07. b BEAD Volume 2 Draft1
2
Table of Contents
Requirement 1: Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 3
Requirement 2: Local, Tribal and Regional Broadband Planning Processes .............................................. 4
Requirement 4: Local Coordination ............................................................................................................. 5
Requirement 8: Deployment Subgrantee Selection ................................................................................... 6
Requirement 8: Deployment Subgrantee Qualifications .......................................................................... 10
Requirement 9: Non-Deployment Subgrantee Selection ......................................................................... 17
Requirement 10: Eligible Entity Implementation Activities ..................................................................... 18
Requirement 11: Labor Standards and Protection ................................................................................... 18
Requirement 12: Workforce Readiness ..................................................................................................... 21
Requirement 13: Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs/Women’s Business Enterprises (WBEs)/Labor
Surplus Firms Inclusion .............................................................................................................................. 23
Requirement 14: Cost and Barrier Reduction ........................................................................................... 24
Requirement 15: Climate Assessment ....................................................................................................... 25
Requirement 16: Low-Cost Broadband Service Option ............................................................................ 26
Requirement 20: Middle Class Affordability Plans ................................................................................... 28
Requirement 17: Use of 20 Percent of Funding ........................................................................................ 29
Requirement 18: Eligible Entity Regulatory Approach ............................................................................. 29
Requirement 19: Certification of Compliance with BEAD Requirements ................................................ 30
3
Requirement 1: Objectives
2.1.1 Outline the long-term objectives for deploying broadband; closing the digital divide; addressing
access, affordability, equity, and adoption issues; and enhancing economic growth and job creation.
Eligible Entities may directly copy objectives included in their Five-Year Action Plans.
2.2 Goals and Objectives
Minnesota first set forth a vision for broadband in legislation passed in the 2008 session that recognized
that all citizens should have the necessary access to broadband service for sending and receiving data.
Details were left to be developed by a broadband task force created in that same law. The November
2009 report of the Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force, a legislatively created body of 23 members
representing a cross section of organizations that had an interest or a stake in broadband deployment,
laid out a path to high-speed internet access for all Minnesotans. That path included recommendations
to set initial speed goal targets; implement policies and actions necessary to achieving ubiquitous
broadband access (lead, incent, measure, evaluate); create opportunities for public and private sectors
to cooperate; establish a broadband advisory council; conduct ongoing evaluation of strategies,
financing and incentives used in other states and countries; evaluate to ensure reliability; recognize
economic development opportunities; and evaluate the benefits of broadband access to organizations.
Since that initial Task Force report submission, Minnesota has implemented several of the
recommendations, either in law or by Executive Order, including the establishment of broadband speed
goals, a mapping program with ongoing funding to measure progress, the creation of an Office of
Broadband Development (OBD) located in the state’s Department of Employment and Economic
Development (DEED), a broadband infrastructure grant program reviewed annually by the legislature,
and a Governor’s Task Force on Broadband. The focus when implementing the recommendations has
stayed true to the initial reason for creating the Task Force in 2008: how to get all residents and
businesses connected.
The first policy recommendation of the Ultra High-Speed Broadband Task Force adopted into law was
for the establishment of goals around the ubiquitous access to a broadband connection. The first round
of goals adopted by the legislature happened in 2010. At the time, the speed goal was set for all homes
and businesses to have access to 10-20 Mbps download by 5-10 Mbps upload by the year 2015. The
2015 task force reviewed the progress toward these goals and determined that, while progress had
been made (91.45% state-wide and 80.16% rural), there was still a significant gap in access.
New goals were proposed and adopted in 2016 that revised the speeds and extended the timeline. The
resulting 2016 law set a deadline of 2022 to achieve universal access to 25 Mbps download by 3 Mbps
upload, and another deadline of 2026 to achieve universal access to 100 Mbps download by 20 Mbps
upload. The statute also highlights competitive goals for being among the top states when it comes to
broadband access and use. That broadband speed goal was, and remains, Minnesota’s objective for
broadband infrastructure deployment.
While the language creating the Office of Broadband Development included as a purpose to “improve
accessibility for underserved communities and populations” and a duty to “make recommendations for
increased usage, particularly in rural and other underserved areas,” specific goals and objectives related
4
to digital equity have not been adopted in Minnesota. That will change with the drafting and subsequent
adoption of a Minnesota Digital Equity Plan by November 2023.
Requirement 2: Local, Tribal and Regional Broadband Planning Processes
2.1 Identify and outline steps that the Eligible Entity will take to support local, Tribal, and regional
broadband planning processes or ongoing efforts to deploy broadband or close the digital divide. In the
description, include how the Eligible Entity will coordinate its own planning efforts with the broadband
planning processes of local and Tribal Governments, and other local, Tribal, and regional entities. Eligible
Entities may directly copy descriptions in their Five-Year Action Plans.
Minnesota has had a long history of engaging with partners and stakeholders, both at OBD, through the
Governor’s Task Force on Broadband (both by its membership and the public comment period held at
each meeting) and through the legislative process. Over many years, OBD has engaged in countless
meetings with various partners and stakeholders to ensure the infrastructure grant program is
addressing the needs of providers and communities (See Appendices 7.1 and 7.2 in the Five-Year Action
Plan). Prior to the Border-to-Border Broadband Infrastructure Grant Program being initially stood up in
statute, meetings were held across the state over the winter of 2013-2014 to gather input on how a
grant program should look. The result was the Border-to-Border Broadband Infrastructure grant
program created in statute in 2014. The Governor’s Task Force on Broadband has annually reported to
the legislature on recommended policy changes for addressing broadband needs in the state. The
Minnesota Legislature has annually reviewed the program and made program modifications in several
years—based on input from the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband and community input to
legislators-- along with approving funding. As examples, in 2016, the broadband goals were updated,
funding was specified for projects in low-income areas, and a challenge process was added. In 2022, two
new programs were created, the Line Extension Connection program and the Lower Population Density
program; the first to fund extensions of highspeed broadband service to locations within close proximity
to existing fiber and the second to allow for funding up to 75 percent of eligible project costs.
OBD would also note that tribal engagement has been ongoing since 2010. In Minnesota, that has
occurred through presentations to the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council as well as tribal consultations by
DEED’s tribal liaison and Commissioner. Tribal Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have also been recipients
of Border-to-Border Broadband Infrastructure grant funding directly (Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa and Bois Forte Reservation) as well as Border-to-Border Broadband Infrastructure grant
projects on tribal lands included in projects submitted by private providers with tribal support (White
Earth Nation, Red Lake Reservation, Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, and Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe).
