Other Locations: Seventeen percent of broadband non-adopters claim they access the Internet from
somewhere else (22% of those without any home Internet access report accessing the Internet from
somewhere else).
■■ Digital Literacy and Perceived Online Risks: Three percent of non-computer-owners report they
don’t have one because computers are too complicated. Twelve percent of broadband non-adopters and
eighteen percent of Internet non-adopters report concerns about fraud and identity theft as a barrier to
adoption.23
21 FCC Broadband Adoption and Use.

22 Ibid.
23 See Appendix A.
14
2.3 Broadband Applications and Uses
Broadband is a tool that enables citizens, companies, and government to better communicate, connect, and
engage. To better understand how broadband is currently affecting the lives and endeavors of Minnesota house-
holds today, and what opportunities exist to expand the benefits of this technology, survey research conducted by
Connect Minnesota explores the online applications used by Minnesotans.24
The top applications used by Minnesota Internet users include sending or receiving e-mail, researching and pur-
chasing products or services online, using a search engine, and communicating with friends and family online.
■■ E-Health: Seven out of ten Minnesota Internet users search for health or medical information or interact
with doctors or healthcare professionals online, while 37% communicate with their health insurance com-
pany and 31% interact with doctors or healthcare professionals online.
■■ E-Government Services: E-government services are utilized by many Minnesota Internet users; 52%
report that they search online for information about government services or policies. In addition, 48% con-
duct online transactions with government offices (such as e-filing taxes or filling out forms), 37% interact
with Minnesota state government offices, 28% interact with local government offices, and 25% interact
with elected officials or candidates online.
■■ E-Education: Many Minnesota Internet users go online for educational purposes. Statewide, 46%
conduct research for schoolwork online, 39% interact with teachers online, and 22% take classes online,
compared to 24% nationally.25
■■ E-Jobs: Minnesota residents also use the Internet for work purposes. Among Minnesota Internet users,
59% interact with businesses, 56% interact with their co-workers online, 46% go online to search for jobs
or employment, and 37% report that they go online to work from home at least occasionally. Further, in
Minnesota, 20% of employed adults report that they telework. Teleworking could also provide an addi-
tional boost to the state’s workforce, as 17% of retirees, nearly three out of five unemployed adults, and
almost one-third of homemakers say they would likely join the workforce if empowered to do so by tele-
working.
24 See Appendix A.
25 FCC Broadband Adoption and Use.
3. Connect Minnesota Broadband Inventory and Analysis
In October 2010, Connect Minnesota, working in partnership with the Minnesota Department of Commerce and
the Minnesota Broadband Advisory Task Force, produced an updated map of the inventory of broadband avail-
ability across the state. This mapping exercise was funded by the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, and is in compliance with the rules and requirements of the federal
State Broadband Data and Development grant program.26 The purpose of this exercise is to measure the level
of broadband service available to Minnesota households and identify communities and households that remain
unserved or underserved by broadband service.
The FCC’s National Broadband Plan sets six goals that frame the FCC’s recommendations for federal, state, and
local policy objectives and strategies for the U.S. broadband market. Based on these six goals (which are listed in
Section 4 along with goals crafted by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Task Force), the NBP offers a series of nor-
mative recommendations for policy measures to help spur innovation, investment, and adoption of the broadband
service.
One key area related to all of these recommendations is the goal of universal availability of broadband infrastruc-
ture. In order to understand which of these policy measures are best suited to address the challenges to broad-
band expansion faced in Minnesota, this report first examines how the broadband market in Minnesota compares
against these national goals set in the NBP.
Results of the Minnesota mapping exercise can be found at Connect Minnesota’s interactive online mapping plat-
form available at http://www.connectmn.org/mapping/interactive_map.php.
It is important to note that the inventory of broadband measured in these maps and used to conduct this analysis
remains preliminary in nature. The Connect Minnesota Fall 2010 broadband inventory and Broadband Inventory
Map are updates to the first map of its kind created in the state of Minnesota by Connect Minnesota in Febru-
ary 2009. Several elements of Connect Minnesota’s latest mapping exercise differ from the initial 2009 mapping
activity. Data collected includes the majority of known broadband providers in the state; however, there are a few
broadband providers that were unable or unwilling to participate in this first round of data collection. The maps will
be further completed as networks owned by these providers are included in the Minnesota broadband mapping in-
ventory updates. Further, the measured broadband inventory provides an estimate of the true extent of broadband
coverage across the state. There is a degree of measurement error inherent in this exercise, which needs to be
taken into consideration when analyzing the data. This measurement error will decrease as the maps become ac-
tive tools for local, state, and federal stakeholders, who will be able to identify areas where the displayed coverage
is underestimated or overestimated. Connect Minnesota solicits and welcomes such feedback, to be analyzed in
collaboration with broadband providers to correct errors identified in the maps.27 The following section summa-
rizes results from these mapping efforts focusing at the state and county levels.
3.1 Broadband Availability in Minnesota – A State Bird’s-eye View

3.1.1 Fixed Broadband Inventory
This section provides a bird’s-eye, statewide assessment of the availability of broadband speeds and platforms
in Minnesota. However, as discussed in more detail below, statewide figures can often present a distorted view.
26 SBDD NOFA: RIN 0660–ZA29 July 8, 2009.

27 Questions regarding the maps and data collection can be directed to info@connectmn.org.
16
With the majority of the population residing in the state’s four urban and 17 suburban counties (the 66 remain-
ing counties are considered rural) statewide averages do not present a complete picture. There are, in fact, many
areas and communities in Minnesota that do not have access to robust broadband infrastructure today, a gap that
can only widen as demands on bandwidth increase over time.
The total number of households in Minnesota in 2000 was 1,895,127 for a total population of 5,266,214.28 Table
2 (similar to Table 1) reports estimates of the number and percentages of households across Minnesota having
broadband available at various download speed tiers.29 Table 2 is based on broadband inventory data from all ter-
restrial, non-mobile platforms, including cable, DSL, fiber, and fixed wireless, but excluding households served by
mobile or satellite broadband.
In October 2010, fixed broadband was available to approximately 1,830,480 households, or 96.59% of all Minne-
sota households.30 This implies that approximately 64,647 Minnesota households, or 3.41%, remain unserved by
terrestrial, fixed broadband.31,32 Further, approximately 1,776,814 households, or 93.76%, across Minnesota have
broadband available at 3 Mbps download speeds or faster. The percentage of Minnesota households having fixed
broadband access available of at least 6 Mbps download speeds is estimated at 90.79%.
Table 2 – Estimate of Broadband Service Availability in the State of Minnesota –

By Speed Tier Among Fixed Platforms
Percent Households
SBDD Download Speed Tiers Unserved Households Served Households
By Speed Tier
At Least 768 Kbps 64,647 1,830,480 96.59%
At Least 1.5 Mbps 77,353 1,817,774 95.92%
At Least 3 Mbps 118,313 1,776,814 93.76%
At Least 6 Mbps 174,467 1,720,660 90.79%
At Least 10 Mbps 301,312 1,593,815 84.10%
At Least 25 Mbps 850,309 1,044,818 55.13%
At Least 50 Mbps 937,613 957,514 50.53%
At Least 100 Mbps 1,006,996 888,131 46.86%

28 National Census, 2000, U.S. Census Bureau. Data collected during the 2010 decennial census is not yet publicly available. The total number
of households, and thus the estimated number of households served by broadband, will be updated by the Connect Minnesota program once
2010 Census Bureau data becomes available (anticipated Spring 2011).
29 Speed tiers are based on the tiers defined by the NTIA in the SBDD NOFA.
30 Broadband is defined according to current NTIA and FCC definition, or 768 Kbps download and 200 Kbps upload speeds.
31 “Unserved area means a proposed funded service area, composed of one or more contiguous Census Blocks, where at least 90 percent of
households in the proposed funded service area lack access to facilities-based, terrestrial broadband service, either fixed or mobile, at the
minimum broadband transmission speed (set forth in the definition of broadband above). A household has access to broadband service if the
household can readily subscribe to that service upon request.” SBDD NOFA Section III Page 32549
32 While the NTIA definition of “unserved” and “underserved” areas encompasses all broadband platforms, including mobile wireless networks,
Table 3 focuses only on fixed, terrestrial broadband infrastructure. Table 8 includes data across all terrestrial platforms.
While there is no national benchmark of broadband available at this time (the SBDD program is scheduled to
generate a national broadband map in February of 2011 that will provide such reference), measures obtained by
Connected Nation, (Connect Minnesota’s parent company) across 11 other states plus Puerto Rico suggests that
broadband investment in Minnesota is on par with that of other states similar to Minnesota which are highly rural.
Table 3 reports data collected by Connected Nation in the winter and spring of 2010 in the following states and
territories: Alaska, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Ohio, Puerto Rico, South Caro-
lina, Tennessee, and Texas.33 Following the NTIA definition of broadband, this measure of broadband availability
includes any connection providing service of at least 768 Kbps downstream and 200 Kbps upstream speeds. The
data reported includes broadband service by all types of platforms except for satellite and terrestrial mobile wire-
less broadband service.
Table 3 – Estimate of Available Terrestrial Fixed Broadband Service

of At Least 768 Kbps Downstream - 200 Kbps Upstream
Selected States
Households with Available
Density of Households Across State
Broadband Service
Alaska 0.39 86.0%
Florida 117.53 96.2%
Illinois 82.61 97.9%
Iowa 20.57 95.4%
Kansas 12.69 97.23%
Michigan 66.64 96.8%
Minnesota 23.81 96.59%
Nevada 6.84 97.9%
Ohio 108.57 98.2%
Puerto Rico 368.62 91.27%
South Carolina 50.94 94.7%
Tennessee 54.17 94.1%
Texas 28.24 96.6%

Data includes all terrestrial technology platforms except for mobile broadband services.
Source: Availability data from Connected Nation, 2010. Household density data from US Census, 2000, US Census Bureau.
Data from Illinois, Kansas and Tennessee dates from March, 2010. Data from Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Ohio, Puer-
to Rico, and South Carolina from April, 2010. Data from Iowa and Texas from May, 2010. Data from Alaska from June 2010.
The average broadband household availability measured across these 13 states and territories is 94.95%, suggest-
ing that the broadband inventory measured in Minnesota is higher than estimates across these states.
33 Research funded by the ARRA and compliant with SBDD data requirements and definitions.
18
3.1.2 Broadband Availability by Technology Platform
The fall 2010 Minnesota Broadband Inventory Map is based on data from 129 terrestrial fixed broadband providers
(92 providers, many of which offer broadband service via multiple platforms). Together these broadband providers
offer service to an estimated 96.59% of the Minnesota households.
The broadband sector serves a very large geographic area where the majority (60%) of residents live in the Twin
Cities metropolitan area. Research shows that the most represented technology across the state is mobile broad-
band.34 Table 4 below reports that there are a total of 5 mobile wireless broadband providers accounted for in the
state of Minnesota’s broadband map serving an estimate of 1,849,107 households, or 97.57%. There are a total
of 15 cable providers reflected on the map, serving 78.17% of the state’s households. Fixed wireless availability is
limited to 22.44% of households across the state from 26 fixed wireless providers. There are 59 Digital Subscriber
Line (DSL) broadband providers in Minnesota who collectively provide service to 90.30% of Minnesota house-
holds.
Fiber availability is low, with 29 providers offering fiber to the premise to just 75,447 (or 3.98%) of households
across the state. In fact, fiber coverage is not available at all in 34 Minnesota counties. Because fiber-optic broad-
band is one of the technologies capable of providing higher-speed broadband services, this lack of fiber availability
has implications for next-generation broadband capability in Minnesota and the state’s goal of ubiquitous broad-
band availability of at least 10-20 Mbps download by 2015, and reinforces the FCC’s NBP policy recommenda-
tions to create Gigabit Community Initiatives and Broadband Corridors.
Table 4 – Availability Estimate by Broadband

Platform in the State of Minnesota
Served Percent of Number of Providers -

Platform Type
Households Households Served By Platform
Cable 1,481,376 78.17% 15
DSL 1,711,313 90.30% 59
Fiber 75,447 3.98% 29
Fixed Wireless 425,296 22.44% 26
Mobile 1,849,107 97.57% 5
Total – All Platform Except Mobile 1,830,480 96.59% 129
Total – All Platforms 1,887,242 99.58% 134

The breakdown of broadband availability by technology in Table 4 above showcases the structural characteris-
tics of the Minnesota broadband market. The most important among them is the low availability of fixed wireless
broadband; the near ubiquitous availability of mobile wireless in areas where the Minnesota population resides;
and the scarcity of FTTP (by percentage of households) in Minnesota, although FTTP is found in 52 of Minnesota’s
counties.
34 High-Speed Services for Internet Access: Status as of December 31, 2008, Industry Analysis and Technology Division Wireline Competition Bureau,
Federal Communications Commission, February 2010. Available at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296239A1.pdf
3.1.3 Household Density across Unserved, Underserved, and Served Areas
Minnesota is a very large state (geographically, the 12th largest in the U.S.) with the highest percentage of its
population living in the Twin Cities area. Given the direct correlation between density of population and the cost of
providing broadband infrastructure, this factor should have a significant role in explaining infrastructure investment
across Minnesota. The average density or number of households, per square mile, across Minnesota is 23.81,
varying greatly by county (see county-level analysis in Section 3.2).35 Table 5 presents average household density
by Census Block in areas that the broadband inventory measures as unserved, underserved, and served, based
on NTIA definitions. Analysis of served and unserved territories by density of households is an important measure
that provides an objective means to assess the challenge of infrastructure build-out in unserved or underserved ar-
eas. It also provides critical information for the debate over Universal Service Fund reform underway. These data
will further assist in benchmarking the “supply-side” challenge faced in Minnesota against national data. At the
present time, national benchmarks do not exist. As further data is released across states from the SBDD mapping
efforts, it will be possible to assess this comparative analysis between Minnesota and other states. Further, these
data provide an objective benchmark for assessing progress of infrastructure build-out moving forward, based on
future SBDD data submissions.
Consistent with expectations, the data show correlations between density of households and infrastructure build-
out across Minnesota. The average density of households per Census Blocks measured as unserved is a mere
2.38, when accounting for all Census Blocks, and only 3.42 when considering only Census Blocks with population.
When considering only areas that have service offered with download speeds of 3 Mbps or more, average popu-
lation density is estimated at the much higher 43.23. In short, as expected broadband network investment has
focused on areas of higher population density and the areas that remain unserved have very low density of popula-
tion. It is important to note, as discussed in Section 3.2 below, that an analysis of data at the county level reveals
that this correlation does not hold across all counties.
Table 5 – Average Number of Households Per Square Mile Across

Census Blocks with Fixed, Terrestrial Broadband Available
Census Blocks
By Download Speeds All Census Blocks
with Households
Below 768 Kbps - “Unserved” 2.38 3.42
Between 768-3000 Kbps - “Underserved” 4.56 5.2
At Least 768 Kbps 34.61 40.56
At Least 3 Mbps 43.23 51.03

Note: Data does not include mobile or satellite broadband.
35 U.S. Census, 2000, U.S. Census Bureau. Household density is defined as number of households per square mile of land area.
20
Table 6 reports broadband availability in Minnesota across areas defined as “rural” by the NTIA SBDD definition
standards.36 According to this definition approximately 836,051 households across Minnesota are classified as
rural (or 44.11% of total households). Of this, approximately 774,391 households are served by at least one ter-
restrial, non-mobile broadband provider with at least 768 Kbps download and 200 Kbps upload speeds, or 92.62%
of all rural households. The number of rural households remaining unserved is estimated to be 61,660. The total
number of households – rural and non-rural – estimated to be unserved by non-mobile broadband across Min-
nesota is 64,647. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of unserved households (95.38%) left in Minnesota are in
rural areas.
Table 6 – Rural Availability Estimate of Broadband Service

of at Least 768 Kbps Download/200 Kbps Upload
Unserved Rural Percent of Rural

Platform Type Total Rural Households
Households Households Served
Fixed Broadband (Excluding Mobile) 836,051 61,660 92.62%
All Terrestrial Platforms (Including Mobile) 836,051 7,606 99.09%

3.1.4 All Terrestrial Broadband Inventory – Including Mobile Wireless Networks

Table 7 represents data of availability of broadband across Minnesota including all types of terrestrial platforms,
including mobile broadband. In October 2010, there were a total of 5 facilities-based mobile broadband providers
in Minnesota, collectively serving an estimated 97.57% of all households.37,38
Taking into account both fixed and mobile broadband service available, an estimated 99.58% of Minnesota house-
holds had broadband available from at least one provider at download speeds of 768 Kbps or higher. This implies
that 0.42% of households remain unserved by a terrestrial broadband connection (including mobile).
36 “Rural Area. Any area, as confirmed by the latest decennial census of the Bureau of the Census, which is not located within: (i) a city,
town, or incorporated area that has a population of greater than 20,000 inhabitants; or (ii) an urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a
city or town that has a population of greater than 50,000 inhabitants. For purposes of the definition of rural area, an urbanized area means
a densely populated territory as defined in the latest decennial census of the U.S. Census Bureau.” SBDD NOFA Section III Page 32549
This analysis includes only used Census Blocks that following this definition are completely rural, and not any Census Blocks that fell within both
rural and non-rural.
37 Connect Minnesota, October 2010.
38 Note that this measure of broadband availability is based on households passed, not geography served. Further, consumers may experience
lower availability of mobile broadband service since typically each consumer has access to only one mobile broadband provider. Hence,
existence of mobile broadband service by one provider does not necessary imply that all mobile subscribers have access at that location. Only
subscribers to the mobile services available within that location will experience reception.
Table 7 – Estimate of Broadband Service Availability in the State of Minnesota -
By Speed Tier - All Terrestrial Platforms (Including Mobile)
Served Percent Households by

SBDD Download Speed Tiers Unserved Households
Household Tier
At Least 768 Kbps 7,885 1,887,242 99.58%
At Least 1.5 Mbps 10,979 1,884,148 99.42%
At Least 3 Mbps 21,096 1,874,031 98.89%
3.2 Broadband in Minnesota Counties

3.2.1 Terrestrial, Fixed Broadband Availability by County
This section examines the estimated broadband inventory by county across Minnesota. Figures 7 and 8 below
present estimated number and percentage of households served by terrestrial, non-mobile broadband at speeds
of 768 Kbps download/200 Kbps upload and above, as well as 3 Mbps download speeds or more, and including
household density by county.39 These data are also presented under Table 8. The data reveals significant vari-
ances in measured broadband inventory across counties, highlighting the importance of granular data in order to
identify gaps in infrastructure at the community level. Such information is essential to develop pragmatic policy
solutions for broadband expansion tailored to the challenges facing each community.
39 Based on NTIA definitions, broadband is defined as 768 Kbps download and 200 Kbps upload speeds or more. Areas with service
below these speeds are deemed “unserved.” Areas where broadband is available at speeds between 768 Kbps download and 200
Kbps upload and 3Mbps are defined as “underserved.” Areas where broadband is available at 3Mbps or above are defined as “served.”
SBDD NOFA. Technical Appendix Page 32557
22
Broadband Availability Figure
in the7 State of Minnesota
Percentage
Broadbandof Availability
Households in Served
the State by Terrestrial,
of Minnesota
Non-Mobile
Percentage Broadband
of Households Service
Served by Terrestrial,
Non-Mobile Broadband Service
At Least 768 Kbps Download/200 Kbps Upload Speeds
At LeastStatewide Availability:Kbps
768 Kbps Download/200 96.59%
Upload Speeds
Statewide Availability: 96.59%
Kittson Roseau
97.81% 93.33%
Lake of the Woods
94.54%
Marshall
94.73%
Koochiching
90.77%
Pennington
96.37% Beltrami
Cook
98.88% 47.62%
Red Lake
99.97%
Lake
Polk Clearwater 80.29%
96.71% 99.34% St. Louis
Itasca 87.6%
83.13%
Norman Mahnomen
98.29% 68.82%
Hubbard
90.95%
Cass
Becker
Clay 89.54%
91.28%
94.18%
Wadena Carlton
Aitkin
89.71% 85.97%
71.52%
Crow Wing
Wilkin Otter Tail 94.55%
96%
97.99%
Pine
<85%
89.89%
Todd
91.52% Morrison Mille Lacs
Grant Douglas 93.75%
92.54% Kanabec
85-90%
99.92% 99.61%
89.72%
Traverse
88.79%
Benton
90.01-93%
Stevens 97.56%
Pope Isanti
99.78% 93.71% Stearns
99.22%
97.92% Chisago
Big Stone Sherburne 99.42%
87.71%
Swift
99.51%
Anoka 93.01-96%
98.54% 99.59%
Wright
Kandiyohi
96.01-98%
Meeker Washington
99.27%
97.04% 96.36%
Chippewa Hennepin Ramsey
Lac qui Parle
98.52% 99.28% 99.88% 99.98% 99.41%
McLeod
99.99%
Carver 98.01-100%
Yellow Medicine Renville 99.76%
98.16% 91.82% Dakota
Scott
99.36% 99.68%
Sibley
91.93%
Lincoln Lyon Redwood Goodhue
97.37% 99.27% Le Sueur Rice 94.63%
77.08% Nicollet
87.66% 91.43% Wabasha
Brown 90.4%
83.5%
98.81%
Pipestone Murray Blue Earth Waseca Steele Dodge Olmsted Winona

Cottonwood Watonwan
97.95% 87.79% 93.41% 84.67% 89.47% 90.11% 96.33% 88.27%
89.12%
94%
Rock Nobles Fillmore Houston

Jackson Martin Faribault Freeborn Mower
98.84% 94.28% 84.95% 99.67% 88.27% 83.48% 75.97% 94.93%
95.86%
This same pattern exists when analyzing estimates of homes served at download speeds of 3 Mbps or more. While
the estimated statewide percentage of households served at speeds of 3 Mbps or more is 93.76%, county avail-
ability estimates range from Aitkin County, with only 42.3% of households served at these speeds, to McLeod
County, with 99.99% of households served and Hennepin County with 99.82% households served. 25 counties in
the state have less than 80% of households served at speeds of 3 Mbps or more.
24
Percentage
of Minnesota
Non-Mobile
At Least 3 Mbps Download Speeds
Statewide
At Least 3 Availability:
Mbps Download 93.76%
Speeds
Statewide Availability: 93.76%
Kittson Roseau
97.12% 81.31%
Lake of the Woods
87.61%
88.81% Marshall
Koochiching
82.29%
Pennington
86.81%
Cook
Beltrami
47.62%
Red Lake 98.09%
99.97%
Polk Lake
89.83% St. Louis 75.66%
Clearwater Itasca
85.63%
99.34% 79.5%
Norman Mahnomen
70.26% 59.14%
Hubbard
73.16%
Becker Cass
Clay
89.98% 84.42%
93.97%
Aitkin Carlton
Wadena
42.3% 72.93%
89.27%
Crow Wing
Otter Tail
92.68%
84.21%
Wilkin
78.72%
Pine
<40%
64.22%
Todd Morrison Mille Lacs
Grant Douglas 84.81% 82.94%
84.65% Kanabec
97.84% 97.41%
40-60%
60.43%
Traverse
72.24% Benton
96.32%
60.01-80%
Stevens Pope Isanti
95.36% Stearns
92.14%
95.87% 83.71% Chisago
Big Stone Sherburne
90.44%
99.36%
80.01-90%
75.97%
Swift Anoka
80.91% 99.28%
Wright
Kandiyohi
90.01-95%
Meeker 97.75% Washington
88.36%
92.49% Ramsey
Chippewa Hennepin
Lac qui Parle 84.31% 99.98%
99.82%
80.28%
Yellow Medicine Renville

McLeod
99.99%
Carver
99.64%
99.41%
95.01-100%
69.35% 78.2% Dakota
Scott
99.54%
99.09%
Sibley
83.39%
Lincoln Lyon Goodhue
Redwood Le Sueur
48.32% 79.41% Rice
42.69% Nicollet 86.77% 89.45%
90.33% Wabasha
Brown 83.14%
85.36% 78.86%

Cottonwood Watonwan
47.74% 69.45% 93.35% 83.95% 88.04% 88.18% 96.18% 88.03%
82.62% 92.17%

54.23% 79.02% 74.16% 94.93%
71.21% 99.64% 93.6% 82.63% 82.47%
While the estimated statewide percentage of households served by at least 768 Kbps download/200 Kbps upload
speeds is 96.59%, Table 8 reports significant variation of infrastructure build-out across counties.
Among the state’s 87 counties, 4 are urban, 17 are suburban, and the remaining 66 are rural. 26 counties across
the state have broadband service available to less than 90% of households.
These data reveal that across Minnesota counties, density of population (a critical factor determining infrastruc-
ture capital investment) is a good indicator of historical investment in broadband infrastructure, although in rural
counties with lower than average broadband availability, the majority of households are clustered together. For
example, Cook County, with only an estimated 47.62% households served, has an estimated 2,350 homes and a
household density of 1.62 households per square mile. Hence, it is a highly rural county with large portions un-
served by broadband infrastructure.
Table 8 – Estimated Availability of Broadband Service by County

Terrestrial Broadband (Excluding Mobile)
≥ 768 Download/
≥ 3 Mbps
200 Kbps Upload
Download Speeds
Speeds
Household Number of
County Percentage Households Served
Density Households
Aitkin 3.65 6,644 71.52% 42.30%
Anoka 251.24 106,428 99.59% 99.28%
Becker 9.04 11,844 91.28% 89.98%
Beltrami 5.72 14,337 98.88% 98.09%
Benton 32.00 13,065 97.56% 96.32%
Big Stone 4.78 2,377 87.71% 75.97%
Blue Earth 27.99 21,062 93.41% 93.35%
Brown 17.35 10,598 98.81% 85.36%
Carlton 14.02 12,064 85.97% 72.93%
Carver 68.22 24,356 99.76% 99.64%
Cass 5.40 10,893 89.54% 84.42%
Chippewa 9.20 5,361 99.28% 84.31%
Chisago 34.61 14,454 99.42% 90.44%
Clay 17.86 18,670 94.18% 93.97%
Clearwater 3.35 3,330 99.34% 99.34%
Cook 1.62 2,350 47.62% 47.62%
26
≥ 768 Download/
≥ 3 Mbps
200 Kbps Upload
Download Speeds
Speeds
Household Number of
Density Households
Cottonwood 7.68 4,917 89.12% 82.62%
Crow Wing 22.33 22,250 94.55% 92.68%
Dakota 230.26 131,151 99.68% 99.54%
Dodge 14.61 6,420 90.11% 88.18%
Douglas 20.93 13,276 99.61% 97.41%
Faribault 9.32 6,652 95.86% 93.60%
Fillmore 9.55 8,228 75.97% 74.16%
Freeborn 18.87 13,356 88.27% 82.63%
Goodhue 22.40 16,983 94.63% 89.45%
Grant 4.64 2,534 99.92% 97.84%
Hennepin 819.46 456,129 99.88% 99.82%
Houston 13.67 7,633 94.93% 94.93%
Hubbard 8.06 7,435 90.95% 73.16%
Isanti 25.59 11,236 99.22% 83.71%
Itasca 6.67 17,789 83.13% 79.50%
Jackson 6.49 4,556 84.95% 71.21%
Kanabec 10.97 5,759 89.72% 60.43%
Kandiyohi 20.02 15,936 97.04% 88.36%
Kittson 1.98 2,167 97.81% 97.12%
Koochiching 1.95 6,040 90.77% 82.29%
Lac qui Parle 4.34 3,316 98.52% 80.28%
Lake 2.21 4,646 80.29% 75.66%
Lake of the Woods 1.47 1,903 94.54% 87.61%
Le Sueur 21.47 9,630 87.66% 86.77%
Lincoln 4.94 2,653 97.37% 48.32%
Lyon 13.60 9,715 99.27% 79.41%
≥ 768 Download/
≥ 3 Mbps
200 Kbps Upload
Download Speeds
Speeds
Household Number of
Density Households
McLeod 27.34 13,449 99.99% 99.99%
Mahnomen 3.54 1,969 68.82% 59.14%
Marshall 2.31 4,101 94.73% 88.81%
Martin 12.78 9,067 99.67% 99.64%
Meeker 14.12 8,590 96.36% 92.49%
Mille Lacs 15.04 8,638 92.54% 84.65%
Morrison 10.51 11,816 93.75% 82.94%
Mower 21.90 15,582 83.48% 82.47%
Murray 5.28 3,722 87.79% 69.45%
Nicollet 23.53 10,642 90.40% 83.14%
Nobles 11.10 7,939 94.28% 79.02%
Norman 3.44 3,010 98.29% 70.26%
Olmsted 73.21 47,807 96.33% 96.18%
Otter Tail 11.45 22,671 96.00% 84.21%
Pennington 8.96 5,525 96.37% 86.81%
Pine 7.04 9,939 89.89% 64.22%
Pipestone 8.73 4,069 97.95% 47.74%
Polk 6.13 12,070 96.71% 89.83%
Pope 6.73 4,513 93.71% 92.14%
Ramsey 1,291.80 201,236 99.98% 99.98%
Red Lake 3.99 1,727 99.97% 99.97%
Redwood 7.59 6,674 77.08% 42.69%
Renville 6.90 6,779 91.82% 78.20%
Rice 37.96 18,888 91.43% 90.33%
Rock 7.96 3,843 98.84% 54.23%
Roseau 3.72 6,190 93.33% 81.31%
28
≥ 768 Download/
≥ 3 Mbps
200 Kbps Upload
Download Speeds
Speeds
Household Number of
Density Households
St. Louis 13.27 82,619 87.60% 85.63%
Scott 86.05 30,692 99.36% 99.09%
Sherburne 49.46 21,581 99.51% 99.36%
Sibley 9.81 5,772 91.93% 83.39%
Stearns 35.41 47,604 97.92% 95.87%
Steele 29.91 12,846 89.47% 88.04%
Stevens 6.67 3,751 99.78% 95.36%
Swift 5.85 4,353 98.54% 80.91%
Todd 9.92 9,342 91.52% 84.81%
Traverse 2.99 1,717 88.79% 72.24%
Wabasha 15.77 8,277 83.50% 78.86%
Wadena 10.14 5,426 89.71% 89.27%
Waseca 16.68 7,059 84.67% 83.95%
Washington 182.44 71,462 99.41% 99.41%
Watonwan 10.65 4,627 94.00% 92.17%
Wilkin 3.66 2,752 97.99% 78.72%
Winona 29.93 18,744 88.27% 88.03%
Wright 47.62 31,465 99.27% 97.75%
Yellow Medicine 5.86 4,439 98.16% 69.35%

Source: Household Numbers and Density - Census Bureau, 2000. Broadband Availability Rates - Connect Minnesota, October
2010.
Detailed information on the estimated inventory of broadband in each county can be found on the Connect Minne-
sota website at http://www.connectmn.org/mapping/county_maps/.
For more granular information regarding the estimated broadband inventory see the Minnesota online broadband
inventory map at http://www.connectmn.org/mapping/interactive_map.php.
3.2.2 Fixed Broadband Availability across Rural and Non-Rural Counties
Figure 9 below depicts the percentage of households served by county with at least 768 Kbps download and 200
Kbps upload speeds and classifies counties as rural or non-rural.40 Figure 10 is a similar depiction with the county
availability threshold set at 3 Mbps download speeds. Across rural counties an estimated 92.62% of households
have broadband available (contrasted with a statewide average of 92.72%). The average estimate across non-
rural (urban and suburban) counties is 96.18%.41 Hence, as expected, broadband availability is on average lower
across rural counties and greatest in highly populated urban areas.
40 Classification of rural and non-rural counties is based on the U.S. Census Bureau urban-rural classification based on Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (MSAs), which are designated by the United States Office of Management and Budget to collect, tabulate, and publish federal statistics.
Metropolitan statistical areas contain a core urban area with a population of 50,000 or more. According to Census Bureau county classification,
counties are categorized as “urban” if they contain the core city of an MSA, “suburban” counties are MSA counties that do not contain a core
city, and “rural” counties include all remaining counties that are not part of an MSA.
41 This simple average county-level availability estimate of 96.18% is lower than the statewide estimate of percentage of households with broadband
available (96.59%). This is due to the fact that the county-level simple average does not weight county estimates by the underlying population
in each county.
30
Percentage
of Minnesota
Non-Mobile
At Least 768 Kbps Download/200 Kbps Upload Speeds
At LeastRural andDownload/200
768 Kbps Non-Rural Counties
Kbps Upload Speeds
Rural and Non-Rural Counties
Kittson Roseau
97.81% 93.33%
Lake of the Woods
94.54%
Marshall
94.73%
Koochiching
90.77%
Pennington
96.37% Beltrami
Cook
98.88% 47.62%
Red Lake
99.97%
Lake
Polk Clearwater 80.29%
96.71% 99.34% St. Louis
Itasca 87.6%
83.13%
Norman Mahnomen
98.29% 68.82%
Hubbard
90.95%
Cass
Becker
Clay 89.54%
91.28%
94.18%
Wadena Carlton
Aitkin
89.71% 85.97%
71.52%
Crow Wing
Wilkin Otter Tail 94.55%
96%
97.99%
Pine
<85%
89.89%
Todd
91.52% Morrison Mille Lacs
Grant Douglas 93.75%
92.54% Kanabec
85-90%
99.92% 99.61%
89.72%
Traverse
88.79%
Benton
90.01-93%
Stevens 97.56%
Pope Isanti
99.78% 93.71% Stearns
99.22%
97.92% Chisago
Big Stone Sherburne 99.42%
87.71%
Swift
99.51%
Anoka 93.01-96%
98.54% 99.59%
Wright
Kandiyohi
96.01-98%
Meeker Washington
99.27%
97.04% 96.36%
Chippewa Hennepin Ramsey
Lac qui Parle
98.52% 99.28% 99.88% 99.98% 99.41%
McLeod
99.99%
Carver 98.01-100%
Yellow Medicine Renville 99.76%
Rural
98.16% 91.82% Dakota
Scott
99.36% 99.68%
Sibley
91.93%
97.37% 99.27% Le Sueur Rice 94.63%
77.08% Nicollet
87.66% 91.43% Wabasha
Brown 90.4%
83.5%
98.81%

Cottonwood Watonwan
97.95% 87.79% 93.41% 84.67% 89.47% 90.11% 96.33% 88.27%
89.12%
94%

98.84% 94.28% 84.95% 99.67% 88.27% 83.48% 75.97% 94.93%
95.86%
in the
10 State of Minnesota
Percentage
of Minnesota
Non-Mobile
At Least 3 Mbps Download Speeds
Rural and3 Non-Rural
At Least Counties
Mbps Download Speeds
Rural and Non-Rural Counties
Kittson Roseau
97.12% 81.31%
Lake of the Woods
87.61%
88.81% Marshall
Koochiching
82.29%
Pennington
86.81%
Cook
Beltrami
47.62%
Red Lake 98.09%
99.97%
Polk Lake
89.83% St. Louis 75.66%
Clearwater Itasca
85.63%
99.34% 79.5%
Norman Mahnomen
70.26% 59.14%
Hubbard
73.16%
Becker Cass
Clay
89.98% 84.42%
93.97%
Aitkin Carlton
Wadena
42.3% 72.93%
89.27%
Crow Wing
Otter Tail
92.68%
84.21%
Wilkin
78.72%
Pine
<40%
64.22%
Todd Morrison Mille Lacs
Grant Douglas 84.81% 82.94%
84.65% Kanabec
97.84% 97.41%
40-60%
60.43%
Traverse
72.24% Benton
96.32%
60.01-80%
Stevens Pope Isanti
95.36% Stearns
92.14%
95.87% 83.71% Chisago
Big Stone Sherburne
90.44%
99.36%
80.01-90%
75.97%
Swift Anoka
80.91% 99.28%
Wright
Kandiyohi
90.01-95%
Meeker 97.75% Washington
88.36%
92.49% Ramsey
Chippewa Hennepin
Lac qui Parle 84.31% 99.98%
99.82%
80.28%
Yellow Medicine Renville

McLeod
99.99%
Carver
99.64%
99.41%
95.01-100%
69.35% 78.2% Dakota
Rural
Scott
99.54%
99.09%
Sibley
83.39%
Lincoln Lyon Goodhue
Redwood Le Sueur
48.32% 79.41% Rice
42.69% Nicollet 86.77% 89.45%
90.33% Wabasha
Brown 83.14%
85.36% 78.86%

Cottonwood Watonwan
47.74% 69.45% 93.35% 83.95% 88.04% 88.18% 96.18% 88.03%
82.62% 92.17%

54.23% 79.02% 74.16% 94.93%
71.21% 99.64% 93.6% 82.63% 82.47%
32
3.2.3 Minnesota’s Underserved Households Across Counties
While Minnesota does not have a high percentage of underserved households42 (53,666 or 2.83%), the tale is
somewhat different when examining Minnesota’s counties. At least 18 counties have greater than 15% of their
households that qualify as underserved. Figure 11 below illustrates by percentage the underserved households in
each county in Minnesota (served households that can receive broadband at speeds of at least 768 Kbps down-
load/200 Kbps upload but are not able to subscribe to broadband at speeds of at least 3 Mbps download).
42 “Underserved area means a proposed funded service area, compared of one or more contiguous Census Blocks meeting certain criteria that
measure the availability of broadband service and the level of advertised broadband speeds. […] Specifically, a proposed funded service area
may qualify as underserved for last mile projects if at least one of the following factors is met, thought the presumption will be that more than one
factor is present: 1. No more than 50 percent of the households in the proposed funded service area have access to facilities-based, terrestrial
broadband service at greater than the minimum broadband transmission speed (set forth in the definition of broadband above); 2. No fixed or
mobile broadband service provider advertises broadband transmission speeds of at least three megabits per second (“mbps”) downstream in
the proposed funded service area; or 3. The rate of broadband subscribership for the proposed funded service area is 40 percent of households
or less.”
Broadband
Percentage of Availability
the State at
of Download
Minnesota
Percentage
Speeds of Households
Between 768 Kbps Served
andat3Download
Mbps
Speeds Between 768 Kbps and 3 Mbps
Percent of Percent
"Underserved"
of “Underserved”Households:
Households: 2.83% 2.83%
Kittson Roseau
0.69% 12.02%
Lake of the Woods
6.93%
Marshall
5.92%
Koochiching
8.47%
Pennington
9.56%
Beltrami Cook
Red Lake 0%
0.8%
0%
Polk Lake
6.88% St. Louis
4.63%
1.97%
Clearwater Itasca
0%
3.63%
Norman Mahnomen
28.03% 9.68%
Hubbard
17.79% Cass
Clay Becker 5.12%
1.3%
0.21%
Aitkin Carlton
Wadena
29.22% 13.04%
0.44% Crow Wing
Otter Tail
1.87%
Wilkin 11.79%
19.27%
Pine
Todd 25.67%
6.7%
Morrison Mille Lacs
Grant Douglas
10.81% 7.89% Kanabec
2.08% 2.2%
29.29%
Traverse
16.55%
Benton
0-10%
1.24%
Stevens Pope Stearns Isanti
4.42% 1.57%
2.05% 15.51% Chisago
Big Stone Sherburne
8.98%
11.74% 0.16%
Swift
17.64%
Anoka
0.31% 10.01-25%
Wright Washington
Kandiyohi Meeker 1.52%
>25%
8.68% 3.87%
Lac qui Parle Hennepin Ramsey
Chippewa
18.24% 14.97% 0.06% 0%
Carver 0.01%
McLeod
Renville 0% 0.12%
Yellow Medicine
28.81% 13.62% Scott Dakota
0.14%
0.27%
Sibley
8.54%
49.04% 19.86% Le Sueur Rice 5.18%
34.39% Nicollet
0.89% 1.1% Wabasha
Brown 7.27%
4.64%
13.45%
Pipestone Murray Cottonwood Blue Earth Waseca Steele Dodge Winona

Olmsted
50.21% 18.34% Watonwan 0.05% 0.25%
6.5% 0.72% 1.43% 1.93% 0.14%
1.82%
Rock Nobles Jackson Fillmore Houston

Martin Faribault Freeborn Mower
44.61% 15.26% 13.74% 1.81% 0%
0.03% 2.27% 5.63% 1.01%
34
3.2.4 Broadband Availability by Platform, by County
Table 9 reports measured percentage of households served by the type of platform by each county, including
cable, DSL, fiber, fixed wireless, and mobile wireless technologies.
Table 9 – County-Level Estimated Availability by Broadband Technology

Percentage of Households Served by Broadband, by Technology Platform
(≥ 768 Download/200 Upload Kbps Speeds)
Mobile All Platforms