With the addition of a Community Engagement and Special Projects Coordinator position, OBD will
continue to meet with providers and communities to explain the existing grant programs, the funding
mechanisms, provide technical support, and listen to concerns. To the extent it is within OBD’s ability to
improve the program as a result, it will do so. To the extent the suggestions require statutory changes,
OBD will connect the provider or community to the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband for its
consideration as a policy recommendation to the legislature, and/or directly to legislators for their
consideration in a future session. Because the program is grounded in statute, changing the program
framework does require a change in law during Minnesota’s relatively short legislative sessions. The
5
2024 session is the only one remaining to inform the BEAD proposal and is scheduled to start February
12, 2024, and likely conclude by mid-May.
Requirement 4: Local Coordination
2.3.1 Describe the coordination conducted, summarize the impact such impact has on the content of the
Initial Proposal, and detail ongoing coordination efforts. Set forth the plan for how the Eligible Entity will
fulfil the coordination associated with its Final Proposal.
The Minnesota Office of Broadband Development was created in statute in 2013 and, following a series
of public listening sessions in late 2013 and early 2014, the Minnesota legislature created the Border-to-
Border Broadband Development grant program. Over the years, that program has been revisited and
revised through review by the Office of Broadband, recommendations of the Governor’s Task Force on
Broadband, and statutory modifications by the Minnesota Legislature, all based on input from the many
stakeholder groups having an interest in broadband. Two of the most recent modifications to the
program occurred in 2022 with the addition of a Lower Population Density Broadband Development
Program and a Line Extension Connection Program.
Information on Minnesota’s broadband programs is available on the OBD website, printable flyers,
handouts, newsletters, webinars, in-person meetings, and regular attendance at annual conferences or
meetings held by groups such as the League of Minnesota Cities, the Association of Minnesota Counties,
the Minnesota Township Association, the Minnesota Telecom Alliance, the Minnesota Cable
Communications Association, and the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council. More recently, OBD held
listening sessions for its Digital Opportunity Plan and staff working on broadband infrastructure were in
attendance at those meetings.
Minnesota has had a broadband infrastructure grant program since 2014. The first six grant rounds were
funded with state general fund revenues, Rounds 7 and 8 in 2022 and 2023 were conducted with federal
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Capital Projects Fund (CPF) funding and state general revenue funding.
On October 9, 2023, round 9 was launched with $50 million in state general revenue funding. Specific to
just the grant program, OBD has ongoing and continuous outreach activities with the success of that
outreach evident by the fact that each round of the grant program has been oversubscribed by a factor
of three to four times.
The Local Coordination Tracker Tool, included as an attachment, is provided as documentation of the
outreach conducted by OBD within the past year. Minnesota’s Five-Year Action Plan contains
documentation of outreach activities that have occurred dating back to 2014.
2.3.2 Describe the formal tribal consultation process conducted with federally recognized Tribes, to the
extent that the Eligible Entity encompasses federally recognized Tribes. If the Eligible Entity does not
encompass federally recognized Tribes, note “Not applicable.”
2.3.2.1 As a required attachment only if the Eligible Entity encompasses federally recognized Tribes,
provide evidence that a formal tribal consultation process was conducted, such as meeting agendas and
participation lists.
Minnesota is home to 11 federal recognized Tribes and formal tribal consultations between the
Department of Employment and Economic Development occur on a regular basis, with broadband
6
specifically included as a topic for consultations as information regarding BEAD has been released by
NTIA. Documentation of those consultations, which are still ongoing, will be included in the Initial
Proposal upon submission to the NTIA.
Requirement 8: Deployment Subgrantee Selection
2.4.1 Describe a detailed plan to competitively award subgrants to last-mile broadband deployment
projects through a fair, open, and competitive process.
2.4.2 As a required attachment, submit the scoring rubric to be used in the subgrantee selection process
for deployment projects. Eligible Entities may use the template provided by NTIA, or use their own format
for the scoring rubric.
On October 9, 2023, Minnesota launched its ninth round of the Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program and its second round of the Lower Population Density Program. Both are
conducted under guidelines provided by Minnesota’s Office of Grants Management to ensure a
transparent, fair and successful grant process. The documents related to the grant program and
responsive to the BEAD Subgrantee Selection process are provided as links here (documents provided
will be modified to meet BEAD requirements once the final BEAD requirements are known):
Minnesota’s ninth round of awarding broadband infrastructure grants is being done under a new grants
management system. Applicant resources for participating in the grant round, which will also be used as
the basis to select BEAD subgrantees is available here: https://mn.gov/deed/programs-
services/broadband/grant-program/
The RFP that will be used to select subgrantees will be consistent with the Round 9 RFP: Call for Border-
to-Border and Low-Density Program Applications
The Grant instructions and Application Guide for Round 9, which will also be used as the basis for the
BEAD subgrantee selection process is available here: 2023 Grant Instructions and Application Guide
While Minnesota will conduct the BEAD Challenge process to determine locations eligible for BEAD
funding, the Minnesota Border-to-Border grant process also includes a challenge process conducted
immediately following the submission of applications each grant round which allows OBD to further
deduplicate any locations that will be receiving broadband services under public funding and planned-
for deployment with private capital. That process is described here: 2023 Challenge Process and the
form to submit a challenge is here: 2023 Challenge Form
The BEAD scoring rubric that will be used to rank and score applications is available as an attachment.
Finally, the Minnesota broadband infrastructure grant programs, from the application process to
selection to project completion, follow state grants management policies overseen by the Minnesota
Department of Administration’s Office of Grants Management and are available for review here:
https://mn.gov/admin/government/grants/policies-statutes-forms/
7
2.4.3 Text Box: Describe how the proposed subgrantee selection process will prioritize Unserved Service
Projects in a manner that ensures complete coverage of all unserved locations prior to prioritizing
Underserved Service Projects followed by prioritization of eligible CAIs.
The Minnesota Legislature has directed OBD to use any funds received through BEAD in its Border-to-
Border grant programs including the Lower Population Density Program. The Director of the Office has
the ability to prioritize grants to unserved locations where unserved is defined as locations without a
wired broadband service of at least 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload.
Minnesota anticipates conducting three rounds to select subgrantees, with priority in Round 1 given to
selecting subgrantees submitting applications containing predominantly unserved locations, consistent
with BEAD and Minnesota State Law. Dependent on the number of remaining unserved locations
following the Round 1 subgrantee selection process and the pricing contained in the Round 1
applications recommended for award, and data we will have available on the cost to serve the unserved
locations with no application, OBD will prioritize remaining unserved locations in a Round 2. To
prioritize, OBD will continue its outreach to existing providers and communities to indicate that all
unserved locations must be addressed before funding can be directed to underserved locations, so
applications to serve predominantly unserved areas will be funded first.
It should be noted here that Minnesota’s broadband grant program is technology neutral, so to the
extent that an application is submitted by a qualified applicant and demonstrates community support, it
will be considered for funding. OBD responds to applications received and does not substitute its
judgement for a community’s judgment in determining the appropriate technology to be built in a
community.
Minnesota does not believe that its BEAD funding allocation will be adequate to fund all applications
submitted that would reach all unserved and underserved locations. If unserved locations remain
following the submission of applications in Round 2, OBD will engage in direct negotiations with existing
providers and/or applicants in nearby areas about the potential expansion to encompass these
remaining unserved locations. As a tool for engaging in these negotiations, OBD will use cost per
location to serve data that it will have as a result of a Request For Proposal (RFP), cost data from its most
recent Border-to-Border and Lower Population Density grant rounds, and NTIA’s per-location NPV and
total investment data as references for assessing the reasonableness of proposed terms for expanding
coverage. In addition to Minnesota’s Border-to-Border Broadband Development grant program which
allows the state to match up to 50% of eligible costs, and the Lower Population Density program which
allows the state to match up to 75% of eligible costs, the state also has a Line Extension Connection
program (currently funded with ARPA CPF funding) which allows the state to contribute up to $25,000
per location. Assuming the Minnesota Legislature provides OBD with discretion to allocate BEAD funding
between programs as necessary, OBD will negotiate with existing providers and applicants on the
appropriate program to bring broadband to all unserved locations. Following negotiations related to the
Round 2 applications, projects will be selected and recommended for funding for inclusion in the Final
Proposal.
A third subgrantee selection process will then be held if funding remains, again with priority given to
unserved locations and additional negotiations held with providers and applicants. Following
negotiations, any remaining BEAD funding would then be awarded in that Round 3, which will likely
include primarily underserved locations.
8
If negotiations and/or funding options to address all unserved locations prove unsuccessful after Round
3, OBD will seek NTIA approval in its Final Proposal to classify any remaining unserved locations as
locations to default to existing fixed wireless service and/or low-earth orbiting satellite service and
addressed in any future state grant funding rounds, ReConnect 6, RDOF II, Community Connect, etc.
2.4.4 Text Box: If proposing to use BEAD funds to prioritize non-deployment projects prior to, or in lieu of
the deployment of services to eligible CAIs, provide a strong rationale for doing so. If not applicable to
plans, note “Not applicable.”
NOT APPLICABLE
2.4.5 Text Box: The proposed subgrantee selection process is expected to demonstrate to subgrantees
how to comply with all applicable Environmental and Historic Preservation (EHP) and Build America, Buy
America Act (BABA) requirements for their respective project or projects. Describe how the Eligible Entity
will communicate EHP and BABA requirements to prospective subgrantees, and how EHP and BABA
requirements will be incorporated into the subgrantee selection process.
OBD will make clear as part of its bid solicitation that each subgrantee must familiarize itself with the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), NHPA and BABA and demonstrate in the
proposal how they intend to comply. In addition, OBD is coordinating with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MNDOT), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR), the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO), the Office of State Archeologist (OSA), and the Minnesota Indian Affairs
Council (MIAC) to develop materials that provide subgrantees information on compliance with
permitting requirements and will make it clear that it is the subgrantee’s obligation to ensure its
proposed project appropriately coordinates their infrastructure construction activities with the relevant
state agencies/offices and comply with state and federal environmental requirements. Regarding BABA,
OBD intends that subgrantees comply with these requirements. Should a subgrantee demonstrate that
delays are being caused by the BABA requirements, OBD, working with the subgrantee and NTIA, will
seek to resolve those issues to prevent such delay.
2.4.6 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will define project areas from which they will solicit
proposals from prospective subgrantees. If prospective subgrantees will be given the option to define
alternative proposed project areas, describe the mechanism for de-conflicting overlapping proposals to
allow for like-to-like comparisons of competing proposals.
Minnesota will allow applicants to identify their project areas on a location basis. To prevent conflict
between projects, OBD will identify overlaps between applications that serve the identical locations. For
the applications that have overlapping service areas, a member(s) of the grant review committee will
contact applicants directly via the information provided on the grant application and work with specific
applicants to broaden or amend their proposed project area into uncovered areas to allow for
comparison of competing applications.
2.4.7 Text Box: If no proposals to serve a location or group of locations that are unserved, underserved,
or a combination of both are received, describe how the Eligible Entity will engage with prospective
subgrantees in subsequent funding rounds to find providers willing to expand their existing or proposed
service areas or other actions that the Eligible Entity will take to ensure universal coverage.
9
Prior to or while Minnesota’s Initial Proposal is under review by NTIA, OBD will check with existing
broadband providers in the state to inquire whether they plan to participate in the BEAD subgrantee
selection process and if so, whether they can identify any areas they are interested in serving. Based on
that preliminary information, OBD will identify remaining unserved locations and attempt to solicit
interest from providers in the vicinity of those unserved locations whether they would also be interested
in serving those locations or what might incent them to do so.
OBD will then prioritize the selection of subgrantees for unserved locations in the first two subgrantee
selection rounds. If unserved locations remain after those two rounds, OBD will then reach out to
providers again, focusing on those that have participated in the first two subgrantee selection rounds, to
determine the barriers to applying for the remaining unserved locations. OBD will also compare the
remaining locations to the cost study results that should be available by that time to determine which, if
any, of the unserved locations may fall into the extremely high-cost threshold category (see
methodology below). If cost is the barrier, to the extent OBD has available funding to award up to 75
percent funding to incent providers to serve these areas, it will do so. If there are locations below the
extremely high-cost threshold and which a provider is willing to serve with greater than 75 percent
funding, and OBD is allowed under state law to submit a waiver request to NTIA, it will do so.
At the end of the day, the decision to serve an unserved (or underserved) location depends on a
provider being willing and qualified to do so. Locations that do not receive a qualified application
despite 50 percent or 75 percent grant funding, and any additional inducements allowed by state law,
will be posted online to maintain transparency and to ensure that all interested parties are aware. If all
options for reliable technology alternatives have been exhausted with no application resulting, OBD will
default those locations as serviceable by fixed wireless if directly available or a low earth orbiting
satellite, all provided at a minimum of 100Mbps download/20Mbps upload.
2.4.8 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity intends to submit proof of Tribal Governments’ consent to
deployment if planned projects include any locations on Tribal Lands.