County Cable DSL Fiber Fixed Wireless
Wireless Except Mobile
Aitkin 21.75% 69.35% 0.07% 0.02% 92.50% 71.52%
Anoka 95.82% 95.14% 0.00% 17.88% 100.00% 99.59%
Becker 38.52% 87.52% 17.16% 0.00% 97.20% 91.28%
Beltrami 56.30% 76.35% 30.53% 60.73% 93.83% 98.88%
Benton 72.79% 94.21% 1.00% 85.63% 99.80% 97.56%
Big Stone 58.49% 22.53% 12.27% 61.66% 99.91% 87.71%
Blue Earth 69.62% 92.20% 0.51% 2.81% 99.84% 93.41%
Brown 73.10% 98.71% 0.00% 0.18% 87.48% 98.81%
Carlton 51.09% 83.14% 0.00% 0.00% 97.11% 85.97%
Carver 77.76% 94.32% 0.00% 75.06% 100.00% 99.76%
Cass 26.99% 83.91% 7.61% 9.01% 92.99% 89.54%
Chippewa 64.65% 76.20% 5.55% 98.81% 99.97% 99.28%
Chisago 50.17% 91.12% 0.00% 80.51% 99.60% 99.42%
Clay 76.61% 52.19% 2.49% 73.09% 99.66% 94.18%
Clearwater 0.00% 98.41% 1.45% 0.01% 88.97% 99.34%
Cook 0.00% 47.62% 0.00% 0.00% 73.47% 47.62%
Cottonwood 16.31% 86.89% 38.38% 3.98% 74.47% 89.12%
Crow Wing 57.50% 87.97% 19.17% 38.33% 99.95% 94.55%
Dakota 95.29% 98.36% 0.02% 0.00% 100.00% 99.68%
Dodge 53.69% 89.71% 12.01% 0.00% 100.00% 90.11%
Douglas 51.65% 90.17% 5.95% 85.07% 100.00% 99.61%
Faribault 54.66% 93.32% 12.08% 56.24% 92.81% 95.86%
Fillmore 30.89% 67.22% 8.52% 0.00% 58.35% 75.97%
Freeborn 57.54% 80.23% 18.13% 16.30% 96.69% 88.27%
Goodhue 58.51% 92.32% 0.00% 8.91% 99.74% 94.63%
Grant 0.00% 50.39% 61.47% 21.54% 100.00% 99.92%
Hennepin 98.07% 96.75% 0.00% 4.70% 100.00% 99.88%
Houston 56.91% 81.57% 25.98% 0.00% 74.56% 94.93%
Hubbard 32.29% 77.45% 20.97% 4.05% 88.02% 90.95%
Isanti 36.57% 83.54% 0.00% 97.70% 99.91% 99.22%
Itasca 45.67% 72.21% 39.54% 0.00% 89.31% 83.13%
Jackson 0.00% 68.89% 0.00% 31.09% 84.48% 84.95%
Kanabec 13.88% 61.78% 0.00% 85.33% 99.33% 89.72%
Kandiyohi 66.86% 88.17% 0.00% 79.33% 99.92% 97.04%
Kittson 0.00% 86.21% 0.00% 76.74% 99.82% 97.81%
Koochiching 65.66% 90.00% 3.35% 0.00% 90.46% 90.77%
Lac qui Parle 42.98% 61.15% 25.84% 79.62% 34.55% 98.52%
Lake 49.90% 76.03% 0.00% 0.00% 89.58% 80.29%
Lake of the Woods 47.79% 59.21% 0.00% 49.53% 92.03% 94.54%
Le Sueur 43.13% 83.96% 11.71% 0.04% 100.00% 87.66%
Lincoln 36.21% 86.56% 0.14% 67.25% 9.48% 97.37%
Lyon 62.53% 77.56% 0.09% 95.17% 85.92% 99.27%
McLeod 56.08% 92.85% 0.00% 99.90% 98.93% 99.99%
Mahnomen 6.99% 67.67% 2.66% 0.00% 92.28% 68.82%
Marshall 18.58% 72.15% 6.36% 69.79% 99.92% 94.73%
Martin 56.75% 88.87% 0.00% 98.74% 94.68% 99.67%
Meeker 45.88% 71.30% 0.00% 90.64% 99.44% 96.36%
Mille Lacs 44.73% 87.80% 0.00% 16.39% 98.99% 92.54%
Morrison 38.05% 86.48% 0.00% 46.70% 98.74% 93.75%
Mower 69.65% 82.17% 10.46% 0.00% 99.48% 83.48%
36
Murray 35.13% 84.77% 1.75% 6.49% 20.22% 87.79%
Nicollet 74.16% 90.36% 0.00% 0.00% 95.86% 90.40%
Nobles 47.44% 87.82% 0.00% 26.90% 91.82% 94.28%
Norman 13.59% 97.79% 0.50% 0.00% 99.98% 98.29%
Olmsted 83.88% 95.59% 7.86% 0.00% 99.98% 96.33%
Otter Tail 39.84% 85.46% 39.89% 43.27% 99.81% 96.00%
Pennington 73.50% 71.00% 6.12% 86.28% 99.27% 96.37%
Pine 35.85% 59.80% 0.00% 66.96% 92.16% 89.89%
Pipestone 42.49% 85.84% 13.82% 83.79% 82.43% 97.95%
Polk 49.72% 55.65% 4.71% 38.03% 99.23% 96.71%
Pope 40.25% 62.59% 10.43% 79.59% 99.45% 93.71%
Ramsey 98.55% 98.71% 0.00% 0.00% 100.00% 99.98%
Red Lake 0.00% 56.51% 43.46% 0.09% 99.98% 99.97%
Redwood 34.19% 55.69% 0.00% 57.98% 69.64% 77.08%
Renville 48.97% 69.47% 0.00% 79.38% 39.23% 91.82%
Rice 67.40% 89.24% 19.13% 1.28% 100.00% 91.43%
Rock 48.28% 23.48% 0.00% 97.75% 14.01% 98.84%
Roseau 43.35% 72.83% 0.00% 70.31% 93.28% 93.33%
St. Louis 71.04% 83.41% 0.00% 37.47% 98.87% 87.60%
Scott 82.44% 96.63% 4.33% 11.44% 100.00% 99.36%
Sherburne 65.17% 96.56% 0.00% 85.76% 100.00% 99.51%
Sibley 48.74% 69.44% 0.00% 65.63% 88.82% 91.93%
Stearns 72.24% 88.14% 2.82% 87.49% 100.00% 97.92%
Steele 72.23% 88.16% 29.18% 3.01% 100.00% 89.47%
Stevens 64.20% 39.79% 79.79% 97.20% 99.99% 99.78%
Swift 56.55% 51.55% 11.53% 95.48% 99.91% 98.54%
Todd 33.09% 71.06% 2.97% 54.57% 99.87% 91.52%
Traverse 41.97% 70.81% 3.81% 16.75% 99.98% 88.79%
Wabasha 60.33% 80.30% 17.12% 0.00% 91.23% 83.50%
Wadena 41.14% 89.64% 44.71% 0.00% 97.27% 89.71%
Waseca 61.28% 82.11% 15.69% 0.00% 99.93% 84.67%
Washington 94.11% 95.40% 0.00% 0.22% 100.00% 99.41%
Watonwan 63.55% 87.69% 0.00% 38.12% 98.95% 94.00%
Wilkin 51.96% 69.93% 9.02% 74.00% 99.73% 97.99%
Winona 77.49% 81.49% 5.95% 0.00% 94.07% 88.27%
Wright 61.23% 92.12% 10.05% 84.63% 99.97% 99.27%
Yellow Medicine 20.43% 70.87% 0.00% 70.50% 56.46% 98.16%
State Total 78.17% 90.30% 3.98% 22.44% 97.57% 96.59%

Source: Connect Minnesota, October 2010
3.3 Federal and Tribal Lands

Connect Minnesota has found through experience that an examination of broadband and its infrastructure in a
state is enhanced by including a comparison of federal and tribal land in a state with broadband availability. Ac-
cording to research conducted by the Minnesota House of Representatives:
“There are about 51.2 million acres of land and 2.6 million acres of water within Minnesota. About 25 percent of
the land is owned by governmental units. The federal government owns about 7 percent of the land area, or 3.4
million acres, while the state government owns about 17 percent of the land area, or 8.4 million acres. Over 95
percent of the state-owned land was given to the state by the federal government.
Almost all federal land in Minnesota is natural resource land, primarily forest acreage in Chippewa and Superior na-
tional forests. Other federal lands are mainly in national wildlife management areas, national parklands, and Indian
reservation lands.”43
3.3.1 Federal Land in Minnesota

Figure 12 indicates the footprint of land in Minnesota controlled or owned by the federal government with broad-
band availability in the state.
43 http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/ss/sssoland.htm#How%20much%20land
38
Figure 12
Broadband Availability in the State of Minnesota

Comparison to Federal Lands
3.3.2 Tribal Land in Minnesota
In acquiring both broadband availability and Community Anchor Institution data in Minnesota, Connect Minnesota
made special effort to engage all federal tribal entities within the state. According to the U.S. Department of the
Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs, the state of Minnesota has 11 Native-American lands:
1. Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake) – Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
2. Fond du Lac Band – Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
3. Grant Portage Band – Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
4. Leech Lake Band – Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
5. Lower Sioux Indian Community in the State of Minnesota
6. Mille Lacs Band – Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
7. Prairie Island Indian Community in the State of Minnesota
8. Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians
9. Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community of Minnesota
10. Upper Sioux Community
11. White Earth Band – Minnesota Chippewa Tribe
Connect Minnesota successfully contacted all of the 11 tribes as part of the SBDD program and is accounting for
the resulting data in its work.
40
Figure 13
Broadband Availability in the State of Minnesota

Comparison to Indian Reservations
3.4 Universal Service Funding in Minnesota
This section explains the current impact of the Universal Service Fund (USF), including the High Cost Program,
across the state of Minnesota. One major policy recommendation included in the National Broadband Plan, as well
as the 2009 report of the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force, involves major revisions to the cur-
rent program to allow it to directly fund broadband infrastructure deployment.
The High Cost Program is designed to ensure that consumers in all regions of the nation have access to and pay
rates for telecommunications services that are reasonably comparable to those services provided and rates paid in
urban areas, and is sub-divided into categories:
■■ High Cost Loop support is available to rural price-cap and rate-of-return incumbent carriers and competi-
tive carriers providing service in the areas of these rural companies, which must be designated as eligible
telecommunications carriers (ETCs) by their state commissions or the FCC. The HCL program provides
support for the “last mile” of connection for rural companies in service areas where the cost to provide this
service exceeds 115% of the national average cost per line.44
■■ Interstate Common Line Support is available only to rate-of-return incumbent carriers (mostly rural and
some non-rural carriers) and competitive carriers providing service in the areas of these incumbent carri-
ers. These carriers must be designated as ETCs. Interstate Common Line Support helps to offset in-
terstate access charges and is designed to permit each rate-of-return carrier to recover its common line
revenue requirement, while ensuring that its subscriber line charges (SLCs) remain affordable to its cus-
tomers.45
■■ Interstate Access Support is available only to price-cap incumbent carriers (mostly non-rural and some
rural carriers) and competitive carriers operating in the service area(s) of a price cap carrier. These carriers
must be designated as ETCs. Interstate Access Support helps to offset interstate access charges for price
cap to companies, is targeted to the density zones that have the greatest need for it.46
■■ Local Switching Support is available to rural incumbent carriers serving 50,000 lines or fewer (mostly
rate-of-return and some price-cap carriers) and competitive carriers providing service in the areas of these
rural incumbent carriers, who must be designated as ETCs. Local Switching Support is designed to help
carriers recoup some of the high fixed switching costs of providing service to fewer customers. LSS helps
keep customer rates comparable to more densely populated urban areas.47
The High Cost Program is historically the largest component of the USF program. The FCC projects a total of
$8.7 billion for the federal Universal Service Fund in 2010. Of this total, $4.6 billion are projected for the High Cost
Program, currently providing funding to an estimated 1,800 eligible telecommunications carriers; $1.2 billion are
projected to subsidize low income households under the Lifeline and Linkup programs; $2.7 billion are projected
for the school and libraries E-Rate program; and $214 million are projected for the Rural Health Care Program.48
In 2009 the total USF program disbursement in the state of Minnesota amounted to $153.88 million, for a total
disbursement in the state of $1.32 billion from 1998 to 2009. High Cost Program disbursements for the state of
Minnesota in 2009 totaled $127 million, for a total of $1.047 billion between 1998 and 2009. Of these, disburse-
ments in Minnesota in 2009 amounted to $44.7 million for HCL, $60.9 million for ICLS, and $18.2 million for LSS.49
Table 10 summarizes these data.
44 USAC.
45 Ibid.
46 Ibid.
47 Ibid.
48 NBP, p. 140 and Annual Report, 2010, Universal Service Administration Company. (“Annual Report 2009, USAC”). Available at: http://www.usac.
org/_res/documents/about/pdf/usac-annual-report-2009.pdf
49 Annual Report, 2009, USAC, p. 39-48.
42
Table 10 – Universal Service Fund Disbursements in the
State of Minnesota – 1998-2009 (millions)
2009 From 1998-2009
High Cost Loop $127
Interstate Common Line $60.9
Interstate Access Support $3.12
Local Switching $18.2
Total High Cost Component $127 $1047.5
Total USF Disbursement $153.88 $1327.7

Source: Annual Report, 2009. USAC
While these data provide an overview of the USF federal program, it is important to note that the data provides
only a partial assessment of the overall USF program. Under current USF rules, small rate-of-return providers are
more likely to receive funding under this program. Illustrative of this fact, consider that in Minnesota, where a
fiber-to-the-home broadband connection is available to less than 4% of households, there is some degree of fiber
available in over 50 of Minnesota’s 87 counties. This indicates that, as USF funding flows to small rate-of-return
providers in Minnesota’s rural counties and those carriers build or improve their voice telephone networks with
fiber, fiber broadband also becomes available. According to the FCC, in 2009 nationally approximately $2 billion of
the High Cost Program went to 814 rate-of-return carriers, $1 billion to 17 price-cap carriers and $1.3 billion to 212
competitive eligible telecommunications carriers (CTECs).50
Following NBP recommendations for reform of the USF program, and the related Intercarrier Compensation rules,
the FCC has now reopened several dockets to evaluate and propose reforms to USF programs and rules. The FCC
reforms underway are likely to have important policy implications across the state. Further examination of the im-
pact of comprehensive USF disbursements across Minnesota communities is recommended in order to assess the
historical and ongoing impact of this federal program upon the broadband market in Minnesota and evaluate the
implications of proposed reforms.
Furthermore, as discussed in the following section, disbursement of USF funds is one factor that partially explains
the differences between Connect Minnesota’s estimates of broadband availability and the FCC’s NBP simulation
estimates (See Section 3.5 below). In order to obtain reliable broadband inventory estimates, it is recommended
that the state of Minnesota continue gathering and validating data under the SBDD grant program that can be
used to ascertain the true extent of unserved and underserved areas in the state.
50 NBP, p. 141.
3.5 Broadband Stimulus Investments in Minnesota through
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
In addition to federal funding for telecommunications that comes through the Universal Service Fund, a second
and significant source of support for broadband improvements in the state of Minnesota comes from the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
Funding provided through five separate programs at the U.S. Department of Commerce or U.S. Department of
Agriculture has been awarded to various grantees that exist in Minnesota.
The U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) adminis-
ters the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) within three program categories:
Comprehensive Community Infrastructure (CCI) -- Projects to deploy new or improved broadband Internet
facilities (e.g., laying new fiber-optic cables or upgrading wireless towers) and to connect “community anchor insti-
tutions” such as schools, libraries, hospitals, and public safety facilities. These networks help ensure sustainable
community growth and provide the foundation for enhanced household and business broadband Internet servic-
es.51
Public Computer Centers (PCC) -- Projects to establish new public computer facilities or upgrade existing ones
that provide broadband access to the general public or to specific vulnerable populations, such as low-income
individuals, the unemployed, seniors, children, minorities, and people with disabilities.52
Sustainable Broadband Adoption (SBA) -- Projects that focus on increasing broadband Internet usage and
adoption, including among vulnerable populations where broadband technology traditionally has been underuti-
lized. Many projects include digital literacy training and outreach campaigns to increase the relevance of broad-
band in people’s everyday lives.53
Figure 14
BTOP CCI $36,200,630
BTOP PCC $6,586,461
BTOP SBA $4,858,219
RUS BIP
$201,016,002
51 http://www2.ntia.doc.gov/about
52 Ibid.
53 Ibid.
44
NTIA also administers the State Broadband Data and Development Program, which is funding the Connect Min-
nesota initiative, Minnesota’s broadband inventory map and planning activities.54
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service (RUS) administers the Broadband Initiatives Program
(BIP). BIP furnishes loans, grants, and loan/grant combinations to assist with addressing the challenge of rapidly
expanding the access and quality of broadband services across rural America.55
Below is a list of grants announced for the state of Minnesota under the programs listed above, totaling
$248,661,312.56 Although it is too early to report on the impact these projects have had in Minnesota, Connect
Minnesota will work to track these projects and their results and provide updates on them in future reports.
BTOP CCI (Total Awarded = $36,200,630):57

■■ Enventis Telecom, Inc. – this $16.8 million project seeks to construct a brand new 428-mile fiber network
that would provide middle-mile service at speeds of up to 10 Gbps and enable connections to anchor
institutions and businesses across a 23-county area of the state. The project intends to expand distance
learning and training opportunities throughout the state, while offering high-capacity services to commu-
nity organizations in the area. Among the anchor institutions already committed to working directly with
the grantee and its partner the State of Minnesota’s Office of Enterprise Technology are the University of
Minnesota at Duluth, Little Falls Police Department, and St. Gabriel’s Hospital.
■■ Zayo Bandwidth, LLC – this $13.3 million projects seeks to create the Connect Anoka County Community
Broadband Network, a partnership between Zayo Bandwidth and Anoka County, Minnesota, to make high-
speed broadband services available to governments, businesses, community anchor institutions, and local
Internet service providers in Anoka County and parts of nearby Isanti and Ramsey counties. The project
plans to build a new 286-mile fiber network that will provide speeds between 100 Mbps and 10 Gbps.
■■ Carver County, MN – this $6 million project (the Carver County Open Fiber Initiative, a partnership between
the county, affiliated city governments, and Jaguar Communications, a for-profit small business) proposes
to build a high-speed fiber optic network across Carver County in south-central Minnesota, bringing ad-
vanced services to its key community organizations. The project also proposes to construct 121 miles of
new fiber that will be open to as many as nine last-mile providers in the region in order to improve com-
mercial broadband availability and adoption.
BTOP CCI Multi-state (Total Awarded = $132,179,453):58

■■ University Corporation for Advanced Internet Development – this $62 million project seeks to interconnect
more than 30 existing research and education networks across all 50 U.S. states that will benefit approxi-
mately 121,000 community anchor institutions.
■■ Merit Network, Inc. – this $69.6 million project seeks to construct a 1,210-mile fiber network offering
speeds between 100 Mbps and 10 Gbps in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and Lower Northern Peninsula,
with additional connections to research and educational networks in Green Bay, Wisconsin and Duluth,
Minnesota.
54 http://www2.ntia.doc.gov/about
55 http://www.broadbandusa.gov/BIPportal/index.htm
56 Other projects that are intended to service multiple states are not listed in the graph above. They are listed below in separate categories and
total $179,005,623.
57 http://www2.ntia.doc.gov/Minnesota
BTOP PCC (Total Awarded = $6,586,461):59
■■ Mission Economic Development Agency – this multi-state, $3.7 million project seeks, in collaboration with
the National Association for Latino Community Asset Builders and a national network of Latino-serving
economic development organizations, to create 12 new public computer centers and expand five existing
ones in 13 communities throughout the United States, including Minneapolis, MN.
■■ Regents of the University of Minnesota – this $2.86 million project plans to establish one new public
computer center and improve 10 existing computer centers, adding 93 new workstations and replacing 49
existing workstations. The project intends to provide broadband speeds of at least 16 Mbps to these loca-
tions. The Broadband Access Project expects to provide broadband training to vulnerable, low-income,
minority, and immigrant populations to promote education, healthcare, workforce preparation, and com-
munity revitalization. The project expects to train 17,000 people over the life of the grant. In addition, the
Minnesota Multicultural Media Consortium plans to conduct culturally-specific outreach and translate
project materials into languages spoken locally.
BTOP SBA (Total Awarded = $4,858,219):60