Minnesota has 11 federally recognized Tribes and the state, across all agencies, also has a long history of
working with its Tribal Nations. DEED has been conducting Tribal consultations for many years and
emphasizing broadband in those consultations this year as part of its BEAD planning process. Any BEAD
application with locations on Tribal lands must include, as identified in footnote 62 of the BEAD NOFO,
“a legally binding agreement, which includes a Tribal Government Resolution, between the Tribal
Government of the Tribal Lands encompassing that location, or its authorized agent, and a service
provider offering qualifying broadband service to that location.” If a legally binding agreement is not
included with the application, locations on Tribal Lands included in the application will not be
considered eligible for BEAD funding.
2.4.9 Text Box: Identify or outline a detailed process for identifying an Extremely High Cost Per Location
Threshold to be utilized during the subgrantee selection process. The explanation must include a
description of any cost models used and the parameters of those cost models, including whether they
consider only capital expenditures or include the operational costs for the lifespan of the network.
The extremely high cost per location threshold (EHCPLT) will not be set until at least the first two
subgrantee selection rounds are completed, as it will be used to ensure that limited funds are used
efficiently and that the State’s service goals are met. Given the anticipated funding shortfall, the State
10
will have to strategically set its EHCPLT to achieve its dual goals of maximizing the use of fiber and
optimizing available funding to reach all unserved, and as many underserved locations as possible. To
set the EHCPLT, the OBD will estimate the cost to serve all unserved and underserved BSLs using data
that will be provided under an RFP issued by the state, supplemented with information from the most
recent Border-to-Border and Lower Population Density broadband grant rounds conducted in
Minnesota, CostQuest data, and the fact that the Minnesota Legislature has established a Line Extension
program that allows for the funding of service extensions up to $25,000 per location. These estimates
will be based on capital expenditures and will be adjusted based on the bids received. Finally, an
optimization analysis will be conducted to ensure that the threshold can be set as high as possible but
still meet the State’s goals of maximizing the use of fiber and stretching BEAD funding as far as possible.
2.4.10 Text Box: Outline a plan for how the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold will be utilized in
the subgrantee selection process to maximize the use of the best available technology while ensuring
that the program can meet the prioritization and scoring requirements set forth in Section IV.B.6.b of the
BEAD NOFO. The response must describe: a. The process for declining a subgrantee proposal that
exceeds the threshold where an alternative technology is less expensive. b. The plan for engaging
subgrantees to revise their proposals and ensure locations do not require a subsidy. c. The process for
selecting a proposal that involves a less costly technology and may not meet the definition of Reliable
Broadband.
Because OBD anticipates that the BEAD allocation may not enable the extension of the service desired
by communities to all unserved and underserved locations, it will utilize careful budgeting and
strategically set its EHCPLT to extend its BEAD allocation as far as possible. By completing at least two
competitive grant rounds prior to setting the EHCPLT, the State will establish a complete view of the
funds required to provide the desired service to all unserved and as many underserved locations as
possible. It will take a holistic view of all bids to determine where it can accept bids that are higher than
expected, and where less expensive bids may balance out the budget. If there are locations included in
only a single application (as OBD anticipates) and the data available to OBD demonstrates that those
applications include a higher cost per location than supported by the available data, OBD will attempt to
negotiate with providers to optimize budgets while maximizing the use of fiber. Ultimately, however, if a
provider is unwilling to negotiate downward, the award may need to be made to get those locations
served or those locations are defaulted as serviceable by fixed wireless if directly available or a low earth
orbiting satellite, all provided at a minimum of 100Mbps download/20Mbps upload.
Requirement 8: Deployment Subgrantee Qualifications
2.4.11 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure prospective subgrantees deploying network
facilities meet the minimum qualifications for financial capability as outlined on pages 72-73 of the BEAD
NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials related to the BEAD subgrantee
selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline alignment with requirements for this
section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to certify that they are
qualified to meet the obligations associated with a Project, that prospective subgrantees will have
available funds for all project costs that exceed the amount of the grant, and that prospective
subgrantees will comply with all Program requirements, including service milestones. To the extent the
11
Eligible Entity disburses funding to subgrantees only upon completion of the associated tasks, the Eligible
Entity will require each prospective subgrantee to certify that it has and will continue to have sufficient
financial resources to cover its eligible costs for the Project until such time as the Eligible Entity
authorizes additional disbursements.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity plans to establish a model letter of credit substantially similar to
the model letter of credit established by the FCC in connection with the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund
(RDOF).
c. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit audited financial
statements.
d. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit business plans
and related analyses that substantiate the sustainability of the proposed project.
2.4.11.1 Optional Attachment: As an optional attachment, submit application materials related
to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, such as drafts of the Requests for Proposals for deployment
projects, and narrative to crosswalk against requirements in the Deployment Subgrantee Qualifications
section.
OBD has conducted nine broadband infrastructure grant rounds with the demonstration of financial
capability improved or clarified as necessary over the grant rounds and always following the
requirements of Minnesota’s state grants management guidelines. The application material required to
be completed to document financial capability can be found in OBD’s 2023 Grant Instructions and
Application Guide for the current Round 9 and specifically in Section 1 starting at page 9 where the
applicant must provide documentation to support the financial viability by providing its most recent
audited financial statements. An applicant affidavit is also required which must include approval for and
commitment to provide the applicant’s required matching funding. The applicant must also provide
documentation to validate the availability of its matching funds including a letter of credit, a letter
confirming funds from a bank, a board resolution committing funding, or loan documentation. Any
partner match must also be identified and documented. OBD also requires a five-year pro forma/return
on investment analysis to demonstrate the financial viability of the project over time.
Current policies of the Minnesota Department of Administration that must be followed in the grants
process can be found here: https://mn.gov/admin/government/grants/policies-statutes-forms/
As a last step, for applications being considered for funding, OBD runs a D&B Finance Analytic report on
the entity submitting the application as an additional measure of risk assessment prior to finalizing
projects to recommend for a grant award.
Minnesota’s practices have worked well for multiple rounds of broadband infrastructure grant funding
but can be modified if NTIA so requires in writing for receipt of BEAD funding.
2.4.12 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee deploying
network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for managerial capability as outlined on pages 73 –
74 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials related to the BEAD
subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline alignment with
requirements for this section. The response must:
12
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit resumes for key
management personnel.
b. Detail how it will require prospective subgrantees to provide a narrative describing their readiness to
manage their proposed project and ongoing services provided.
OBD has conducted nine broadband infrastructure grant rounds with the demonstration of managerial
capability improved as necessary over the grant rounds. The application material required to be
completed to document managerial capability can be found in OBD’s 2023 Grant Instructions and
Application Guide for the current Round 9 and specifically in Section 1 starting at page 9 where the
applicant must provide documentation to support the organizational capacity, including documentation
that identifies key officers and management personnel with brief resumes, organizational structure
charts and a detailed description of how the organizational strength matches to the level of broadband
service delivery and service maintenance necessary to meet current and proposed broadband
deployment. The applicant affidavit or resolution must include official applicant support for the project
submitted in the application, a commitment to offer service for at least five years, and a commitment
and capacity to ensure adequate project administration and compliance with all contract terms. The
executive summary included in Section 2 of the application (page 9-10) must also describe the
applicant’s prior involvement in broadband technology implementation and how the applicant intends
to manage and sustain the proposed project.
2.4.13 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee deploying
network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for technical capability as outlined on page 74 of the
BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials related to the BEAD subgrantee
selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline alignment with requirements for this
section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to certify that they are technically
qualified to complete and operate the Project and that they are capable of carrying out the funded
activities in a competent manner, including that they will use an appropriately skilled and credentialed
workforce.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit a network design,
diagram, project costs, build-out timeline and milestones for project implementation, and a capital
investment schedule evidencing complete build-out and the initiation of service within four years of the
date on which the entity receives the subgrant, all certified by a professional engineer, stating that the
proposed network can deliver broadband service that meets the requisite performance requirements to
all locations served by the Project.
OBD has conducted nine broadband infrastructure grant rounds with the demonstration of technical
capability improved as necessary over the grant rounds. The application material required to be
completed to document technical capability can be found in OBD’s 2023 Grant Instructions and
Application Guide for the current Round 9 and specifically in Section 1 starting at page 8 where the
applicant must provide documentation to support its technical expertise and specific prior experience in
providing broadband services in Minnesota (and other states, if applicable). In Section 4 (page 14), the
applicant must confirm that upon completion the project will be capable of delivering service of at least
100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload (or 100Mbps symmetrical for federally funded projects
13
awarded through the state Border to Border or Lower Population Density grant programs) or the project
is not eligible for funding. In Section 6, the applicant must include all engineering designs, diagrams and
maps that demonstrate the viability of the proposed project. The information must be certified by a
registered Professional Engineer. Documentation to support that the technology to be deployed is
scalable to 100Mbps symmetrical must be certified by either the manufacturer of the equipment or by a
registered Professional Engineer.
Section 6 (page 14) is also where the applicant must provide a project schedule which reflects all key
planning, procurement, construction, installation, testing, and service activation milestones, with an
anticipated start date and completion date for each milestone. The contract executed with the
subgrantee will include a completion date that meets BEAD requirements.
Section 10 (page 17) includes budget tables to be completed by the applicant which include tables for
the requested budget, a budget summary and cost share (match) and information on any funding
partners. Project costs deemed eligible are listed. The start date for incurring expenses eligible for
reimbursement (under state grant guidelines) is the date the contract is fully executed. If federal
guidelines provide for an earlier start date for incurring reimbursable expenditures, the state process
can be modified to accommodate a directive allowing for that earlier date, otherwise the state process
will be followed.
The budget details narrative and procurement/bidding policies and procedure, which is also part of
Section 10, provide the opportunity for the applicant to define the elements and activities that make up
each budget category and how the budget figures were determined.
In addition to the above, because the applicant is responsible for a match amount of at least 50 percent
for a Border-to-Border application (and at least 25 percent for a Lower Population Density application),
and because the applicant will be responsible for all ongoing maintenance and operational costs, the
applicant is incented to ensure that the work to be completed is done right.
And again, for all applications being considered for funding, OBD runs a D&B Finance Analytic report on
the entity submitting the application as an additional measure of risk assessment prior to finalizing
projects to recommend for a grant award.
2.4.14 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee deploying
network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for compliance with applicable laws as outlined on
page 74 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials related to the
BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline alignment with
requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to demonstrate that they are
capable of carrying out funded activities in a competent manner in compliance with all applicable
federal, state, territorial, and local laws.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to permit workers to create worker-
led health and safety committees that management will meet with upon reasonable request.
The D&B Finance Analytic report will identify any risk related to noncompliance with state, federal and
local laws. The contract signed with the subgrantee requires compliance with the grant contract
14
agreement and all applicable state and federal laws. OBD requires reporting on steps for safety and
healthy workplaces in grantee’s semi-annual progress reports for projects that exceed thresholds
identified for that federal funding and a similar reporting requirement can be established if required for
BEAD funding.
2.4.15 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee deploying
network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for operational capability as outlined on pages 74 –
75 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials related to the BEAD
subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline alignment with
requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to certify that they possess the
operational capability to qualify to complete and operate the Project.
b. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to submit a certification that have
provided a voice, broadband, and/or electric transmission or distribution service for at least two (2)
consecutive years prior to the date of its application submission or that it is a wholly owned subsidiary of
such an entity, attests to and specify the number of years the prospective subgrantee or its parent
company has been operating.
c. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees that have provided a voice and/or
broadband service, to certify that it has timely filed Commission Form 477s and the Broadband DATA Act
submission, if applicable, as required during this time period, and otherwise has complied with the
Commission’s rules and regulations.
d. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees that have operated only an electric
transmission or distribution service, to submit qualified operating or financial reports, that it has filed
with the relevant financial institution for the relevant time period along with a certification that the
submission is a true and accurate copy of the reports that were provided to the relevant financial
institution.
e. In reference to new entrants to the broadband market, detail how the Eligible Entity will require
prospective subgrantees to provide evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the newly formed entity has
obtained, through internal or external resources, sufficient operational capabilities.
The technical, managerial and financial capacity documentation required above, which includes a signed
affidavit/resolution, will together demonstrate the operational capacity of the applicant. The D&B
Analytics report will uncover any risks concerning the ongoing operational capacity of an applicant being
considered for a grant award. And the contract will require the subgrantee comply with all contract
requirements including abiding by all applicable state and federal laws.
If the FCC or NTIA have any concerns with particular applicants for BEAD funding, the FCC and NTIA
through their regular check-ins, can share such information and relay to the Eligible Entities as
appropriate. And, ultimately, the NTIA has the final approval over the Eligible Entities’ Final Proposals
and can deny BEAD funding being awarded to any subgrantee included in a Final Proposal.