■■ C.K. Blandin Foundation – this $4.85 million project expects to reach each of Minnesota’s 80 rural coun-
ties through education, training, technical assistance, and by removing barriers to broadband adoption.
The project anticipates training as many as 2,500 individuals in computer literacy, online education, and
workforce development, and plans to distribute 1,000 affordable refurbished computers to low-income,
rural Minnesota residents. Funding will support the development of institutional broadband applications for
schools and healthcare facilities to help increase broadband adoption.
BTOP SBA Multi-state (Total Awarded = $46,826,170 across project

areas of 32 states and 56 states/territories, respectively):61
■■ Portland State University – this $3.31 million project proposes to lead the Learner Web Partnership project
to increase broadband use among low-income, minorities, and other vulnerable populations by teach-
ing digital literacy along with English literacy, educating participants to become informed consumers, and
providing access to career paths in the digital economy.
■■ One Economy Corporation – the One Economy Corporation was awarded $28.5 million to create a pro-
gram in 31 states including Minnesota. The 21st Century Information and Support Ecosystem program of
computer training, wireless Internet access, broadband awareness marketing, and online content and ap-
plications will serve 159 affordable and public housing developments and low-income communities in 50
cities and towns across 31 states and the District of Columbia.
■■ Communication Service for the Deaf, Inc. – this $14.9 million project will provide services in all 56 U.S.
states and territories including Minnesota. The grantee intends to employ a combination of discounted
broadband service and specialized computers, technology training from an online state-of-the art support
center customized to the community’s needs, public access to videophones at anchor institutions from
coast to coast, and a nationwide outreach initiative.
RUS BIP (Total Awarded = $201,016,002 – all awards are grant/

loan combinations, unless otherwise noted):62
■■ Minnesota Valley Television Improvement Corporation – this $1.12 million project proposes to continue
building out its two-way broadband Internet network to unserved and underserved areas of west central
60 Ibid.
61 Ibid.
62 RUS BIP project summaries adapted from grant announcement notifications issued by U.S. Department of Agriculture.
46
and south central Minnesota. The proposed project will add 34 additional WIMAX Access Points in 34
unserved and underserved communities adjacent and contiguous to its current service area.
■■ Arvig Telephone Company – this $5 million project proposes to provide last-mile service to unserved rural
households in Minnesota.
■■ Farmers Mutual Telephone Company – this $9.65 million project proposes to provide last-mile Fiber-to-the-
Premises (FTTP) in Lac qui Parle County.
■■ Halstad Telephone Company – this $6.55 million project proposes last-mile FTTP service within Halstad
Telephone Company’s exchange.
■■ Northeast Service Cooperative – this $43.5 million project plans to provide middle-mile service in North-
east Minnesota.
■■ Sjoberg’s, Inc. – this $866,060 project seeks to provide FTTP last-mile service in Northwest Minnesota.
■■ Federated Telephone Cooperative – this $1.26 million project will provide expanded last-mile service in
rural Appleton, MN.
■■ Federated Telephone Cooperative – this $2.98 million project will provide expanded last-mile service in
rural Morris, MN.
■■ City of Windom, MN – this $12.7 million project will provide expanded last-mile service as part of the
Southwest Minnesota Broadband Group.
■■ Winnebago Cooperative Telecom Association – this $3.14 million project proposes last-mile coverage as
part of the WCTA 2010 Broadband Initiative.
■■ Wikstrom Telephone Company, Inc. – this $7.39 million project will provide expanded last-mile coverage in
Northwest Minnesota.
■■ Woodstock Telephone Co., Inc. - $15.18 million project will provide expanded last-mile service as part of
the WCTA 2010 Broadband Initiative.
■■ Lake County, MN – this $66.37 million project will provide last-mile FTTP coverage in Lake County, MN.
■■ Red River Rural Telephone Assn, Inc. – this $9 million project will upgrade the last-mile service of Red
River Rural Telephone Association in rural Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota to FTTP.
■■ Arrowhead Electric Cooperative, Inc – this $16.1 million project will provide FTTP last-mile service within
the Arrowhead Electric Cooperative’s footprint.
3.6 FCC and Connect Minnesota Availability Estimates – A Comparative Analysis

As part of the National Broadband Plan, the FCC published in April 2010 a study titled “The Broadband Availability
Gap,” which includes research assessing the level of funding necessary to provide broadband to all those U.S.
households that don’t currently have service available.63 This estimate is constructed to ensure universal broad-
band service across the nation of at least 4 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload speeds, the National Broadband
Availability Target.64 The study includes a simulation of the current state of broadband availability that estimates
123 million households, or 95% of the U.S. population, have “or will have in the near-term without government
support” service supported at these speeds; while 7 million households, or 5% of the nation, do not.65 It further
estimates that the cost to serve these households at the National Broadband Availability Target capacity is $23.5
billion.66 This FCC simulation constitutes the only nationwide estimate of broadband inventory and sets the stage
63 FCC Availability Gap.

64 Ibid, at footnote 3, 4.
65 Ibid, 17.
66 Ibid, 1.
for the national debate over reform of the Universal Service Fund program. As such, it is an important benchmark
in the public policy debate.
The FCC Availability Gap study includes simulated estimates of broadband inventory for each county across the
nation. For the state of Minnesota, these estimates are the result of a simulation based on commercially available
data and data from other states, including earlier data collected for the state of Minnesota by Connect Minnesota.
This section presents a comparative analysis between Connect Minnesota’s measured broadband inventory and
the FCC simulation of broadband availability for the state of Minnesota.
Connect Minnesota has collected broadband inventory data by speed tiers as required by NTIA’s SBDD NOFA.67
This comparative analysis contrasts broadband inventory across Minnesota of at least 3 Mbps download speeds
(the closest NTIA defined speed tier to the FCC’s National Broadband Availability Target) with the FCC simulation
estimates of at least 4 Mbps download speeds.
The FCC’s Availability Gap study estimates that 95% of U.S. households are currently served by broadband of
at least 4 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload speeds.68 Connect Minnesota estimates that in the fall of 2010,
93.76% of Minnesota households are served by broadband of at least 3 Mbps download speeds.69 It further es-
timates that 90.79% of Minnesota households have broadband available at speeds of 6 Mbps or greater. Hence,
the statewide Minnesota estimates for broadband availability are less than FCC estimate of 95% of households
served by broadband of at least 4 Mbps. When evaluating county level estimates for broadband availability, there
appear to be some significant differences across the two studies. The FCC anticipated outcomes such as this and
describes just this situation in its FCC Availability Gap study, stating, “We rely on these results to represent an ag-
gregate, nationwide figure. We are more cautious with results in specific geographies because the estimates of the
availability of broadband capable networks are in part based on a statistical model (see Chapter 2 for more detail).
When examined at a very granular level, the availability model will sometimes overestimate and sometime under-
estimate service levels, but should tend to balance out when aggregated to larger geographic areas. …Further
analysis and improved source data would be required to refine estimates for particular geographies.”70
Table 11 reports FCC and Connect Minnesota estimates of broadband availability by county.71 The data is sorted
according to density of population and showcases that the FCC and Connect Minnesota estimates are relatively
similar in counties with high household density.72 By contrast, results from the two studies differ across rural coun-
ties, and in some cases the estimates are significantly different. For example, in Lincoln County the two estimates
differ by as much as +42.68 percentage points, where Connect Minnesota measured capacity is significantly
below the FCC simulation. In Clearwater County the difference between the two study estimates is 63.34 percent-
age points; Connect Minnesota estimates availability of 99.34% compared to the FCC simulation of only 36% of
households served.
67 SBDD NOFA, Technical Appendix.

68 Ibid, 17.
69 See Table 1.
70 FCC Availability Gap, p. 5.
71 FCC county availability gap simulation estimates are available at http://www.broadband.gov/maps/availability.htm
72 With the exclusion of Storey County.
48
Table 11 – Broadband Estimated Availability In the State Of Minnesota By County:
FCC and Connect Minnesota Estimates
Percent Households Served
Connect Minnesota Difference

FCC Gap Simulation
County Household Density Estimates (= FCC-CMN
(≥ 4 Mbps)
(≥ 3 Mbps) % Estimate)
Aitkin 3.65 33.00% 42.30% -9.30%
Anoka 251.24 100% 99.28% 0.72%
Becker 9.04 75.00% 89.98% -14.98%
Beltrami 5.72 76.00% 98.09% -22.09%
Benton 32.00 94.00% 96.32% -2.32%
Big Stone 4.78 88.00% 75.97% 12.03%
Blue Earth 27.99 92.00% 93.35% -1.35%
Brown 17.35 87.00% 85.36% 1.64%
Carlton 14.02 88.00% 72.93% 15.07%
Carver 68.22 99.00% 99.64% -0.64%
Cass 5.40 84.00% 84.42% -0.42%
Chippewa 9.20 92.00% 84.31% 7.69%
Chisago 34.61 100% 90.44% 9.56%
Clay 17.86 82.00% 93.97% -11.97%
Clearwater 3.35 36.00% 99.34% -63.34%
Cook 1.62 41.00% 47.62% -6.62%
Cottonwood 7.68 72.00% 82.62% -10.62%
Crow Wing 22.33 85.00% 92.68% -7.68%
Dakota 230.26 100% 99.54% 0.46%
Dodge 14.61 89.00% 88.18% 0.82%
Douglas 20.93 97.00% 97.41% -0.41%
Faribault 9.32 77.00% 93.60% -16.60%
Fillmore 9.55 85.00% 74.16% 10.84%
Freeborn 18.87 79.00% 82.63% -3.63%
FCC Gap Simulation
(≥ 4 Mbps)
Goodhue 22.40 97.00% 89.45% 7.55%
Grant 4.64 58.00% 97.84% -39.84%
Hennepin 819.46 100% 99.82% 0.18%
Houston 13.67 95.00% 94.93% 0.07%
Hubbard 8.06 72.00% 73.16% -1.16%
Isanti 25.59 89.00% 83.71% 5.29%
Itasca 6.67 64.00% 79.50% -15.50%
Jackson 6.49 62.00% 71.21% -9.21%
Kanabec 10.97 66.00% 60.43% 5.57%
Kandiyohi 20.02 92.00% 88.36% 3.64%
Kittson 1.98 54.00% 97.12% -43.12%
Koochiching 1.95 72.00% 82.29% -10.29%
Lac qui Parle 4.34 82.00% 80.28% 1.72%
Lake 2.21 89.00% 75.66% 13.34%
Lake of the Woods 1.47 32.00% 87.61% -55.61%
Le Sueur 21.47 89.00% 86.77% 2.23%
Lincoln 4.94 91.00% 48.32% 42.68%
Lyon 13.60 96.00% 79.41% 16.59%
McLeod 27.34 99.00% 99.99% -0.99%
Mahnomen 3.54 38.00% 59.14% -21.14%
Marshall 2.31 69.00% 88.81% -19.81%
Martin 12.78 81.00% 99.64% -18.64%
Meeker 14.12 86.00% 92.49% -6.49%
Mille Lacs 15.04 96.00% 84.65% 11.35%
Morrison 10.51 73.00% 82.94% -9.94%
Mower 21.90 93.00% 82.47% 10.53%
Murray 5.28 88.00% 69.45% 18.55%
Nicollet 23.53 95.00% 83.14% 11.86%
50
FCC Gap Simulation
(≥ 4 Mbps)
Nobles 11.10 83.00% 79.02% 3.98%
Norman 3.44 57.00% 70.26% -13.26%
Olmsted 73.21 99.00% 96.18% 2.82%
Otter Tail 11.45 84.00% 84.21% -0.21%
Pennington 8.96 83.00% 86.81% -3.81%
Pine 7.04 76.00% 64.22% 11.78%
Pipestone 8.73 85.00% 47.74% 37.26%
Polk 6.13 72.00% 89.83% -17.83%
Pope 6.73 78.00% 92.14% -14.14%
Ramsey 1,291.80 100% 99.98% 0.02%
Red Lake 3.99 55.00% 99.97% -44.97%
Redwood 7.59 70.00% 42.69% 27.31%
Renville 6.90 75.00% 78.20% -3.20%
Rice 37.96 98.00% 90.33% 7.67%
Rock 7.96 90.00% 54.23% 35.77%
Roseau 3.72 71.00% 81.31% -10.31%
St. Louis 13.27 87.00% 85.63% 1.37%
Scott 86.05 100% 99.09% 0.91%
Sherburne 49.46 99.00% 99.36% -0.36%
Sibley 9.81 86.00% 83.39% 2.61%
Stearns 35.41 96.00% 95.87% 0.13%
Steele 29.91 94.00% 88.04% 5.96%
Stevens 6.67 91.00% 95.36% -4.36%
Swift 5.85 77.00% 80.91% -3.91%
Todd 9.92 63.00% 84.81% -21.81%
Traverse 2.99 73.00% 72.24% 0.76%
Wabasha 15.77 79.00% 78.86% 0.14%
Wadena 10.14 83.00% 89.27% -6.27%
FCC Gap Simulation
(≥ 4 Mbps)
Waseca 16.68 86.00% 83.95% 2.05%
Washington 182.44 100% 99.41% 0.59%
Watonwan 10.65 84.00% 92.17% -8.17%
Wilkin 3.66 64.00% 78.72% -14.72%
Winona 29.93 97.00% 88.03% 8.97%
Wright 47.62 97.00% 97.75% -0.75%
Yellow Medicine 5.86 74.00% 69.35% 4.65%
State Total 23.81 93.76%

Source: Household Numbers and Density: Census Bureau, 2000. FCC Availability Gap.
Broadband Availability Estimates: Connect Minnesota, October 2010.
What appears to be driving these differences?

The FCC Availability Gap study is based on limited data available from commercial sources and a handful of
states, including older data collected by Connect Minnesota. This limited data is used to simulate broadband in-
ventory across other states. Furthermore, the FCC Availability Gap simulation is based on a series of assumptions
of national broadband market trends that are not necessarily applicable to the broadband market in the state of
Minnesota. These discrepancies likely explain the measured differences between the FCC and Connect Minnesota
estimates across rural areas in the state.
The FCC Availability Gap simulation estimates national cable availability based on cable availability data from com-
mercially available data and publicly available data from the commonwealth of Massachusetts.73 Wireless net-
work coverage is estimated using a commercial dataset from American Roamer. However, due to lack of reliable
sources for Wireless ISP (WISP) provider data, this type of platform is not included in the FCC analysis.74 National
estimates of DSL (or telco) availability are based on data from the states of California, Minnesota, Pennsylvania,
Alabama, and Wyoming.75 For all other states, the FCC Availability Gap analysis estimated broadband availability
using statistical simulation modeling.
According to the FCC Availability Gap analysis, “the main risk in this approach is the possibility of systematic
differences between the states for which we have data and the states for which we do not. Since the statistical
regression relies on a small number of states, to the extent that the tie between demographics and network avail-
ability in the rest of the country is not the same as these states, the regression will not be accurate. The states we
used in our analysis have a wide variety of rural and urban areas and have varied geographic challenges which are
advantageous, but there is no way to verify our outputs without additional data.”76
Minnesota’s broadband inventory falls slightly lower than FCC estimates at a statewide, or aggregated, level. At
more granular levels (as predicted by the FCC), these structural differences are likely driving any discrepancies
73 FCC Broadband Availability Gap, p. 21.

74 Ibid, p. 25.
75 Ibid, p. 23.
76 Ibid, p. 24.
52
between the Connect Minnesota broadband inventory and the FCC Availability Gap simulation for the state of Min-
nesota. It is important to continue gathering and validating broadband inventory and adoption data in the state of
Minnesota – particularly in rural areas – in order to accurately measure the broadband gaps and demand across
the state and inform the ongoing Universal Service Fund reform debate currently underway at the FCC.
3.7 Connectivity across Community Anchor Institutions in the State of Minnesota

Connect Minnesota has identified the names and addresses of 7,329 Community Anchor Institutions (CAIs) across
the state of Minnesota, including 1,773 libraries, 3,636 K-12 schools, 140 institutions of higher education, 1,541
public safety facilities (including fire departments, state and local police, and sheriff’s offices), 157 healthcare insti-
tutions (hospitals and medical clinics), and 82 other state, local, and federal government facilities. From this exten-
sive list, 7,323 have been geocoded to determine their latitude and longitude for inclusion on the Connect Minne-
sota interactive broadband map, BroadbandStat. Connect Minnesota is currently engaged in gathering broadband
connectivity data (broadband platform, download speed, and upload speed) from these identified institutions. It
is important to continue the SBDD data collection effort to build a more complete dataset because of the policy
implications of these connectivity data.
A CAI layer has been introduced on BroadbandStat, Connect Minnesota’s interactive map, and is available for
viewing at the following link in the advanced tab:
http://www.connectmn.org/mapping/_interactive_map_interface/?q=map
This layer clearly demonstrates the current data that has been gathered for the 7 different categories of CAIs by a
unique identifier and displays their location, technology category, and speed (if available). This layer will be up-
dated in the future to provide a clear visual representation of current broadband capacity at CAIs and provide an
overview of what services are available to these institutions in each community throughout the state.
The BroadbandStat CAI layer will be used as a communications tool throughout the coming months to engage
with CAIs throughout the state. An overview of this new technology and a link to the site will be provided to all CAI
contacts that have been engaged through past outreach and will also serve as an introduction to new contacts as
they are identified.
Connect Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Commerce have worked closely together to conduct
research as part of an ongoing process to identify existing, centralized sources for CAI connectivity data. This
research has resulted in the identification of databases within the state containing CAI connectivity data includ-
ing the Minnesota Office of Enterprise Technology (OET). OET has provided Connect Minnesota with access to
its statewide network which includes data for approximately a thousand CAI within the state that purchase this
service for their institutions. Connect Minnesota staff are in the process of augmenting this data and converting
it into a format that will be eventually uploaded to the BroadbandStat mapping application. Additionally, Connect
Minnesota will be reporting this data to NTIA in the upcoming spring 2011 submission.
Connect Minnesota has an ongoing mission to educate CAI throughout the state on the importance of reporting
their connectivity information for inclusion on the map and to be analyzed as a part of this report. Participation by
these institutions will raise awareness about the importance of broadband connectivity and the impact that CAIs
can have with access to a high-speed broadband connection.
4 The National Broadband Plan and the Minnesota Ultra
High-Speed Broadband Report: Policy Recommendations
to Combat Broadband Availability and Adoption Gaps
Utilizing Connect Minnesota’s extensive broadband inventory data (analyzed in detail in Section 3), and survey
research data (summarized in Section 2 and described in detail in Appendix A), this section summarizes a series of
policy recommendations inspired by the principles and vision of the FCC’s NBP as they apply to the state of Min-
nesota, and also examines goals and recommendations produced by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband
Task Force.
The overview and recommendations of this section are based on data and policy recommendations from three key
sources:
■■ The National Broadband Plan: The NBP presents a series of studies analyzing the state of broadband
across the USA. These data are used as a benchmark against which we compare data collected in the
state of Minnesota. Furthermore, the NBP provides a series of goals and recommendations that are evalu-
ated in this section in light of the state of broadband in the state of Minnesota. This section outlines policy
recommendations that are particularly relevant to the state of Minnesota, given the current state of broad-
band inventory and usage among consumers, businesses, and various key sectors.
■■ The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report: The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task
Force was created in April 2008 to outline a path to ultra broadband access for all residents of Minne-
sota by 2015. This task force held meetings, briefings, public hearings and ultimately set several goals for
broadband deployment and adoption.
■■ The Connect Minnesota broadband inventory and survey research funded under the SBDD mapping grant.
The National Broadband Plan is more than 350 pages long and offers a broad set of recommendations directed at
more than 20 federal agencies as well as state and local government. In order to synthesize the key elements of
these recommendations that are most relevant to the state of Minnesota, this section focuses on two key “gap”
areas: the broadband availability gap and the broadband adoption and digital skills gap.
4.1 Strategies to Close the Availability Gap

• Universal Service Fund & Intercarrier Compensation Rules Reform
The NBP calls for a Universal Service Fund (USF) and Intercarrier Compensation (ICC) reform.77 The NBP and the
FCC’s Notice of Inquiry (NOI) regarding the reform of the USF High Cost programs correctly asserts that the cur-
rent federal High Cost USF program, projected to amount to $4.6 billion in 2010, is established to fund traditional
POTS (Plain Old Telephone Services) and not broadband services and states that “[w]hile the High-Cost program
has made a material difference in enabling households in many high cost areas of America to have access to af-
fordable voice service, it will not do the same for broadband without reform of the current system.”78 FCC pro-
cedures to address these proposed reforms are underway in the form of various NOIs and Notices of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) to further understand the complexity of the reform and propose rulemakings.79 In light of this,
Connect Minnesota puts forth the following considerations that it believes should be taken into account as Minne-
sota policymakers contemplate strategies to expand broadband:
77 NBP, p.10.
78 NBP, p. 140-142 and Federal Communications Commission, Notice of Inquiry, High-Cost Universal Service Support, WC Docket No. 05-337,
April 21, 2010, (“USF NOI”).
79 USF NOI.
54
4.1.i Further exploring the impact of current USF program across different communities of Minnesota
– both capital investment and operational subsidies. Section 3 above examines data available regarding USF
funding to the state of Minnesota. As noted in this report, this data is revealing, yet insufficient to fully assess
the impact upon Minnesotans of the current USF program. It does not, for example, include data regard-
ing the levels of historical funding accruing to various regions and communities for High Cost Loop support;
support under other components of the High Cost program; low-income support programs-related subsidies;
or disbursements under the E-Rate and Rural Health Care Program support. Furthermore, the data do not
demonstrate the impact of ICC access rates upon rural broadband investments in Minnesota. Because all
of these programs are interrelated, it is imperative to further understand how they affect communities across
Minnesota in order to evaluate the impact of proposed reforms to the USF currently underway. Hence, collec-
tion and analysis of further data regarding USF disbursements and infrastructure enabled by these interlocking
programs is recommended.
4.1.ii Engaging in the FCC discussion over USF and ICC reform to understand, and where possible
measure, the impact upon Minnesota communities. Understanding that there may be significant differences
of opinion between Minnesota’s various broadband stakeholders regarding the proper course of action over re-
form of the Universal Service Fund and Intercarrier Compensation, consideration should be given to establish-
ing a dialogue with the FCC to explore the particularities of the Minnesota market and contrast them to FCC
national assessment of the Availability Gap, which serves as a key benchmark for the USF reform debate. The
FCC’s Availability Gap study includes a simulation of the broadband infrastructure inventory across the USA.
Section 3 of this report compares and contrasts results of this study with the Connect Minnesota measured
broadband inventory and concludes that the FCC Availability Gap analysis is an insufficient predictor of the
state of broadband inventory across Minnesota’s rural regions. This report addresses some of the key struc-
tural factors of the Minnesota broadband market that may explain the discrepancy across these two estimates.
It is recommended to continue gathering and validating broadband inventory data across Minnesota, under the
current SBDD program in order to inform the ongoing Universal Service Fund reform debate currently under-
way at the FCC and assess how it affects the state of Minnesota.
• Encourage coordination at the state and local level aimed to achieve economies of scale and encourage
efficiency of public investments
According to the NBP, deployment costs for broadband service to unserved areas could drop dramatically through
coordination and planning with other infrastructure projects.80 The NBP recommends a series of measures and
policies aimed at encouraging this coordination among projects receiving federal funding.81 Connect Minnesota
believes that many of these measures are applicable to state and local government, including:
4.1.iii Plan for broadband in infrastructure projects; for example, consider “dig once” measures and leg-
islation that would apply to all future state funded or enabled projects. (This recommendation is very similar to
recommendations made by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force in its 2009 report.)82
4.1.iv Encourage joint deployment of broadband conduit alongside state financed or enabled infrastruc-
ture projects such as highway, road, and bridge projects. (This recommendation is very similar to recommen-
dations made by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force in its 2009 report.)83
4.1.v Develop policies aimed to encourage local and state government policies that will deploy broad-
80 According to the NBP, placement costs associated with burying fiber or cable on the ground can account for ¾ of the total costs of deployment,
which would be partially saved if conducted at the time of road, bridge or development construction. NBP, p. 114.
81 NPB, Chapter 6, p. 109.
82 http://www.ultra-high-speed-mn.org/CM/Custom/UHS%20Broadband%20Report_Full.pdf - page 60.
83 Ibid. Page 60.
band conduit to new neighborhoods and developments. (This recommendation is very similar to recommenda-
tions made by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force in its 2009 report.)84
4.1.vi Establish “Gigabit Communities” or “Broadband Corridors” in regions within the state by working
together with state, local, and private stakeholders.
4.1.vii Evaluate local and state rules and regulations that currently affect the cost and speed of towers
supporting mobile networks and assess how such measure can be streamlined to encourage faster deploy-
ment of 3G networks across the state, and attract faster investment from mobile providers for the rollout of
4G mobile networks. (This recommendation is very similar to recommendations made by the Minnesota Ultra
High-Speed Broadband Task Force in its 2009 report.)
4.1.viii Explore the possibility of developing a set of state master contracts to expedite the placement of
wireless towers on state government property and buildings. (This recommendation complements recommen-
dations made by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force in its 2009 report.)85
• Encourage development of statewide “smart grids”

The NBP emphasizes the opportunity to significantly improve national electricity distribution efficiency by develop-
ing “smart grids” that leverage our national broadband infrastructure.86 Efforts are underway at the federal level to
assess the challenges facing the expansion of “smart grids” across the nation. Minnesota, like all other states, has
much to gain from these “smart grids” that will maximize benefits to Minnesotans of the broadband infrastructure
and result in more energy efficient communities. “Smart grids” will improve Minnesotans’ livelihood, benefit the
environment, and make Minnesota more competitive both nationally and internationally.
4.1.ix In order to make Minnesota a leader in “smart grid” development, a comprehensive review of the
challenges of developing these platforms is recommended. Such review would aim to understand Minneso-
ta-specific assets and challenges of the electricity distribution market, develop pragmatic policies that will
encourage private sector investment in these networks, assess what role the state should have in coordinating
and encouraging cooperation across the broadband and energy sectors in the state, and leverage the pro-
grams and opportunities to expand “smart grids” developed at the federal level. Connect Minnesota believes
that this goal of the NBP is complementary to the spirit of recommendations contained in the Ultra High-Speed
Broadband Task Force’s 2009 report.
• Lower costs of access to key network inputs such as utility-owned poles, ducts, conduits, and rights-of-way
According to the NBP, the cost of deploying a broadband network depends significantly on the costs that service
providers incur to access conduits, ducts, poles, and rights-of-way (ROW) on public and private lands. The NBP
estimates that up to 20% of a rural subscriber’s broadband bill is due to pole rental costs.87 Further, rearranging
existing pole attachments or installing new poles, and “make ready” charges can constitute upwards of 10% of the
cost of deployment in rural areas. The market for pole rental presents multiple sets of inconsistent rules, policies,
and prices across both public and private lands. Often pole rental pricing and rules present different rates for pole
attachments based on the category of service that would be supported by the pole network, not on the cost of the
inputs. Such a pricing scheme may result in price disincentives for decisions to expand service or invest in capac-
ity upgrades (such as 4G networks).
84 Ibid. Page 64, 68.

85 http://www.ultra-high-speed-mn.org/CM/Custom/UHS%20Broadband%20Report_Full.pdf. Page 68.
86 NBP, p. 249.
87 NBP, p. 109.
56
According to the NBP, the cost of deployment of and time to market new technologies can be reduced by a series
of measures aimed at cutting rental fees and expediting processes and decreasing the risks and complexities that
companies face as they deploy broadband network infrastructure.88 With this goal in mind, Connect Minnesota
recommends to the state of Minnesota the following measures recommended by the FCC in the National Broad-
band Plan:
4.1.x Create a Task Force (or subgroup) of federal, state, local, and tribal ROW experts to catalog ROW
policies, identify ROW policies that are consistent and inconsistent with broadband deployment, and recom-
mend guidelines and cost-lowering processes.
4.1.xi Conduct research to better understand current state and local pole rental and ROW rules and poli-
cies and define strategies to encourage efficiencies in essential input for broadband deployment.
4.1.xii Review and reform Rights of Way and Pole Rental Rules over state public lands and assess means
to incentivize more efficient local government rules and regulations that may inadvertently encourage exces-
sive ROW and pole rental prices or delays in deployment plans.
4.1.xiv Explore and establish state policies aimed to lower the cost of entry in the provision of broadband
service.
4.1.xv Explore the possibility of developing a state master contract to expedite placement of wireless
towers on state government property and buildings.
4.1.xvi Collaborate with the FCC and other Federal agencies in the implementation of similar federal poli-
cies where they apply to Minnesota.
The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force also makes recommendations in its 2009 report to Rights-
of-Way issues which are similar to the recommendations of the National Broadband Plan.89 Minnesota’s continued
exploration of this issue in the spirit of both the NBP and the Ultra High-Speed Broadband report is recommended.
• Promote public-private partnerships to address existing gaps in the network at the local level
Once the gaps in the broadband network are identified at the local level, pragmatic solutions to fill these gaps need
to be developed. Statewide stakeholders should work to implement strategies to facilitate pragmatic solutions for
broadband build-out to unserved areas.
4.1.xvii Strategies that have a proven record of success include local-level public-private partnerships to
build new and expanded broadband capacity across unserved areas. Statewide resources should promote
and encourage such strategies and ensure that state and federal resources (both financial and technical) are
fully leveraged to achieve these goals. The extended federal SBDD grant program will provide resources
across Minnesota to develop best practice resources, and technical engineering capacity to encourage and
facilitate this kind of local public-private partnerships.
• Continue efforts to measure and map broadband inventory data

The October 2010 Connect Minnesota estimates of broadband inventory and mapping enable a clearer picture of
the challenges and opportunities for broadband expansion in Minnesota. This updated estimate reveals that the
state of Minnesota is roughly on par with national benchmarks of broadband inventory and speeds. It also reveals
88 NBP, p. 110.
89 http://www.ultra-high-speed-mn.org/CM/Custom/UHS%20Broadband%20Report_Full.pdf. Page 67.
that, like elsewhere in the country, there is an availability gap that needs to be addressed by sound policy. Fur-
ther, the data reveals that broadband inventory across the state is not homogenous. Factors including density of
population and geography have an impact on where broadband is available and is not. Other more idiosyncratic
factors likely also affect the current state of broadband deployment. It is not enough to evaluate statewide trends
and broadband inventory. Granular data at the county level and beyond is necessary to accurately measure the
challenges on the ground and develop sound, pragmatic policy to help address them.
4.1.xviii Continued efforts to collect, validate, and benchmark broadband inventory data across the state
under the SBDD program is recommended. The extended federal SBDD grant program will provide financial
support for three additional years – beyond the initial two-year Mapping grant program underway – of collec-
tion, integration, and verification of broadband inventory data and mapping.
4.2 Strategies to Close the Adoption Gap

Research suggests that broadband adoption and usage trends among Minnesotans generally follow the national
trends. The adoption gap in Minnesota is estimated to be similar to the national estimate and non-adopters
overwhelmingly include the vulnerable demographics: the elderly, people with disabilities, low-income residents,
minorities, and those in rural areas.
Data also suggests that the reasons why Minnesotans are not choosing or able to embrace twenty-first century
technologies are similar to national trends: relevance, technology inventory, affordability, availability, and digital
literacy being among the top barriers to adoption of broadband and related technologies.
Finally, Minnesotans are increasingly using broadband technologies to improve their lives and endeavors. Broad-
band technology is helping citizens better connect with friends and family; federal, state, and local government;
health-related resources; and educational and professional opportunities. Yet, there is further room for growth in
application and usage of broadband that can and should be promoted by sound state and local policy.
Having measured similar adoption trends at the national level, the NBP recommends a series of strategies to
ensure that broadband is more affordable and accessible to all Americans. The NBP recommends a holistic ap-
proach to address the adoption gap among vulnerable populations and tackle key barriers to adoption including
relevance, affordability, and digital literacy. The holistic approach includes programs aimed to encourage adoption
in the home, as well as the strengthening of public computing and Internet access capacity at community anchor
institutions.
This holistic approach is consistent with the programs that Congress unanimously mandated in the BDIA. The
NBP and BDIA call for a series of principles and programs to be implemented at the federal, state, and local levels
aimed to implement pragmatic solutions to the broadband adoption gap. Connect Minnesota believes that key
among these are the following programs particularly relevant to state and local stakeholders:
4.2.i Promote public-private partnerships at the state and local levels to build awareness campaigns
about the benefits of broadband technology among at-risk populations. Awareness campaigns should target
at-risk populations and address the concrete and pragmatic benefits that broadband technology can afford
every community, neighborhood, school, library, community center, and household. Leverage the potential
opportunity under the extended SBDD grant program to conduct statewide broadband awareness campaigns
and local, grassroots broadband adoption stimulation strategies. This recommendation is present in the Min-
nesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report’s sections on broadband adoption.
4.2.ii Promote and facilitate local community engagement aimed to address local barriers to adoption
58
and develop pragmatic solutions tailored to each community. Statewide resources, from the private sector
and from the public sector if such resources can be identified, should be fully leveraged to ensure the success
of these grassroots strategies.
4.2.iii Expand, improve, or create pragmatic digital literacy programs at the state and local level and
leverage digital literacy resources available via the NBP proposed National Digital Literacy Program.
4.2.iv Encourage public-private collaboration to educate consumers and families about the reality of
online risks and promote online safety practices among children and citizens. Work with not-for-profits pro-
moting online safety practices and encourage online safety practices and principles across various state
departments and among educators in the state of Minnesota.90 Leverage the extended SBDD grant program’s
statewide broadband awareness campaign strategies. This recommendation is complementary to the Minne-
sota Ultra High-Speed Task Force’s recommendations on security.
4.2.v Leverage the proposed federal National Broadband Clearinghouse portal aimed to promote best
practices and information sharing, as well as the federal Online Digital Literacy Portal program. Explore ways
to leverage these federal online resources to complement and promote new or existing local or state resources
to more efficiently and effectively coordinate and implement best practices models and digital literacy offerings
across the state in a manner that is streamlined and non-duplicative of current or proposed assets or offerings.
This recommendation and a recommendation made by the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report are
complementary.
4.2.vi Promote expansion of publicly available computing and online resources leveraging federal, state,
local, and private funds. Federal resources available through programs such as the USF Schools and Librar-
ies (E-Rate) and Rural Health Care support programs as well as public funding available through the federal
Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Disbursements in Minnesota under the E-Rate amounted
to just $4.29 million in 2009 and a cumulative amount of $41 million between 1998 and 2009. Disbursements
in Minnesota under the Rural Health Care Program amounted to $73,000 in 2009 and a cumulative amount of
$453,000 between 1998 and 2009.91 This recommendation is complementary to a recommendation made in
the Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report.
4.2.vii Monitor and assess how the proposed reform of the Low Income Support programs under the Uni-
versal Service Fund will affect Minnesotans. The NBP calls for a comprehensive reform of the USF programs,
including programs aimed to support low-income households, including Lifeline and Linkup, and the Federal-
State Joint Board on Universal Service is seeking comment on these programs.92 In 2009, disbursement of
low-income support funds across the state of Minnesota amounted to $7.04 million, overwhelmingly from the
Lifeline program. Between 1998 and 2009, low-income support disbursements in Minnesota amount to $64.4
million.93 Hence, the reform underway is likely to have a significant impact upon the opportunity of low-income
households in the state to bridge the digital divide. The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report in-
cludes a recommendation on assisting low-income households with the price of broadband subscriptions, and
Connect Minnesota recommends that the Broadband Advisory Task Force remain engaged at the federal level
on this proposal.
90 For best practices regarding online safety strategies see The Children’s Partnership, iKeepSafe and the Family Online Safety Institute (FOSI).
91 Annual Report, 2009, Universal Service Administrative Company (“USAC”) http://www.usac.org/default.aspx.
92 See FCC CC Docket No. 96-45, WC Docket No. 03-109.
93 Annual Report, 2009, USAC.
4.2.viii Coordinate with Minnesota tribal nations on broadband issues. The NBP recognizes the impor-
tance of working with tribal nations to develop programs tailored to address the particular technology adoption
challenges faced by these communities. Furthermore, the authors would recommend strong collaboration
where possible with federal government agencies as well.
4.3 The 2009 Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report

The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report is 146 pages long and includes close to 70 inter-related goals
or recommendations.94 These recommendations largely serve to satisfy the primary goal of the Ultra High-Speed
Taskforce:
4.3.1 Broadband Availability

Ubiquitous broadband in Minnesota by 2015.
That Minnesota has available the following minimum speeds by 2020 Mbps (download):
■■ 10-20 Mbps (download)

■■ 5-10 Mbps (upload)
Also, that Minnesota, by 2015:
■■ Will be in the top 5 states of the United States for overall broadband speed (download/upload).
■■ Will be in the top 5 states of the United States for broadband penetration.
■■ Will be in the top 15 when compared to countries for global broadband penetration.
The Ultra High-Speed Task Force also makes note of the desirability of symmetrical speeds where possible, espe-
cially for advanced applications such as telemedicine, telework, and distance education. These broadband avail-
ability goals were codified in the state of Minnesota by HF2097 in 2010 (see Minnesota Statute Ch. 237.012).
At the present point in time, Minnesota’s availability of speeds matching its goals are that roughly 84% of house-
holds have broadband available at a speed of 10 Mbps download (advertised) and that roughly 55% of households
have access to broadband at a speed of 25 Mbps (advertised) or faster.
Table 12 – Estimate of Broadband Service Availability in the State of Minnesota –

At 10 Mbps or Faster
Unserved Served Percent Households By

SBDD Download Speed Tiers
Households Households Speed Tier
At Least 10 Mbps 301,312 1,593,815 84.10%
At Least 25 Mbps 850,309 1,044,818 55.13%
Source: Connect Minnesota, October 2010
94 http://www.ultra-high-speed-mn.org/CM/Custom/UHS%20Broadband%20Report_Full.pdf
60
The Ultra High-Speed Task Force makes recommendations in several sections dealing with broadband availability,
including:
Mobilize communities and their human, technological, and organizational resources, which includes: the collection
and dissemination of best practices; the collation of information on current broadband-mobilizing projects in the
state; the monitoring of federal initiatives that promote broadband planning, coordination or construction (such as
the Connect Minnesota program or the many programs described in Section 3.5); and the endorsement of a col-
laborative effort (such as the Minnesota Broadband Advisory Task Force and the Connect Minnesota program) that
can provide an ongoing focal point and funding for these tools and activities.
The Ultra High-Speed Task Force’s report also recommended that Minnesota pass legislation to form a multi-
stakeholder Broadband Advisory Council for Minnesota. The current Minnesota Broadband Advisory Task Force
was created after the enactment of HF2097. Connect Minnesota assumes that goals established for the Broad-
band Advisory Task Force will be addressed by the Task Force itself and will work to ensure that its current and
future work assists the Broadband Advisory Task Force in the completion of its mission.
The Ultra High-Speed Task Force’s report (see page 61) also recommends that the state work toward expansion of
the definition of Federal Universal Service Fund (USF) to include broadband. As noted above, Connect Minnesota
recommends tracking and engaging with the FCC on this topic. At this stage, while accepting that reform of the
USF is one of the more complicated elements of the NBP, the inevitable reform of the USF will include broadband.
The question remains as to what extent the USF will fund broadband, how it will treat existing USF recipients, and
the funding levels available to the USF.
4.3.2 Broadband Adoption

The Ultra High-Speed Task Force correctly perceived in its report that broadband adoption is critical to meeting
its goals of broadband ubiquity in Minnesota, and states, “Increasing adoption among those who already have the
capability to receive broadband is not only good for individuals and society, it is also a key factor in facilitating the
ability of providers to access further capital for additional deployment.”
The Technology Assessment contained in Appendix A of this report contains a detailed benchmark on the current
state of broadband adoption in Minnesota, both at an aggregate level and across several key demographic sec-
tors.
4.3.3 Infrastructure Security

The Ultra High-Speed Task Force noted in its report the difficulty of assessing the state infrastructure security and
redundancy when confronted with the confidential and proprietary nature of broadband infrastructure data.
The Connect Minnesota broadband inventory mapping activity has confronted this same challenge, and is guided
by regulations crafted by the NTIA to ensure the confidentiality of proprietary data. Connect Minnesota recom-
mends that the State look for guidance in the experience of the federal Department of Homeland Security’s efforts
to implement the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which led to the creation of the National Infrastructure Protec-
tion Plan (NIPP). In the NIPP, DHS discusses the issue of the sensitivity of telecommunications infrastructure data,
and as the state of Minnesota works to harden its communications infrastructure key insight may be gained from
experience of the federal government.
4.3.4 Cyber security

As part of its recommendations on security, the Ultra High-Speed Task Force discusses cyber security. To assist
the State in its pursuit of these goals, Connect Minnesota has compiled an initial technology assessment regarding
online activities pertaining to cyber security (also contained in Appendix A):
■■ 12% of Minnesotans with no home broadband connection and 18% with no Internet connection at home
say it is because they are concerned about fraud or identity theft.
4.3.5 e-Government
The Minnesota Ultra High-Speed Broadband Report makes several recommendations regarding access to high-
speed broadband service for the purpose of improving and expanding e-Government services. To assist the State
in its pursuit of these goals, Connect Minnesota has compiled an initial technology assessment regarding online
activities pertaining to e-Government (also contained in Appendix A):
■■ 52% of Minnesotans search for information about government services or policies online;
■■ 37% of Minnesotans interact with state government online, 28% interact with their local government, and
25% interact with elected officials or candidates;
■■ 48% of Minnesotans conduct online transactions with government offices.
4.3.6 e-Economic development

speed broadband service for the purpose of economic development, including data transfer, telecommuting, and
increased business opportunities. To assist the State in its pursuit of these goals, Connect Minnesota has com-
piled an initial technology assessment regarding online activities pertaining to economic activities (also contained
in Appendix A):
■■ 80% of Minnesotans search for product or service information online;