2.4.16 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure that any prospective subgrantee deploying
network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for providing information on ownership as outlined
15
on page 75 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials related to the
BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline alignment with
requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how the Eligible Entity will require prospective subgrantees to provide ownership information
consistent with the requirements set forth in 47 C.F.R. § 1.2112(a)(1)-(7).
The Office of Broadband Development is committed to ensuring that applicants seeking to deploy
network facilities are thoroughly vetted and meet the minimum qualifications for providing information
on ownership as outlined in the BEAD NOFO.
The Office of Broadband Development will require each applicant to provide ownership information
consistent with the requirements set forth in 47 C.F.R. § 1.2112(a)(1)-(7).
The Code of Federal Regulations regarding ownership information requires the following:
(1) List the real party or parties in interest in the applicant or application, including a complete
disclosure of the identity and relationship of those persons or entities directly or indirectly owning or
controlling (or both) the applicant;
(2) List the name, address, and citizenship of any party holding 10 percent or more of stock in the
applicant, whether voting or nonvoting, common or preferred, including the specific amount of the
interest or percentage held;
(3) List, in the case of a limited partnership, the name, address and citizenship of each limited partner
whose interest in the applicant is 10 percent or greater (as calculated according to the percentage of
equity paid in or the percentage of distribution of profits and losses);
(4) List, in the case of a general partnership, the name, address and citizenship of each partner, and the
share or interest participation in the partnership;
(5) List, in the case of a limited liability company, the name, address, and citizenship of each of its
members whose interest in the applicant is 10 percent or greater;
(6) List all parties holding indirect ownership interests in the applicant as determined by successive
multiplication of the ownership percentages for each link in the vertical ownership chain, that equals 10
percent or more of the applicant, except that if the ownership percentage for an interest in any link in
the chain exceeds 50 percent or represents actual control, it shall be treated and reported as if it were a
100 percent interest; and
(7) List any FCC-regulated entity or applicant for an FCC license, in which the applicant or any of the
parties identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section, owns 10 percent or more of stock,
whether voting or nonvoting, common or preferred. This list must include a description of each such
entity's principal business and a description of each such entity's relationship to the applicant (e.g.,
Company A owns 10 percent of Company B (the applicant) and 10 percent of Company C, then
Companies A and C must be listed on Company B's application, where C is an FCC licensee and/or license
applicant). (b) Designated entity status. In addition to the information required under paragraph (a) of
this section, each applicant claiming eligibility for small business provisions, or a rural service provider
16
bidding credit shall disclose the following: (1) On its application to participate in competitive bidding
(i.e., shortform application (see 47 CFR 1.2105)):
(i) List the names, addresses, and citizenship of all officers, directors, affiliates, and other controlling
interests of the applicant, as described in § 1.2110, and, if a consortium of small businesses or
consortium of very small businesses, the members of the conglomerate organization;
(ii) List any FCC-regulated entity or applicant for an FCC license, in which any controlling interest of the
applicant owns a 10 percent or greater interest or a total of 10 percent or more of any class of stock,
warrants, options or debt securities. This list must include a description of each such entity's principal
business and a description of each such entity's relationship to the applicant;
(iii) List all parties with which the applicant has entered into agreements or arrangements for the use of
any of the spectrum capacity of any of the applicant's spectrum;
(iv) List separately and in the aggregate the gross revenues, computed in accordance with § 1.2110, for
each of the following: The applicant, its affiliates, its controlling interests, and the affiliates of its
controlling interests; and if a consortium of small businesses, the members comprising the consortium;
(v) If claiming eligibility for a rural service provider bidding credit, provide all information to
demonstrate that the applicant meets the criteria for such credit as set forth in § 1.2110(f)(4); and
(vi) If applying as a consortium of designated entities, provide the information in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)
through (v) of this section separately for each member of the consortium. Applications that fail to meet
the minimum qualifications for providing ownership information as outlined on page 75 of the BEAD
NOFO will not be considered to receive BEAD funding through OBD.
2.4.17 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure any prospective subgrantee deploying
network facilities meets the minimum qualifications for providing information on other public funding as
outlined on pages 75 – 76 of the BEAD NOFO. If the Eligible Entity opts to provide application materials
related to the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the Eligible Entity may reference those to outline
alignment with requirements for this section. The response must:
a. Detail how it will require prospective subgrantees to disclose for itself and for its affiliates, any
application the subgrantee or its affiliates have submitted or plan to submit, and every broadband
deployment project that the subgrantee or its affiliates are undertaking or have committed to undertake
at the time of the application using public funds.
Throughout its eight completed and ninth round in progress, the Office of Broadband Development has
been mindful of its role in safeguarding the use of public dollars and ensuring the funding is used to
bring broadband service to locations not otherwise scheduled to receive such services. Under Section 6
of the current application, information is required to be provided on whether an applicant has
submitted or intends to submit the same project, or any overlapping portion, to any other federal or
state broadband funding program. If yes, the applicant is required to attach a map and list of addresses
identifying the overlapped area and the type of funding applied for.
OBD also maintains its own mapping effort which includes layers identifying areas already served, areas
scheduled to be served (with previously awarded state grant funding, USDA ReConnect and Community
Connect, RDOF, NTIA Tribal funding, etc.) and provides shapefiles so locations in those areas are pre-
17
identified as ineligible for the Border-to-Border or Lower Population Density grant programs. Further,
the state legislature has built into state law for the grant program a post-application challenge period
during which existing providers can identify areas that they plan to build and if OBD finds the challenge
credible, an application will either not be funded in its entirety or the locations that will receive service
from another provider are removed prior to the application being considered further for funding.
Information on the state post-application challenge process can be found here: 2023 Challenge
Process and the form that a challenging provider must complete is here: 2023 Challenge Form
b. At a minimum, the Eligible Entity shall require the disclosure, for each broadband deployment project,
of: (a) the speed and latency of the broadband service to be provided (as measured and/or reported
under the applicable rules), (b) the geographic area to be covered, (c) the number of unserved and
underserved locations committed to serve (or, if the commitment is to serve a percentage of locations
within the specified geographic area, the relevant percentage), (d) the amount of public funding to be
used, (e) the cost of service to the consumer, and (f) the matching commitment, if any, provided by the
subgrantee or its affiliates.
Information responsive to this section is already a part of Minnesota’s Border-to-Border and Lower
Population Density grant application process, see 2023 Grant Instructions and Application Guide
Project area information is required under Section 3 (pages 10-11) and includes a description of the
project area, a pdf and digital geospatial map, evidence that the area is not served, and location data.