■■ 46% of Minnesotans search for jobs or employment online;
■■ 59% of Minnesotans interact with businesses online, and 56% interact with their co-workers online;
■■ 78% of Minnesotans purchase products or services online, 69% conduct online banking, 66% book travel
arrangements online, 65% pay bills online, 32% sell products or services online, and 21% buy, sell or
trade investments online;
■■ 37% of Minnesotans work from home (20% regularly telework now and 27% would telework if allowed);
■■ Three out of ten Minnesota adults (30%) who are not currently in the workforce say they would work if em-
powered to do so through teleworking. This includes 17% of retirees, nearly three out of five unemployed
adults, and almost one-third of homemakers.
Also, at the time of the compilation of this report, Connect Minnesota is in the process of completing an initial
technology assessment of businesses in Minnesota. The results of this study should be made available in the first
or second quarter of 2011, and should assist the Minnesota Broadband Advisory Task Force as it continues work
on e-Economic Development goals.
4.3.7 e-Health
speed broadband service for the purpose of enhancing access to healthcare services. To assist the State in its
pursuit of these goals, Connect Minnesota has compiled an initial technology assessment regarding online activi-
ties regarding e-Health or telemedicine (also contained in Appendix A):
62
■■ 70% of Minnesotans search for health or medical information online, including 66% of seniors;
■■ 37% of Minnesotans interact with their health insurance company, and 31% interact with their doctor or
healthcare professionals online.
4.3.8 e-Learning
speed broadband service for the purpose of education and e-Learning. To assist the State in its pursuit of these
goals, Connect Minnesota has compiled an initial technology assessment regarding online activities e-Learning
(also contained in Appendix A):
■■ 46% of Minnesotans conduct research for schoolwork online, including 60% of those aged 35 to 44;
■■ 39% of Minnesotans interact with their teachers online;
■■ 22% of Minnesotans take online classes.
Future iterations of this report will seek to address and adapt key proposals from the National Broadband Plan that
address key national purposes, as well as provide updates on Connect Minnesota broadband inventory and survey
research activities and findings.
Appendix A:
Connect Minnesota Residential Technology Assessment
June 2010
A-1
Connect Minnesota
Residential Technology
Assessment Results
In compliance with state and NTIA requirements
2010 © Connect Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Do Not Copy Without Written Permission.
March 2010 Technology Assessment of

Minnesota Residential Consumers
Presentation Outline
Summary of Key Findings 5

Broadband Adoption and Usage 11
Computer and Internet Adoption 23
Prices Paid by Minnesota Residents for Internet Service 33
Online Activities Among Minnesota Internet Users 39
Mobile Technology Adoption 47
Teleworking and Working From Home Through
an Internet Connection 53
Technology Adoption Barriers 57
2010 © Connect Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Do Not Copy Without Written Permission. 2
March 2010 Technology Assessment of
Minnesota Residential Consumers
Presentation Outline (Continued)
Residential Technology Assessments

Assessment by Age 63
Assessment by Annual Household Income 75
Assessment by Race/Ethnicity 87
Assessment by Urban-Rural Classification 99
Assessment by Education 111
Assessment of Households With Children 123
Assessment by Employment Status 135
Research Methodology 147
This page intentionally left blank.
Summary of Key Findings
Key Findings: March 2010
Key Technology Benchmarks, March 2010:

•Households with broadband service: 72%
•Households with a computer: 85%
•Residents who access the Internet from home or someplace else: 91%
•Residents who subscribe to mobile broadband via laptop or cell phone/mobile device: 26%
Other Key Findings:

•Across Minnesota, 72% of all residents subscribe to home broadband service; by comparison, a
national survey shows that 67% of American households subscribe to home broadband service.
•Statewide, 85% of all Minnesota residents own a home computer. This translates into over 588,000
adults without a home computer, with 73% of those without a computer saying they don’t believe they
need a computer.
•Statewide, 4% of Minnesota residents report that broadband is not available where they live, 89% say
with certainty that broadband is available, and 7% do not know whether broadband service is available.
By comparison, Connect Minnesota’s provider-validated Broadband Service Inventory found that 3.4%
of households do not have terrestrial fixed broadband service access.
•In rural Minnesota, 6% of adults report that broadband service is not available where they live, 83% say
with certainty that broadband is available, and 11% do not know whether broadband service is available
where they live. By comparison, Connect Minnesota’s provider-validated Broadband Service Inventory
reports that 7.4% of rural households do not have terrestrial fixed broadband access.
Key Findings: March 2010 (Continued)
•Broadband adoption among rural residents is significantly lower than the state average.
•Residents ages 65 or older are less likely to subscribe to home broadband service, and they are also
less likely to access the Internet altogether (from home or any other location).
•Statewide, 45% of broadband subscribers report that they have cable modem service at home, while
40% subscribe via DSL service. Satellite broadband accounts for 5%, wireless card/WiFi accounts for
1%, and fiber to the home service accounts for 7% of home broadband subscribers in Minnesota. Fixed
wireless broadband accounts for 9% of all Minnesota broadband subscribers.
•Eighty percent of Minnesota Internet subscribers also subscribe to other “bundled” services from their
Internet service provider. The most popular service to be bundled with home Internet service is home
phone service, followed by television service.
•On average, Minnesota broadband subscribers pay $46.35 per month for their home broadband.
Among those who do not subscribe to home broadband service, 31% cite cost as a barrier to adoption.
•Nearly one-half (48%) of Minnesota residents who do not have home broadband service say it is
because they do not need Internet service or don’t understand the benefits. More than one-third (35%)
say it is because they do not own a computer.
•Among rural non-subscribers, the belief that they do not need broadband or the Internet is the top
barrier, cited by nearly six out of ten (57%) rural residents without home broadband service.
Key Findings: March 2010 (Continued)
•The top applications used by Minnesota Internet users include communicating with friends and family,
sending or receiving e-mail, using a search engine, and searching for products or services online.
•Seven out of ten Minnesota Internet users search for health or medical information online, while 31%
interact with doctors or healthcare professionals online.
•E-government services are utilized by many Minnesota Internet users; 52% report that they search
online for information about government services or policies. In addition, 48% conduct online
transactions with government offices (such as e-filing taxes or filling out forms), 37% interact with
Minnesota state government offices, 28% interact with local government offices, and 25% interact with
elected officials or candidates online.
•Many Minnesota Internet users go online for educational purposes. Statewide, 46% conduct research
for schoolwork online, 39% interact with teachers online, and 22% take classes online.
•Minnesota residents also use the Internet for work purposes. Among Minnesota Internet users, 56%
interact with their co-workers online, 46% go online to search for jobs or employment, and 37% report
that they go online to work from home at least occasionally.
•In Minnesota, 20% of employed adults report that they telework. Teleworking could also provide an
additional boost to the state’s workforce, as 17% of retirees, nearly three out of five unemployed
adults, and almost one-third of homemakers say they would likely join the workforce if empowered to
do so by teleworking.
Minnesota Technology
Adoption Summary
Percent of all Minnesota residents
Use broadband
Use dial-up from
from home
home
72%
7%
Use the Internet

someplace
other than home
10%
Don't know if
home Internet
Don't use the service is dial-
Internet up or
9% broadband
2%
Q: Do you have an Internet connection at home? and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Which of the following describe the type of Internet service you have at home? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=1,207 MN residents) www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption by Demographic
85%
78% 77%
72% 69%
66%
53% 58%
53%
46%
39%
35%
Statewide Age 65 Low-income Low-income Minority Rural residents

or older households* households
with children*
*Low-income=annual household income less than $25,000
Q: Does your household have a computer? and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Broadband Adoption and Usage
Minnesota Residents Who Subscribe

to Home Broadband Service
Percent of all Minnesota residents who subscribe to home broadband service
72%
Statewide, 72% of all Minnesota residents subscribe to home broadband service.

This translates into over 2.8 million adults with broadband service at home.
Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
to Home Broadband Service
Percent of all Minnesota residents with
broadband service at home
72%
Statewide, 72% of Minnesotans 67%
(approximately 2.8 million
Minnesota adults) subscribe to
home broadband service.
National surveys indicate that

67% of American households
subscribe to home broadband
service.*
National Average* Minnesota

*Source: Federal Communications Commission,
Broadband Adoption and Use in America, 2010.
Q: Which of the following describe the type of Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Internet service you have at home? Residential Technology Assessment
Types of Broadband Service

That Minnesota Residents Use
Percent of all Minnesota broadband subscribers*
Cable modem 45%
DSL 40%
Fixed wireless broadband 9%
Fiber to the home 7%

Statewide, 72% of
Satellite broadband 5% all Minnesota
adults have
Wireless Card/WiFi 1% broadband service
at home.
Don't know/refused 6%
*Percentages do not add up to 100% because individuals could give multiple responses. Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
(n=856 MN residents with home broadband service) www.connectmn.org
Perceptions of Broadband
Availability in Minnesota
Awareness of broadband availability

among Minnesota residents
Statewide, 4% of
Minnesota residents
Have Don't know if
report that broadband is
broadband broadband is
not available where they
service, or say available
live, and 7% do not know broadband is where they live
whether broadband available 7%
service is available. where they live
89%
According to Connect
Minnesota’s provider-
Say
validated Broadband
broadband is
Service Inventory, 3.4%
not available
of households do not where they live
have terrestrial fixed 4%
broadband access.
Q: To the best of your knowledge, is broadband or high-speed Internet Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
service available in the area where you live? Residential Technology Assessment
Perceptions of Broadband
Availability in Minnesota
Among Rural Residents
Awareness of broadband availability

among rural Minnesota residents
In rural Minnesota, 6% of
adults report that Have
broadband service is not broadband
available where they live, service, or
and 11% do not know say Don't know if
whether broadband is broadband is broadband is
available to them. available available
where they where they
live live
According to Connect 83% 11%
Minnesota’s provider-
validated Broadband
Service Inventory, 7.4% Say
of rural households do broadband is
not have terrestrial fixed not available
broadband access. where they
live
6%
Q: To the best of your knowledge, is broadband or high-speed Internet Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
service available in the area where you live? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=400 rural MN residents) www.connectmn.org
When Minnesota Residents First
Subscribed to Broadband
When Minnesota broadband users began subscribing
23%
17% 17%
14% 15%
13%
Within the 1-2 2-3 3-5 5-7 More than 7

last year years ago years ago years ago years ago years ago

Q: When did you first begin subscribing to broadband service? Residential Technology Assessment
Why Minnesota Residents

Subscribe to Broadband
Percent of Minnesota residents with a broadband connection at home*
I realized broadband was worth the extra money 54%
I bought (or received) a computer for my home 48%
The cost of broadband became more affordable 44%
I learned that broadband was available in my area 43%
I needed to conduct business online 39%
I heard about the benefits of broadband 30%
Friends or family convinced me 18%
Other 4%
Q: Which of the following contributed to your decision to subscribe to broadband service? Residential Technology Assessment
Broadband Download Speeds
Download speeds among Minnesota broadband subscribers
Over 10.0 Mbps 7%
About 10.0 Mbps 4% Minnesota broadband

subscribers who know
About 6.0 Mbps 8% their download speeds
report an average
About 3.0 Mbps 8% speed of 5.9 Mbps.
About 1.5 Mbps 12%
About 768 Kbps 4%
Less than 768 Kbps 4%
Don't know 52%
Q: To the best of your knowledge, what is the approximate download speed Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
or bandwidth provided by your Internet service provider? Residential Technology Assessment
Actual Broadband Speeds

vs. Advertised Speeds
Among Minnesota residents with home broadband service
Nearly two-thirds of
broadband subscribers Download
(64%) say their speeds are Download
download speed is the slower than speeds are
same or faster than advertised about the
what was advertised by 27%
their provider. same as
advertised
60%
However, over one-
fourth of broadband Download
subscribers (27%, or
speeds are
approximately 763,000
faster than
adults) say that their
download speeds are advertised
slower than advertised. 4% Don't know
9%
Q: To what extent would you say the actual speeds you receive
compare to the speeds advertised by the Internet provider you use? Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Would you say the actual speed you receive is usually... Residential Technology Assessment
Satisfaction With
Broadband Service
Satisfaction among Minnesota residents

with their home broadband service
Very satisfied Not satisfied

74% 2%
Only 2% of
Minnesota
broadband
subscribers
report being Somewhat
dissatisfied with satisfied
their current 24%
broadband
service.

Q: Overall, how satisfied are you with your broadband service? Residential Technology Assessment
Reasons for Dissatisfaction

With Broadband Service
Among Minnesota residents with home broadband service*
Too slow 1.8%
Too expensive 1.5%

Overall, 2% of
Minnesota broadband
subscribers report that
Frequent service outages 1.1%
they are dissatisfied
with their current
service.
Latency 0.7%
Poor customer service 0.7%
*Respondents could provide more than one answer. Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: What is it about your broadband service that is not satisfactory? Residential Technology Assessment
Computer and Internet Adoption
Minnesota Residents With a

Computer in Their Household
Percent of all Minnesota residents who own a computer
85%
Statewide, 85% of all Minnesota residents own a home computer.

This translates into over 588,000 adults without a home computer.
Q: Does your household have a computer? Residential Technology Assessment
Minnesota Residents
Who Use a Computer
(At Home or Someplace Else)
Percent of all Minnesota adults who use a computer
92%
Statewide, 92% of all Minnesota adult residents use a computer.

This translates into fewer than 315,000 adults who do not use a computer at all.
Q: Do you have access to the Internet from any location outside of your own home? Residential Technology Assessment
Minnesota Residents With a

Computer in Their Household
When Minnesota computer owners purchased their home computer
27% 27%
23%
20%
3%
Within the 1-2 3-4 More than Don't know

past year years ago years ago 4 years ago
Q: When was the last time you purchased a home computer? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=1,015 MN computer owners) www.connectmn.org
Types of Computers That
Minnesota Residents Own
Desktop only
37%
Laptop only
18%
No computer
Both desktop
at home
and laptop
15%
30%
Q: What type of computer do you have at home? Residential Technology Assessment

to Home Internet Service
(Either Dial-Up or Broadband)
Percent of all Minnesota residents who subscribe to home Internet service
81%
Statewide, 81% of all Minnesota adult residents subscribe to either dial-up or broadband Internet
service at home. This translates into over 3.1 million adults with Internet service at home.
Q: Do you have access to the Internet at home? Residential Technology Assessment
Minnesota Residents
Who Use the Internet
(Any Internet Connection, from Any Location)
who use the Internet
91%
Ninety-one percent of Minnesota 79%
residents access the Internet either
from their home or from some
other place (such as school, work,
or Wi-Fi “hot spots”). By
comparison, a national study
recently found that 79% of
American adults use the Internet.*
National Minnesota
Average*
*Source: Pew Internet and American Life Project, “Home Broadband
2010,” released Aug. 11, 2010.
Q: Do you have access to the Internet at home? and Minnesota Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Do you have access to the Internet from any location outside of your own home? Residential Technology Assessment
Internet Access Locations

Among Minnesota Residents
Locations where Minnesota residents access the Internet
Home 81%
Work 44%
Library 16%
Someone else's home 13%
Restaurants 9%
Ninety-one percent of
School 8% Minnesota residents
Hotels 4% access the Internet
from home or from
Airports 3% some other place.
Community Center 3%
No access, any locations 9%
Q: At what locations do you have access to the Internet? Residential Technology Assessment
Bundling Services Offered
by Internet Providers
Among Minnesota residents Other services bundled with home
with Internet access at home Internet service
Home phone service 75%
Internet
service is Television 61%
bundled
80%
Cell phone service 5%

Internet
service is
not
bundled Other 1%
20%
Don't know 2%
Q: Does your Internet provider also provide your home with other service,
such as our telephone, cell phone service, or television? This is often called
“bundling”? (n=966 MN residents with Internet service at home) and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: What other services are bundled with your home Internet service? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=755 MN residents with bundled Internet access) www.connectmn.org
Prices Paid by Minnesota
Residents for Internet Service
Average Monthly Price Minnesota

Residents Pay for Internet Service
Average monthly price paid for home Internet service
$44.76 $46.35
$31.81
Home dial-up All Internet Home broadband

subscribers subscribers subscribers
Q: What do you pay each month for your Internet service? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=966 MN residents with Internet service at home) www.connectmn.org
Residents Pay for Internet Service
Percent of Minnesota residents with either dial-up or broadband Internet service at home
$50.00 or more 25%
$40.00 - $49.99 14%
$30.00 - $39.99 20%
$20.00 - $29.99 16% On average,

Minnesota
$10.00 - $19.99 6% residents pay
$44.76 per
Less than $10.00 2% month for their
Internet service.
(n=966 MN residents with Internet service at home) www.connectmn.org

Residents Pay for Broadband Service
Percent of Minnesota residents with broadband service at home
$50.00 or more 26%
$40.00 - $49.99 15%
$30.00 - $39.99 20% On average,

Minnesota
$20.00 - $29.99 15% residents pay
$46.35 per
$10.00 - $19.99 5% month for their
broadband
Less than $10.00 1% service.

Average Monthly Price Residents Pay
for Broadband Service
Average monthly price paid for home broadband service
$46.35
$41.18
On average, Minnesota residents pay
$46.35 per month for their broadband
service. By comparison, a national
study recently found that Americans
pay an average of $41.18 a month for
broadband Internet service.*
National Average* Minnesota
*Source: Pew Internet and American Life Project, “Home Broadband

Report 2010,” released Aug. 10, 2010.
Minnesota Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Online Activities Among
Minnesota Internet Users
Searching for
Information Online
Percent of Minnesota Internet users who search for the following types of information online
Product or service information 80%
Health or medical information 70%
Information about events in your community 63%
Information about government services or policies 52%
Jobs or employment 46%
Research for schoolwork 46%
Q: Which of the following types of information do you use the Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Internet to look for online? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=1,093 MN Internet users) www.connectmn.org
Communicating Online
Percent of Minnesota Internet users who communicate in the following ways
E-mail 90%
Through a social networking site 58%
Instant messages 34%
Posting content to a website 28%
Posting content to a blog 12%
Chatting in chat rooms 9%
Posting content to a microblog 8%

Q: Which of the following ways of communicating with others do you use? Residential Technology Assessment
Interacting Online
Percent of Minnesota Internet users who interact

with the following individuals or organizations online
Friends or family 87%
Businesses 59%
Co-workers 56%
Teachers 39%
Minnesota state government 37%
Health insurance companies 37%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 31%
Local government 28%
Elected officials or candidates 25%

Q: Which of the following types of individuals or organizations do you interact with online, Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
by visiting a website or communicating online to obtain information? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Transactions
Percent of Minnesota Internet users who conduct the following transactions online
Purchasing a product or service online 78%
Online banking 69%
Booking travel arrangements 66%
Paying bills 65%
Online transactions with government offices 48%
Selling a product or service online 32%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 21%
Q: Which of the following types of transactions have you Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
completed online? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Activities
Percent of Minnesota Internet users who conduct the following activities online
Using a search engine 84%
Sending or receiving photos 75%
Reading online newspapers or other news sources 69%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows online 48%
Playing games online 46%
Downloading music 46%
Working from home 37%
Reading blogs 27%
Taking online classes 22%

Q: Which of the following activities do you conduct online? Residential Technology Assessment
Use of the Internet to Make or
Receive Phone Calls
Among Minnesota residents who have broadband service at home
Do not make
or receive Make or
home phone receive home
calls through telephone
the Internet calls through
83% the Internet
16%
Don't know
1%
Statewide, 16% of Minnesota residents with broadband make or receive

home telephone calls using their Internet connection.
Q: Do you make or receive home telephone calls through your Internet connection? Residential Technology Assessment
Mobile Technology Use
Minnesota Residents Who

Own or Use a Cell Phone
Percent of all Minnesota residents who own or use a cell phone
81%
Statewide, 81% of all Minnesota adult residents own or use a cell phone. This translates into
over 3.1 million adults who use a cell phone.
Q: Do you have a cell phone? Residential Technology Assessment
Mobile Broadband Adoption

Subscribe to mobile
wireless via laptop
AND cell Do not subscribe to
phone/mobile device mobile wireless
5% broadband
74%
Subscribe to mobile
wireless via cell
phone or mobile
device
18%
Subscribe to mobile
wireless via laptop
3%
More than one quarter of Minnesota residents (26%) subscribe to mobile wireless
broadband either through their laptop, cell phone, or both.
Q: On your laptop, do you subscribe to mobile wireless service that allows you to
access the Internet through a cellular network? and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Do you access the Internet through a cellular phone or other mobile device? Residential Technology Assessment
Mobile Wireless Broadband for Laptops

Via a Cellular Network
Statewide, 17% of laptop owners (or 8% of all Minnesota residents) subscribe to a mobile wireless
service that allows them to access the Internet on their laptop computer via a cellular network.
Among all Minnesota residents Among Minnesota laptop owners

Do not
subscribe
to mobile
Don't own wireless
a laptop service
Don't
52% 80%
know
3%
Own a Subscribe
laptop to mobile
48% wireless
service
17%
Q: What type of computer do you have at home?