Section 4 (page 12) requires information related to the number of households, farms, businesses and
community anchor institutions (CAIs) that will be served and the number of those passings by type that
are currently unserved and underserved and the speeds that will be available upon project completion.
The location data sheet will provide a list of all locations to be served by the project so that will identify
100 percent of the locations to be served. The location data sheet will be the precise list of locations to
be served under the project whereas the map will show the general project area (an address search
could divulge locations not on the location data sheet and not part of the project due to ineligibility for
BEAD funding).
Section 5 (page 13) of the Round 9 application material requires the applicant to indicate the type of
broadband infrastructure that will be deployed in the project area. (The type of infrastructure will
determine the latency.) Section 7 (page 15) requires the applicant to provide information on the pricing
that will be available for speeds that meet or exceed state and federal speed requirements, as well as
any additional equipment or separately charged service installation elements. Section 10 (page 17)
requires the applicant to provide the budget for the project, including the amount of the grant and the
match by the applicant and any funding partners.
Requirement 9: Non-Deployment Subgrantee Selection
2.5.1 Text Box: Describe a fair, open, and competitive subgrantee selection process for eligible non-
deployment activities. Responses must include the objective means, or process by which objective means
will be developed, for selecting subgrantees for eligible non-deployment activities. If the Eligible Entity
does not intend to subgrant for non-deployment activities, indicate such.
N/A Minnesota does not anticipate using BEAD funding for non-deployment activities.
18
2.5.2 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s plan for the following: a. How the Eligible Entity will employ
preferences in selecting the type of non-deployment initiatives it intends to support using BEAD Program
funds; b. How the non-deployment initiatives will address the needs of residents within the jurisdiction; c.
The ways in which engagement with localities and stakeholders will inform the selection of eligible non-
deployment activities; d. How the Eligible Entity will determine whether other uses of the funds might be
more effective in achieving the BEAD Program’s equity, access, and deployment goals.
N/A Minnesota does not anticipate using BEAD funding for non-deployment activities.
2.5.3 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s plan to ensure coverage to all unserved and underserved
locations prior to allocating funding to non-deployment activities.
N/A Minnesota does not anticipate using BEAD funding for non-deployment activities.
2.5.4 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity will ensure prospective subgrantees meet the general
qualifications outlined on pages 71 – 72 of the NOFO.
N/A Minnesota does not anticipate using BEAD funding for non-deployment activities.
Requirement 10: Eligible Entity Implementation Activities
2.6.1 Text Box: Describe any initiatives the Eligible Entity proposes to implement as the recipient without
making a subgrant, and why it proposes that approach.
In this section, the Eligible Entity must describe any initiatives it proposes to implement as the recipient.
Examples of initiatives the Eligible Entity may propose include administrative activities to manage the
grant, implementation of the Challenge Process, implementation of the subgrantee selection process,
workforce development related to the deployment of broadband, digital equity, or broadband adoption
activities (as long as the Eligible Entity has sufficient funding for unserved and underserved areas), and
mapping or data collection. An Eligible Entity may not propose broadband deployment projects without
conducting a competitive subgranting process.
OBD will use a portion of its BEAD funding beyond the $5 million initial planning grants to administer the
subgrantee selection process for broadband deployment grants; to administer the grants awarded with
BEAD funding; implementation of the BEAD Challenge process; mapping, data collection and field
validation related to BEAD grant administration, awards and compliance. OBD will not be using a
subgrantee selection process for the non-broadband deployment activities as these activities will be
conducted by OBD staff or through our existing mapping contractor.
Requirement 11: Labor Standards and Protection
2.7.1 Text Box: Describe the specific information that prospective subgrantees will be required to provide
in their applications and how the Eligible Entity will weigh that information in its competitive subgrantee
selection processes. Information from prospective subgrantees must demonstrate the following and must
include information about contractors and subcontractors:
a. Prospective subgrantees’ record of past compliance with federal labor and employment laws, which:
19
i. Must address information on these entities’ compliance with federal labor and employment
laws on broadband deployment projects in the last three years;
For the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the applicant will be required to indicate via checkbox
certification that it has complied with federal labor and employment laws on broadband deployment
projects over the last three years.
ii. Should include a certification from an Officer/Director-level employee (or equivalent) of the
prospective subgrantee evidencing consistent past compliance with federal labor and employment laws
by the subgrantee, as well as all contractors and subcontractors; and
During the BEAD subgrantee selection process, an officer- or director-level employee or equivalent
thereof will be required to indicate via checkbox certification that the applicant, its contractors, and its
subcontractors have consistently complied with federal labor and employment laws.
iii. Should include written confirmation that the prospective subgrantee discloses any instances in
which it or its contractors or subcontractors have been found to have violated laws such as the
Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, or any other applicable labor and
employment laws for the preceding three years.
During the BEAD subgrantee selection process, the applicant will be required to indicate via checkbox
certification that neither it, nor its contractors or subcontracts, have been found to have violated laws
such as the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, or any other applicable
labor and employment laws for the preceding three years. If the applicant indicates that it, its
contractors and/or its subcontractors have violated any such laws, it must provide a detailed account in
narrative form, accompanied by any relevant documentation. If the applicant indicates the latter, OBD
will review the details and potentially disqualify the applicant from further consideration.
b. Prospective subgrantees’ plans for ensuring compliance with federal labor and employment laws,
which must address the following:
i. How the prospective subgrantee will ensure compliance in its own labor and employment
practices, as well as that of its contractors and subcontractors, including:
1. Information on applicable wage scales and wage and overtime payment practices for
each class of employees expected to be involved directly in the physical construction of the
broadband network; and
2. How the subgrantee will ensure the implementation of workplace safety committees
that are authorized to raise health and safety concerns in connection with the delivery of
deployment projects.
OBD requires the reporting of the following information in grantee’s semi-annual progress reports for
projects that exceed thresholds identified for that federal funding: wages/benefits by worker
classification; and wages and benefits information, process to ensure supply of skilled labor, how labor
disputes are minimized, steps for safety and healthy workplace. Similar reporting requirements can be
established if required for BEAD funding.
20
Additionally, the Exhibit A to the grant contract agreement contains all required provisions and
certifications that are mandated by the use of federal funds. OBD will include any such provisions
required by NTIA for BEAD funding to be included in Exhibit A to the grant contract agreement. Ideally
those requirements will be identified by NTIA sooner, rather than later, so that potential applicants can
determine whether they wish to participate in the BEAD grant funded application rounds. If the federally
required provisions are not known or provided to OBD in advance of the subgrantee selection process
such that the applicant knows all that will be required in advance of participating in the process (and
able to include any associated costs for complying with the provisions in the application budget), there is
the risk that a selected subgrantee will withdraw after the Final Proposal is submitted to NTIA or upon
presentation of the contract language, and locations thought to be receiving service via BEAD funding
will be left out.