(n=1,207 MN residents) and
Q: On your laptop computer, do you subscribe to a mobile wireless Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
service that allows you to access the Internet through a cellular network? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=565 MN residents who own laptop computers) www.connectmn.org
Hot Spot Usage Among
Laptop Computer Owners
Among Minnesota Most popular places to access hot
laptop computer owners spots (among wireless hot spot users)
Do not Restaurants 70%

access Access
wireless wireless Hotels 66%
hot spots hot spots
49% 48%
Airports 50%
Work 46%
Libraries 34%
Don't
know Outdoor public places 18%
3%
Community centers 11%

Q: Do you regularly use Wi-Fi zones, sometimes called “hot spots,” to
access the Internet with your laptop? (n=565 MN laptop owners) and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Do you regularly use hot spots at any of the following locations? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=271 MN wireless hot spot users) www.connectmn.org
Internet Access Through Cellular

Phones or Mobile Devices

Own a cellular
phone and
access the
Own a cellular Internet through
phone, but do not a cellular phone
access the or mobile device
Internet through 23%
a cellular phone
or mobile device
58%
Do not own a
cellular phone or
mobile device
19%
In Minnesota, 81% of adults own a cellular phone.

Q: Do you have a cell phone? and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Do you access the Internet through a cellular phone or other mobile device? Residential Technology Assessment
Teleworking and Working From
Home Through an Internet
Connection
Minnesota Residents and Telework
Among Minnesota residents employed full-time or part-time
27%
20%
Regularly telework now Would telework if allowed
Q: Which of the following describe the way you work from home? and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Would you be interested in teleworking if your employer allowed it? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=814 MN residents employed full-time or part-time) www.connectmn.org
The Potential Impact of
Telework on the Labor Force
Minnesota residents who do not currently work and are “very likely” or
“somewhat likely” to work outside the home if allowed to telework
Three out of ten
Minnesota adults
(30%) who are not 59%
currently in the
workforce say they
would work if
empowered to do so 30% 32%
through teleworking.
This includes 17% of 17%
retirees, nearly three
out of five
unemployed adults,
and almost one-third
Not employed Retirees Unemployed Homemakers
of homemakers.
(full- or part-
time)
Q: If you were able to work from home through a broadband connection - commonly known Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
as teleworking - how likely is it that you would work outside the home? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=393 MN residents not employed full-time or part-time) www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption Barriers
Barriers to Computer Ownership
Percent of Minnesota residents with no computer at home*
I don't need a computer, or don't know why I

73%
need one
Too expensive 32%
I use a computer someplace else 19%
Computers are too complicated 3%
Other 1%
Q: Why don't you have a computer at home? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=191 MN residents with no home computer) www.connectmn.org
Barriers to Internet Adoption
Among Minnesota residents with no Internet connection at home*
I don't own a computer 51%

I don't need the Internet, or don't know why I
don't subscribe 48%
Internet service is too expensive 33%
I access the Internet somewhere else 22%
Concerns about fraud or identity theft 18%
Broadband isn't available in your area 12%
Other 1%
Q: Why don't you subscribe to the Internet at home? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=241 MN residents with no Internet service in their household) www.connectmn.org
Barriers to Broadband Adoption
Percent of Minnesota residents with no home broadband service*

I don't need broadband/the Internet,
or don't know why I don't subscribe 48%
I don't have a computer 35%
Too expensive 31%
I access broadband someplace else 17% Nearly one-half of Minnesota

residents who do not have
Broadband is not available where I live 16% home broadband service say
it is because they do not
need Internet service or
Concerns about fraud or identity theft 12% don’t understand the
benefits. More than one-
Available broadband service is not fast enough 2% third say it is because they
do not own a computer.
Q: Why don't you subscribe to broadband at home? Residential Technology Assessment
(n=351 MN residents who do not have home broadband service) www.connectmn.org
Barriers to Broadband Adoption
Among Dial-Up Users
Among Minnesota Internet subscribers who do not
Statewide, 7% of subscribe to home broadband service*
Minnesota residents
rely on dial-up I don't need broadband or don't know
why I don't subscribe
48%
service.
The top barriers to Broadband is too expensive 27%

broadband adoption
among dial-up users
is the belief that they Broadband service is not available 26%
do not need
broadband service
I access broadband someplace else 8%
and the monthly cost
of subscribing to
broadband service. The broadband service offered where I
6%
live is not fast enough
(n=110 MN Internet subscribers who do not subscribe to broadband) www.connectmn.org
Lack of Availability as a
Barrier to Broadband Adoption
Among Minnesota dial-up subscribers who say
broadband service is not available where they live
More than one-half of
Minnesota dial-up users
who say broadband Would
service is unavailable say subscribe
they would subscribe if it 52% Would not
were available. subscribe
27%
More than one-fourth of
Minnesota dial-up users
who say broadband
service is unavailable
would not subscribe to
broadband even if it were Don't know
available where they live. 21%
Q: Would you sign up for broadband service if it were available in your area? Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
(n=55 MN Internet users who do not have broadband, and report that Residential Technology Assessment
broadband service is not available where they live) www.connectmn.org
Assessment
by Age
Broadband Availability
and Population Age 65 or Older
Percent of the
Resident Population
Age 65 or Older
Less than 13.1%
13.1% - 17.9%
18.0% - 22.6%
Greater than 22.6%
Broadband Availability*
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
*Percentage of households served by terrestrial, non-mobile service with speeds of at least 768 Kbps download and 200 Kbps upload
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Census (2008 estimate)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
by Age
94% 92% 90%

85% 82% 81% 85%
77%
72% 71%
53%
39%
Statewide 18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65
or older
Respondent’s age

Access the Internet
Percent of all Minnesota residents who access the Internet from home or some other place
98% 97% 98%

91% 92%
61%
Statewide 18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 or older
Respondent’s age
Q: Do you have access to the Internet at home? and Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Q: Do you use the Internet from any locations outside of your own home? Residential Technology Assessment
Searching for
Information Online
Percentage is significantly* higher than the state average:

65 or
18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64
Percentage is significantly* lower than the state average: older
Product or service information 79% 84% 85% 82% 61%
Community events 65% 73% 63% 54% 50%
Health or medical information 65% 75% 73% 73% 66%
Government services 51% 49% 54% 61% 41%
Research for schoolwork 50% 60% 51% 31% 18%
Jobs or employment 60% 51% 43% 33% 18%
*Significance measured at a 95% confidence level

Percent of Minnesota Internet users who communicate with others in the following ways

65 or
Percentage is significantly* lower than the state average: 18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64
older
E-mail 95% 94% 90% 88% 76%
Instant messages 44% 40% 28% 23% 18%
Posting content to a website 34% 27% 30% 24% 16%
Chatting in chat rooms 12% 8% 8% 11% 4%
Posting content to a blog 17% 12% 9% 11% 5%
Social or professional networking sites 79% 67% 51% 38% 20%
Posting content to a microblog such as Twitter 12% 12% 5% 4% 3%
*Significance measured at a 95% confidence level Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota

Interacting Online
Percent of Minnesota Internet users who interact online with the following
Percentage is significantly* higher than the state average: 65 or

18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64
Friends or family 89% 90% 88% 87% 73%

Businesses 54% 68% 68% 58% 40%
Co-workers 64% 62% 58% 51% 22%
Minnesota state government 34% 38% 42% 44% 28%
Health insurance companies 35% 41% 38% 41% 27%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 30% 36% 30% 33% 25%
Teachers 42% 57% 40% 25% 11%
Local government 25% 31% 31% 32% 22%
Elected officials or candidates 20% 27% 28% 31% 24%
Q: Which of the following types of individuals or organizations do you interact with online, by Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
visiting a website or communicating online to obtain information? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Transactions

65 or
18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64
Purchasing a product or service online 84% 84% 80% 75% 48%
Online banking 82% 77% 68% 59% 36%
Paying bills 77% 74% 62% 54% 33%
Booking travel arrangements 65% 73% 71% 64% 47%
Online transactions with government 56% 55% 49% 40% 27%
Selling a product or service online 42% 35% 30% 22% 12%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 24% 24% 21% 22% 10%

Q: Which of the following types of transactions have you completed online? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Activities

18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64
Using a search engine 93% 90% 86% 78% 54%

Reading online newspapers 76% 76% 69% 61% 51%
Sending or receiving photos 81% 79% 76% 70% 54%
Playing games online 55% 51% 41% 38% 36%
Downloading music 60% 61% 39% 31% 12%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows 67% 55% 36% 31% 20%
Working from home 34% 50% 41% 37% 13%
Reading blogs 33% 32% 24% 26% 12%
Taking online classes 29% 22% 22% 18% 8%

Percent of Minnesota residents who subscribe to broadband for the following reasons

18 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64
I realized broadband was worth the extra money 53% 56% 58% 57% 45%
I needed to conduct business online 39% 46% 41% 41% 11%
Broadband became available in my area 35% 37% 50% 57% 50%
The cost of broadband became more affordable 41% 47% 43% 45% 44%
I received a computer for my home 47% 42% 49% 55% 53%
I heard about the benefits of broadband 25% 27% 33% 39% 38%
A friend or family member convinced me 14% 12% 25% 20% 23%

Top Barriers to
Computer Ownership
Among Minnesota residents who do not own a home computer

I don't need a computer or don't know why I need one
Too expensive
I use a computer at a different location
Too complicated
84%
73%
68%
49%
44%
41%
32% 37%
26% 24%
19%
3% 2% 5% 5%
0%
Statewide 18 to 44 45 to 64 65 or older
Respondent’s age
Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption
Percent of Minnesota residents without home broadband service

I don't need broadband or don't know why I don't subscribe
No computer
Broadband is too expensive
Broadband is not available in my area
62%
48% 46%
43%
37% 36%
35% 31% 32% 35%
27%
22% 23% 22%
16%
5%
Statewide 18 to 44 45 to 64 65 or older
Respondent’s age
(n=351 MN residents who do not subscribe to broadband) www.connectmn.org
Assessment
by Annual Household Income
and Median Household Incomes
Median Household Income
$34,493 - $43,729
$43,730 - $50,632
$50,633 - $62,275
$62,276 - $84,085
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Census (2008 SAIPE)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
by Income
94% 98%
90%
85% 81% 83% 78%
72%
64% 66%
48% 45%
36% 35%
Statewide Less than $15,000 to $25,000 to $35,000 to $50,000 to $75,000

$15,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 or more
Annual household income

Access the Internet
96% 96% 99%

91% 91%
73%
61%
Statewide Less than $15,000 to $25,000 to $35,000 to $50,000 to $75,000

$15,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 or more
Searching for
Information Online
Percentage is significantly* higher Less $15,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000

than the state average:
Percentage is significantly* lower than to to to to or
than the state average: $15,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 more
Product or service information 63% 60% 69% 75% 85% 89%
Community events 52% 40% 50% 55% 68% 73%
Health or medical information 63% 51% 60% 63% 74% 76%
Government services 43% 42% 49% 50% 54% 57%
Research for schoolwork 57% 52% 41% 41% 46% 49%
Jobs or employment 52% 49% 50% 37% 50% 46%

Q: Which of the following types of information do you use the Internet to look for online? Residential Technology Assessment
E-mail 79% 65% 86% 88% 93% 98%
Social or professional networking sites 56% 49% 54% 51% 61% 66%
Instant messages 48% 31% 31% 32% 29% 37%
Posting content to a website 27% 26% 26% 23% 32% 33%
Posting content to a microblog such as

Twitter
10% 8% 12% 4% 6% 10%
Posting content to a blog 20% 11% 8% 9% 11% 15%
Chatting in chat rooms 23% 10% 14% 10% 8% 7%

Interacting Online
Friends or family 81% 58% 85% 85% 90% 94%
Businesses 30% 38% 45% 51% 65% 73%
Co-workers 34% 27% 45% 43% 58% 72%
Minnesota state government 31% 21% 38% 32% 37% 43%
Health insurance companies 20% 15% 22% 29% 44% 46%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 34% 15% 23% 21% 34% 41%
Teachers 48% 30% 25% 35% 36% 49%
Local government 24% 13% 23% 20% 28% 35%
Elected officials or candidates 18% 10% 16% 17% 28% 33%

Q: Which of the following types of individuals or organizations do you interact with online, by visiting Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
a website or communicating online to obtain information? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Transactions

Purchasing a product or service online 62% 49% 65% 75% 85% 89%
Online banking 60% 40% 53% 60% 75% 85%
Paying bills 55% 39% 49% 53% 68% 81%
Booking travel arrangements 26% 32% 50% 49% 71% 86%
Online transactions with government 34% 26% 36% 43% 51% 63%
Selling a product or service online 18% 14% 26% 23% 33% 43%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 5% 12% 10% 14% 20% 34%

Online Activities
Percentage is significantly* higher
Less $15,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000
Percentage is significantly* lower
than to to to to or
Using a search engine 78% 58% 78% 77% 87% 95%

Reading online newspapers 49% 52% 66% 67% 71% 76%
Sending or receiving photos 61% 45% 65% 67% 76% 88%
Playing games online 34% 45% 45% 56% 55% 43%
Downloading music 47% 40% 37% 32% 48% 58%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows 57% 34% 43% 45% 52% 54%
Working from home 17% 10% 18% 18% 35% 58%
Reading blogs 25% 14% 17% 25% 29% 32%
Taking online classes 31% 17% 21% 20% 21% 25%


Less than $25,000 to $50,000
Percentage is significantly* lower than the state average: $25,000 $49,999 or more
I realized broadband was worth the extra money 47% 54% 56%
I needed to conduct business online 33% 32% 41%
Broadband became available in my area 28% 43% 44%
The cost of broadband became more affordable 54% 46% 42%
I received a computer for my home 53% 53% 45%
I heard about the benefits of broadband 30% 30% 30%
A friend or family member convinced me 26% 17% 17%

Top Barriers to
Computer Ownership

Too expensive
Too complicated
73% 74% 73%
53%
47%
32% 36%
32%
24% 21%
19% 14%
3% 2% 4% 0%
Statewide Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more

Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption

No computer
58%
48% 51% 48%
35% 31% 39%
31% 29% 32% 30%
23%
16% 16% 18%
12%
Statewide Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 or more

Assessment
by Race/Ethnicity
and Minority Population
Percent of the
Population that is
Minority
Less than 5.4%
5.4% - 10%
10.1% - 20.7%
Greater than 20.7%
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Census (2008 estimate)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
by Race
85% 86% 87%

72% 73% 72%
66%
58%
Statewide Caucasian Hispanic Other

Respondent’s race/ethnicity

Access the Internet
91% 92% 93%

81%
Statewide Caucasian Hispanic Other
Searching for
Information Online

Caucasian Hispanic Other
Product or service information 81% 55% 79%
Community events 63% 62% 56%
Health or medical information 71% 71% 60%
Government services 52% 48% 51%
Research for schoolwork 44% 68% 65%
Jobs or employment 43% 59% 68%


E-mail 91% 85% 92%
Social or professional networking sites 58% 52% 71%
Instant messages 32% 52% 50%
Posting content to a website 28% 24% 39%
Posting content to a microblog such as Twitter 8% 9% 14%
Posting content to a blog 12% 15% 18%
Chatting in chat rooms 9% 15% 20%

Interacting Online
Friends or family 88% 83% 88%

Businesses 61% 42% 51%
Co-workers 56% 51% 56%
Minnesota state government 38% 26% 26%
Health insurance company 37% 32% 32%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 30% 34% 44%
Teachers 38% 38% 59%
Local government 29% 19% 17%
Elected officials or candidates 26% 21% 15%

Q: Which of the following types of individuals or organizations do you interact with Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
online, by visiting a website or communicating online to obtain information? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Transactions

Purchasing a product or service online 80% 69% 64%
Online banking 70% 76% 66%
Paying bills 65% 70% 61%
Booking travel arrangements 66% 68% 68%
Online transactions with government 49% 48% 55%
Selling a product or service online 33% 28% 21%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 21% 20% 34%

Online Activities
Using a search engine 85% 70% 81%

Reading online newspapers 69% 76% 71%
Sending or receiving photos 76% 71% 65%
Playing games online 45% 54% 57%
Downloading music 45% 46% 59%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows 47% 54% 60%
Working from home 37% 36% 39%
Reading blogs 27% 20% 28%
Taking online classes 22% 14% 35%


Caucasian Minority
Percentage is significantly* lower than the state average:
I realized broadband was worth the extra money 56% 48%
I needed to conduct business online 38% 42%
Broadband became available in my area 43% 42%
The cost of broadband became more affordable 44% 43%
I received a computer for my home 47% 53%
I heard about the benefits of broadband 31% 23%
A friend or family member convinced me 17% 20%

Top Barriers to
Computer Ownership

Too expensive
Too complicated
76%
73%
49%
33%
32% 31%
19% 19% 20%
3% 4%
0%
Statewide Caucasian Minority*

*Sample size less than 30 Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption

No computer
48% 47% 52%
35% 35% 36%

31% 31% 30%
16% 16%
11%
Statewide Caucasian Minority

Assessment by Urban-Rural
Classification
and Household Density
Households per
Square Mile of Land
0-8
9 - 20
21 - 40
41 - 85
86+
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (March, 2010)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
by Urban-Rural Classification
85% 88% 87%

77% 77% 77%
72%
58%
Statewide Urban Suburban Rural

Respondent’s county of residence

Access the Internet
91% 94% 92%

85%

Searching for
Information Online

Urban Suburban Rural
Product or service information 82% 80% 77%
Community events 68% 65% 53%
Health or medical information 73% 71% 64%
Government services 59% 49% 47%
Research for schoolwork 46% 48% 42%
Jobs or employment 53% 47% 34%


E-mail 94% 90% 86%
Social or professional networking sites 62% 59% 51%
Instant messages 38% 30% 34%
Posting content to a website 28% 29% 29%
Posting content to a microblog such as Twitter 11% 8% 6%
Posting content to a blog 15% 10% 11%
Chatting in chat rooms 11% 8% 8%

Interacting Online

Friends or family 89% 87% 84%

Businesses 63% 59% 55%
Co-workers 60% 57% 49%
Minnesota state government 41% 37% 33%
Health insurance company 40% 39% 29%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 36% 35% 20%
Teachers 42% 40% 33%
Local government 35% 29% 20%
Elected officials or candidates 28% 25% 21%
Q: Which of the following types of individuals or organizations do you interact with Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
online, by visiting a website or communicating online to obtain information? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Transactions

Purchasing a product or service online 81% 79% 73%
Online banking 75% 71% 60%
Paying bills 71% 67% 53%
Booking travel arrangements 72% 68% 55%
Online transactions with government 55% 49% 40%
Selling a product or service online 32% 34% 28%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 25% 20% 18%

Online Activities

Using a search engine 89% 85% 77%

Reading online newspapers 74% 68% 66%
Sending or receiving photos 79% 76% 68%
Playing games online 48% 48% 42%
Downloading music 48% 50% 37%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows 51% 50% 39%
Working from home 40% 38% 31%
Reading blogs 34% 25% 23%
Taking online classes 24% 24% 17%




Top Barriers to
Computer Adoption

Too expensive
Too complicated
77% 76%
73%
61%
32% 36% 36%

22% 23%
19% 17% 20%
6%
3% 0% 2%

Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption

No computer
57%
48% 45%
37% 34% 39%
35% 31% 32% 35% 33%
25%
18% 18%
16% 12%

Assessment by Education
and Educational Attainment
Percent of the Population Age 25+

With a Bachelor’s, Graduate, or
Professional Degree
Less than 14.4%

14.4% - 18.4%
18.41% - 26.6%
Greater than 26.6%
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Census (2000)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
by Education
94% 95%
85% 87% 86%
83%
72% 74%
68%
51%
Statewide No college Some college College degree Advanced or

professional degree
Highest education level attained


Access the Internet
98% 97%
91% 93%
77%
Statewide No college Some college College degree Advanced or

professional degree

Searching for
Information Online

College Advanced or
than the state average: Some
No college degree professional
Percentage is significantly* lower college
than the state average: (4 yr) degree
Product or service information 73% 77% 84% 87%
Health or medical information 58% 70% 75% 77%
Information about events in your community 48% 59% 70% 77%
Information about government services 40% 52% 56% 62%
Jobs or employment 41% 43% 53% 40%
Research for schoolwork 40% 47% 46% 51%

(n=1,093 MN residents who use the Internet) www.connectmn.org

College Advanced or
than the state average: Some
No college degree professional
E-mail 83% 90% 94% 95%
Social or professional networking sites 52% 56% 62% 62%
Instant messages 37% 29% 36% 36%
Posting content to a website 27% 25% 29% 36%
Posting content to a microblog such as Twitter 7% 6% 10% 8%
Posting content to a blog 10% 9% 14% 17%
Chatting in chat rooms 10% 8% 11% 7%

Interacting Online
Percentage is significantly* higher College Advanced or

than the state average: Some degree
No college professional
Friends or family 82% 84% 90% 93%

Businesses 43% 52% 69% 75%
Co-workers 39% 46% 65% 77%
Minnesota state government 29% 33% 43% 46%
Health insurance company 26% 34% 44% 43%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 28% 25% 35% 37%
Teachers 27% 38% 42% 48%
Local government 21% 23% 33% 39%
Elected officials or candidates 13% 19% 30% 44%

Online Transactions

Advanced or
than the state average: Some College
Percentage is significantly* lower college degree (4yr)
than the state average: degree
Purchasing a product or service online 64% 77% 85% 86%
Online banking 53% 69% 78% 79%
Paying bills 46% 61% 75% 75%
Booking travel arrangements 47% 60% 77% 81%
Online transactions with government 32% 46% 58% 59%
Selling a product or service online 21% 31% 36% 40%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 13% 19% 25% 29%

Online Activities
College Advanced or
Some degree
college
Using a search engine 71% 83% 90% 93%

Reading online newspapers 60% 64% 78% 78%
Sending or receiving photos 64% 71% 82% 84%
Playing games online 52% 46% 44% 45%
Downloading music 40% 42% 51% 53%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows online 42% 41% 55% 55%
Working from home 16% 27% 48% 63%
Reading blogs 23% 19% 34% 34%
Taking online classes 12% 19% 28% 28%



No college Any college
Percentage is significantly* lower than the state average: education education

Top Barriers to
Computer Adoption

Too expensive
Too complicated
73% 76%
68%
38%
32% 28% 27%
19% 14%
3% 4% 2%
Statewide No college education Any college education

Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption

No computer
53%
48% 44%
43%
35% 35%
31% 27% 28%
16% 14% 18%
Statewide No college education Any college education

Assessment of
Households With Children
and Children Living in Poverty
Percent of Children
Living in Poverty
Less than 8.4%
8.4% - 13.4%
13.41% - 19.3%
Greater than 19.3%
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Census (2000)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
of Households with Children
94%
85% 83% 79% 80%
72% 69%
65% 65%
53%
Statewide Households with Households Low-income* Single-parent

children without children households with households
children

Access the Internet
98% 98% 98%

91%
87%
Statewide Households with Households Low-income* Single-parent

children without children households with households
children
Searching for
Information Online
Percentage is significantly** higher

than the state average: Households Low-income* Single-
Households
Percentage is significantly** lower without households parent
with children
than the state average: children with children households
Product or service information 82% 79% 59% 63%
Community events 69% 59% 45% 52%
Health or medical information 72% 69% 67% 64%
Government services 51% 53% 29% 40%
Research for schoolwork 61% 34% 72% 57%
Jobs or employment 52% 40% 63% 61%

**Significance measured at a 95% confidence level Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota

Households Low-income*
than the state average: Households Single-parent
without households
Percentage is significantly** lower with children households
than the state average: children with children
E-mail 94% 88% 82% 91%
Social or professional networking sites 69% 49% 61% 68%

Instant messages 41% 29% 52% 57%
Posting content to a website 33% 25% 31% 37%
Posting content to a microblog

such as Twitter
10% 7% 11% 9%
Posting content to a blog 15% 10% 25% 19%
Chatting in chat rooms 8% 10% 11% 12%

Interacting Online
Percentage is significantly** higher Households Low-income* Single-

than the state average: Households
without households parent
Percentage is significantly** lower with children
children with children households
Friends or family 90% 85% 74% 86%
Businesses 63% 56% 39% 54%
Co-workers 63% 50% 30% 50%
Minnesota state government 35% 39% 27% 35%
Health insurance company 40% 34% 22% 28%
Doctors or healthcare professionals 37% 27% 41% 37%
Teachers 58% 24% 48% 56%
Local government 28% 29% 23% 28%
Elected officials or candidates 26% 25% 11% 15%
**Significance measured at a 95% confidence level
Online Transactions

Households Households Low-income* Single-
Percentage is significantly** lower
with without households parent
than the state average: children children with children households
Purchasing a product or service online 84% 74% 59% 73%
Online banking 80% 62% 65% 70%
Paying bills 76% 56% 52% 60%
Booking travel arrangements 69% 64% 26% 50%
Online transactions with government 57% 43% 35% 43%
Selling a product or service online 40% 26% 16% 30%
Buying, selling, or trading investments 26% 18% 14% 14%

Online Activities
Percentage is significantly** higher Households Low-income* Single-

than the state average: Households
Percentage is significantly** lower without households parent
with children
than the state average: children with children households
Using a search engine 91% 79% 74% 82%
Reading online newspapers 77% 64% 63% 79%
Sending or receiving photos 83% 69% 64% 73%
Playing games online 53% 41% 50% 55%
Downloading music 62% 34% 54% 58%
Watching videos, movies, or TV shows 58% 40% 50% 61%
Working from home 49% 28% 15% 29%
Reading blogs 33% 22% 26% 25%
Taking online classes 27% 19% 27% 27%



Households Households
Percentage is significantly* lower than the state average: with children without children

Top Barriers to
Computer Ownership

Too expensive
Too complicated
78%
73%
56%
48%
38%
32% 30%
19% 14%
3% 0% 4%
Statewide Households Households without

with children* children
*Sample size less than 30 Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption

No computer
48% 52%
35% 34% 38% 38%
31% 30% 29%
25%
16% 12%
Statewide Households Households without

with children children
Assessment
by Employment Status
and Unemployment Rate
Unemployment Rate
Less than 5.8%

5.8% - 7.4%
7.4% - 9.5%
Greater than 9.5%
Less than 85%

85.00% - 90%
90.01% - 93%
93.01% - 96%
96.01% - 98%
98.01% - 100%
Source: 2010 Q2 Connect Minnesota statewide broadband inventory map and United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (March, 2010)
www.connectmn.org
Technology Adoption
by Employment Status
92%
85% 84%
79% 81% 80% 78%
72%
67% 66%
58%
45%
Statewide Employed (full- Unemployed Retired Homemakers Other

time or part-time)

Access the Internet
98%
91% 89% 90%
86%
66%
Statewide Employed (full- Unemployed Retired Homemakers Other

time or part-
time)
Searching for
Information Online

than the state average: Employed
Home-
(full-time or Unemployed Retired Other
Percentage is significantly* lower makers
than the state average: part-time)
Product or service information 83% 89% 64% 77% 75%
Community events 65% 64% 49% 65% 67%
Health or medical information 69% 76% 71% 81% 68%
Government services 52% 63% 46% 46% 64%
Research for schoolwork 48% 47% 21% 55% 65%
Jobs or employment 48% 83% 17% 40% 48%

Percentage is significantly* higher Employed

than the state average: Home-
Percentage is significantly* lower (full-time or Unemployed Retired Other
makers
E-mail 94% 88% 78% 78% 87%

Social or professional
networking sites
62% 67% 23% 60% 76%
Instant messages 36% 34% 16% 29% 53%

Posting content to a website 30% 33% 14% 32% 38%
Posting content to a microblog
such as Twitter
8% 10% 3% 8% 17%
Posting content to a blog 12% 8% 3% 22% 29%

Chatting in chat rooms 8% 19% 7% 6% 21%

Interacting Online
Home-
makers
part-time)
Friends or family 89% 90% 78% 77% 90%
Businesses 64% 62% 41% 46% 44%
Co-workers 65% 48% 20% 30% 41%
Minnesota state government 36% 49% 30% 40% 48%
Health insurance companies 39% 25% 29% 46% 19%
Doctors or healthcare
professionals
33% 18% 29% 28% 30%
Teachers 42% 38% 11% 49% 57%

Local government 28% 30% 25% 27% 33%
Elected officials or candidates 26% 24% 21% 29% 31%
Q: Which of the following types of individuals or organizations do you interact with online, Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
by visiting a website or communicating online to obtain information? Residential Technology Assessment
Online Transactions

Home-
(full-time or Unemployed Retired Other
Percentage is significantly* lower makers
Purchasing a product
or service online
82% 72% 54% 83% 85%
Online banking 74% 63% 42% 78% 73%

Paying bills 70% 59% 39% 59% 69%
Booking travel arrangements 71% 50% 49% 60% 62%
Online transactions
with government
52% 46% 29% 58% 44%
Selling a product or service online 35% 30% 13% 35% 29%

Buying, selling,
or trading investments
23% 25% 13% 22% 13%

Online Activities
Percentage is significantly* higher Employed

than the state average: Home-
makers
Using a search engine 88% 85% 61% 84% 81%

Reading online newspapers 73% 77% 54% 62% 66%
Sending or receiving photos 78% 73% 60% 76% 78%
Playing games online 45% 66% 38% 48% 66%
Downloading music 50% 58% 14% 47% 52%
Watching videos, movies, or
TV shows
50% 54% 24% 53% 70%
Working from home 43% 26% 11% 24% 25%

Reading blogs 29% 26% 13% 26% 32%
Taking online classes 23% 19% 13% 25% 29%


Percentage is significantly* higher than the state average: Employed

(full-time Retired All other
or part-time)

Q: Which of the following contributed to your decision to subscribe to Source: 2010 Connect Minnesota
broadband service? Residential Technology Assessment
Top Barriers to
Computer Ownership

Too expensive
Too complicated
85%
73%
67%
60%
39% 41%
32% 34%
26%
19% 18%
3% 4% 6%
1% 0%
Statewide Employed Retired All other

(full- or part-time)
Top Barriers to
Broadband Adoption

No computer
63%
48%
43% 45% 44%
35% 39% 35% 37%
31% 27% 23%
22% 17%
16%
6%
Statewide Employed Retired All other

(full- or part-time)
Research Methodology
Methodology
• Data were collected by telephone through live computer-assisted interviews

from a statewide random digit dial (RDD) sample of 1,207 households
contacted between February 22 and March 3, 2010. On average, each survey
took approximately 10 minutes to complete. Data were collected by
Thoroughbred Research Group in Louisville, KY.
– This research was designed to measure technology adoption and the awareness
of available broadband service, and establish benchmarks for these metrics.
• The questionnaire screened to include only adults age 18 or older with quotas
set by gender, age, and county of residence (urban, suburban, or rural) to
ensure adequate representation of all adults in the state.
• Weights were applied to correct for minor variations and ensure that the
sample matches the most recent U.S. Census estimates of the state’s
population by age, gender, and urban/rural classification of the respondent’s
county of residence. Weighting and research consultation were provided by
Lucidity Research LLC.
• Sampling margin of error:
– Statewide, full sample (n=1,207): +2.9% at the 95% level of confidence. This
sample error accounts for sample weighting, using the effective sample size.
Urban-Rural
Classifications Defined
• The U.S. Census Bureau uses an urban-rural classification based on

Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), which are designated by the United
States Office of Management and Budget to collect, tabulate and publish
federal statistics.
• Metropolitan statistical areas contain a core urban area with a population of

50,000 or more. Each MSA also includes one or more counties that have a high
degree of social and economic interaction with the urban core (further
information on definitions for MSAs can be found at:
www.census.gov/population/www/estimates/00-32997.pdf).
• When classifying urban, suburban and rural counties, we follow the Census
Bureau definition whereby counties are categorized as “urban” if they contain
the core city of an MSA. “Suburban” counties are MSA counties that do not
contain a core city, and “rural” counties include all remaining counties that are
not part of an MSA.
• Using these definitions, there are currently 4 urban, 16 suburban, and 67 rural
counties in Minnesota.
State Survey Sample

(n=1,207 Adults)
Gender: Employment Status:
Male 49% Employed full-time or part-time 67%
Female 51% Retired 17%
Age: Homemaker not employed outside home 4%
34 or younger 30% Student not working for wages 2%
35 to 44 18% Unemployed 5%
45 to 54 21% Disabled, not employed outside the home 2%
55 to 64 15% Other / no answer 3%
65 or older 16% Educational Attainment:
Mean age (years) 47 Less than high school 4%
Median age (years) 46 High school graduate 22%
Any children under age 18 in household 40% Some college 29%
Race: College graduate or higher 43%
White (non-Hispanic) 87% Refused 2%
Black (non-Hispanic) 2% Household Income:
Any other (non-Hispanic) 3% Under $25,000 12%
Refused (non-Hispanic) 4% $25,000 to $49,999 24%
Of Hispanic origin or descent 4% $50,000 to $74,999 18%
Marital Status: $75,000 or higher 33%
Single, never married 13% No answer/refused 13%
Married or living in partnership 69% Mean household income ($000) $63
Separated or divorced 9% Median household income ($000) $60
Widowed 7% Average household size (# of persons) 3.0
Refused to say 2%
Note: Sample profile shown here is after weighting to U.S. Census by age, gender and urban/suburban/rural county classification.
Appendix B
List of Participating and Non-Participating Providers
in Connect Minnesota’s Broadband Inventory
Connect Minnesota’s most recent data submission to the National Telecommunications and Information Adminis-
tration as part of the State Broadband Data and Development (SBDD) Grant Program included the participation of
approximately 78.9% of the Minnesota provider community, or 97 of 123 total providers. Data collected under the
SBDD formed the basis of the broadband availability information supplied in the above report. For the latest and
updated data submission, of the 97 participating providers, 20 supplied an update to their network or coverage
area(s), while 69 have reported no change. The remaining eight represented providers who supplied initial submis-
sion data but were non-responsive in the final 2010 update effort or could not verify coverage areas at the time
of the submission; therefore their initial dataset was put forward as part of the compilation. A complete roster by
provider depicting participation status is below. Of the 18 providers that are listed as not participating, six have
either refused to participate in the voluntary program or have remained unresponsive to the numerous attempts at
contact by Connect Minnesota, and the remaining providers are currently in some form of progress toward data
submission but were not able to either submit or verify coverage areas at the time of this submission, and are listed
in this Appendix as participating in the program.
It is the collective opinion of the Connect Minnesota principals that all commercially-reasonable efforts were made
to account for 100% of the known Minnesota broadband provider community.
At the program’s inception, Connect Minnesota launched a website to create awareness about the initiative. During
the provider outreach process, the website prominently featured an informational page specifically for Minnesota
broadband providers. Connectmn.org continues to serve a prominent role in the outreach and data collection ef-
fort. While one-to-one contact was made with each and every identified provider, the portal page was created to
ensure that no provider was overlooked. The website offered clear instructions about the data transfer process and
a means to contact a Connect Minnesota representative.
This program asset provides a way for the general public to participate in the process by offering interactive tools
for users to test their connection speed, submit broadband inquiries, or contact a program representative. These
program stakeholders are an essential component in the larger Connect Minnesota data validation methodology.
Providers Participating in the Connect Minnesota Broadband Inventory:

AT&T, Inc. Midcontinent Communications
Blue Earth Valley Telephone Company Qwest Corporation
Broadband Corp Savage Communications
CenturyLink Sprint Nextel Corporation
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC T-Mobile USA, Inc.
Federated Telephone Cooperative TDS Telecommunications Corporation
Frontier Communications Corporation US Cable Corp.
Garden Valley Telephone Company Verizon Communications, Inc.
Gardonville Cooperative Telephone Midcontinent Communications
Hiawatha Broadband Communications, Inc. TDS Telecommunications Corporation
Johnson Telephone Company Zayo Group, LLC
B-1 Connect Minnesota

McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. Runestone Telecom Association
360networks Sacred Heart Telephone Company
Ace Telephone Association Scott Rice Telephone
Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. Sheehan Gas
Arrowhead Communications Sioux Valley Wireless
Arvig Communications Systems Sjoberg’s, Inc.
Barnesville Municipal Telephone Sleepy Eye Telephone Company
Benton Cooperative Telephone Co. Southern Cablevision, Inc.
Cable ONE Inc. Spring Grove Cooperative Telephone Co.
Charter Communications Sprint Nextel Corporation
City of Windom Starbuck Telephone Company
Clara City Telephone Company tw telecom of Minnesota, LLC
Clearwire Corporation Upsala Cooperative Telephone Association
DIECA Communications, Inc. VAL-ED Joint Venture
diversiCOM West Central Telephone Association
Eagle Valley Telephone Company Western Telephone Company
Emily Cooperative Telephone Company Wikstrom Telephone Company
EN-TEL Communications, LLC Winnebago Cooperative Telephone Association
Farmers Mutual Telephone Company Wolverton Telephone Company
Felton Telephone Company Woodstock Telephone Company
Genesis Wireless XO Communications, LLC
Granada Telephone Company Zumbrota Telephone Company
Halstad Telephone Company Albany Mutual Telephone Association
Harmony Telephone Company Bradoo-WISP, Inc
Hickory Tech Corporation Christensen Communications Co.
HomeTown Solutions, LLC CitEscape Wireless Internet, LLC
Hutchinson Telecommunications, Inc. Cogent Communications, Inc.
Info Link Wireless, Inc. Consolidated Telecommunications
Interstate Telecommunications Crosslake Telephone Company
InvisiMax, Inc. Enterpoint Wireless
Jaguar Communications Evertek Enterprises LLC
KM Telecom Level 3 Communications, LLC
Lakedale LINK
Lakedale Telephone
Lonsdale Telephone Company
Loretel Systems, Inc.
Mabel Cooperative Telephone Company
Manchester-Hartland Telephone Company
Mediacom Minnesota, LLC
Minnesota Valley Telephone Company
Minnesota Valley TV Improvement
New Ulm Telecom Inc.
Otter Tail Telecom
Paul Bunyan Rural Telephone Cooperative
Pine Island Telephone Company
Polar Telecom, Inc.
Red River Rural Telephone Association
River Valley Telecommunications Coop
Rothsay Telephone Company
B-2
Providers Not Participating in the Connect Minnesota Broadband Inventory:
Kentucky Data Link, Inc. Digital Telecommunications, Inc.
Knology of the Plains, Inc. Dunnell Telephone Company
Nextera Communications Fibernet Monticello
A Better Wireless, NISP, LLC FTTH Communications
Minnesota Network Services Ideaone Telecom Group, LLC
Chaska Net Maple Leaf Networks
City of Detroit Lakes Redwood County Telephone Company
Clements Telephone Company Inc. Ridge Runner Internet Services Inc.
Cloudnet Inc. USI Wireless
B-3 Connect Minnesota

Minnesota Broadband Availability

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Minnesota Broadband Availability

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Minnesota Broadband

The Broadband Adoption Gap.................................................................................................................................. 11

Connect Minnesota Broadband Inventory and Analysis....................................................................................... 16

Appendix A: Connect Minnesota Residential Technology Assessment, June 2010......................................... A-1

Appendix B: List of Participating and Non-Participating

Overview of the Broadband Market in Minnesota

Table 1 – Estimate Of Broadband Service Availability In The State Of Minnesota –

At Least 768 Kbps 64,647 1,830,480 96.59%

At Least 1.5 Mbps 77,353 1,817,774 95.92%

At Least 3 Mbps 118,313 1,776,814 93.76%

At Least 6 Mbps 174,467 1,720,660 90.79%

At Least 10 Mbps 301,312 1,593,815 84.10%

At Least 25 Mbps 850,309 1,044,818 55.13%

At Least 50 Mbps 937,613 957,514 50.53%

At Least 100 Mbps 1,006,996 888,131 46.86%

Figure 1: Minnesota Technology Adoption Summary

Use dial-up from home 7%

Use the Internet someplace other than home 10%

Use broadband Don’t know if home Internet

Do not use the Internet 9%

Strategies to Address the Broadband Availability Gap

Strategies to Address the Broadband Adoption Gap

9 Broadband Data Improvement Act, P.L. 110-385, (“BDIA”).

Minnesota Broadband Service Inventory

Figure 3: Minnesota Technology Adoption Summary

Use dial-up from home 7%

Use the Internet someplace other than home 10%

Use broadband Don’t know if home Internet

Do not use the Internet 9%

2.1 Broadband Adopters and Non-Adopters

Figure 4: Minnesota Technology Adoption by Demographic

14 See Section 3 of this report.

2.2 Barriers to Adoption

I don’t need broadband/the Internet

I don’t have a computer 35%

Too expensive 31%

I access broadband someplace else 17%

Concerns about fraud or identity theft 12%

I don’t need a computer,

Too expensive 32%

I use a computer someplace else 19%

Computers are too complicated 3%

21 FCC Broadband Adoption and Use.

3.1 Broadband Availability in Minnesota – A State Bird’s-eye View

26 SBDD NOFA: RIN 0660–ZA29 July 8, 2009.

Table 2 – Estimate of Broadband Service Availability in the State of Minnesota –

At Least 768 Kbps 64,647 1,830,480 96.59%

At Least 1.5 Mbps 77,353 1,817,774 95.92%

At Least 3 Mbps 118,313 1,776,814 93.76%

At Least 6 Mbps 174,467 1,720,660 90.79%

At Least 10 Mbps 301,312 1,593,815 84.10%

At Least 25 Mbps 850,309 1,044,818 55.13%

At Least 50 Mbps 937,613 957,514 50.53%

At Least 100 Mbps 1,006,996 888,131 46.86%

Table 3 – Estimate of Available Terrestrial Fixed Broadband Service

Alaska 0.39 86.0%

Florida 117.53 96.2%

Illinois 82.61 97.9%

Iowa 20.57 95.4%

Kansas 12.69 97.23%

Michigan 66.64 96.8%

Minnesota 23.81 96.59%

Nevada 6.84 97.9%