2.7.2 Text Box: Describe in detail whether the Eligible Entity will make mandatory for all subgrantees
(including contractors and subcontractors) any of the following and, if required, how it will incorporate
them into binding legal commitments in the subgrants it makes:
a. Using a directly employed workforce, as opposed to a subcontracted workforce;
b. Paying prevailing wages and benefits to workers, including compliance with Davis-Bacon and
Service Contract Act requirements, where applicable, and collecting the required certified payrolls;
c. Using project labor agreements (i.e., pre-hire collective bargaining agreements between
unions and contractors that govern terms and conditions of employment for all workers on a
construction project);
d. Use of local hire provisions;
e. Commitments to union neutrality;
f. Use of labor peace agreements;
g. Use of an appropriately skilled workforce (e.g., through Registered Apprenticeships or other
joint labor-management training programs that serve all workers, particularly those underrepresented or
historically excluded);
h. Use of an appropriately credentialed workforce (i.e., satisfying requirements for appropriate
and relevant pre-existing occupational training, certification, and licensure); and
i. Taking steps to prevent the misclassification of workers.
OBD requires the reporting of the following information in semi-annual progress reports for federally
funded projects that exceed established federal funding thresholds: compliance of project with appliable
Federal/State labor laws, number of employees and contractors, number of employees and contractors;
number of direct or third party hires; wages/benefits by worker classification; wages and benefits
information, process to ensure supply of skilled labor, how labor disputes are minimized, steps for safe
and healthy workplace. Similar reporting requirements can be established if required for BEAD funding.
Prevailing wage requirements apply per Minnesota statues.
21
Requirement 12: Workforce Readiness
2.8.1 Text Box: Describe how the Eligible Entity and their subgrantees will advance equitable workforce
development and job quality objectives to develop a skilled, diverse workforce. At a minimum, this
response should clearly provide each of the following, as outlined on page 59 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. A description of how the Eligible Entity will ensure that subgrantees support the development
and use of a highly skilled workforce capable of carrying out work in a manner that is safe and effective;
b. A description of how the Eligible Entity will develop and promote sector-based partnerships
among employers, education and training providers, the public workforce system, unions and worker
organizations, and community-based organizations that provide relevant training and wrap-around
services to support workers to access and complete training (e.g., child care, transportation, mentorship),
to attract, train, retain, or transition to meet local workforce needs and increase high-quality job
opportunities;
c. A description of how the Eligible Entity will plan to create equitable on-ramps into broadband-
related jobs, maintain job quality for new and incumbent workers engaged in the sector; and continually
engage with labor organizations and community-based organizations to maintain worker voice
throughout the planning and implementation process; and
d. A description of how the Eligible Entity will ensure that the job opportunities created by the
BEAD Program and other broadband funding programs are available to a diverse pool of workers.
The Office of Broadband Development is located within the Minnesota Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED), which also houses Workforce Development, the Governor’s Workforce
Development Board, Workforce Services and Transformation, Immigrant & Refugee Affairs, CareerForce,
Employment and Training, and Vocational Rehabilitation Services. DEED is coordinating the state level
approach to ensuring workforce needs are met for all jobs being created under the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act and that all state tools are being considered in that coordination.
Additionally, over the past two years, knowing that workforce needs would likely have to be addressed
for broadband deployment, OBD has been in close and constant communication with the associations to
monitor any issues in terms of worker shortages and to share available DEED resources on training
programs should companies wish to avail themselves of such opportunities. More recently, OBD has
connected unions that have reached out to our office to the personnel leading the coordinated state
approach for addressing workforce in the broadband space.
2.8.2 Text Box: Describe the information that will be required of prospective subgrantees to demonstrate
a plan for ensuring that the project workforce will be an appropriately skilled and credentialed
workforce. These plans should include the following:
a. The ways in which the prospective subgrantee will ensure the use of an appropriately skilled
workforce, e.g., through Registered Apprenticeships or other joint labor-management training programs
that serve all workers;
22
b. The steps that will be taken to ensure that all members of the project workforce will have
appropriate credentials, e.g., appropriate and relevant pre-existing occupational training, certification,
and licensure;
c. Whether the workforce is unionized;
d. Whether the workforce will be directly employed or whether work will be performed by a
subcontracted workforce; and
e. The entities that the proposed subgrantee plans to contract and subcontract with in carrying
out the proposed work.
If the project workforce or any subgrantee’s, contractor’s, or subcontractor’s workforce is not unionized,
the subgrantee must also provide with respect to the non-union workforce:
a. The job titles and size of the workforce (FTE positions, including for contractors and
subcontractors) required to carry out the proposed work over the course of the project and the entity
that will employ each portion of the workforce;
b. For each job title required to carry out the proposed work (including contractors and
subcontractors), a description of:
i. Safety training, certification, and/or licensure requirements (e.g., OSHA 10, OSHA 30,
confined space, traffic control, or other training as relevant depending on title and work),
including whether there is a robust in-house training program with established requirements tied
to certifications, titles; and
ii. Information on the professional certifications and/or in-house training in place to
ensure that deployment is done at a high standard.
OBD requires the reporting of the following information in semi-annual progress reports for federally
funded projects that exceed established federal funding thresholds: compliance of project with appliable
Federal/State labor laws, number of employees and contractors, number of employees and contractors;
number of direct or third party hires; wages/benefits by worker classification; wages and benefits
information, process to ensure supply of skilled labor, how labor disputes are minimized, steps for safe
and healthy workplace. Similar reporting requirements can be established if required for BEAD funding.
Prevailing wage requirements apply per Minnesota statues.
Additionally, the Exhibit A to the grant contract agreement contains all required provisions and
certifications that are mandated by the use of federal funds. OBD will include any such provisions
required by NTIA for BEAD funding to be included in Exhibit A to the grant contract agreement. Ideally
those requirements will be identified by NTIA sooner, rather than later, so that potential applicants can
determine whether they wish to participate in the BEAD grant funded application rounds. If the federally
required provisions are not known or provided to OBD in advance of the subgrantee selection process
such that the applicant knows all that will be required in advance of participating in the process (and
able to include any associated costs for complying with the provisions in the budget included in their
application), there is the risk that a selected subgrantee will withdraw after the Final Proposal is
submitted to NTIA or upon presentation of the contract language, and locations thought to be receiving
service via BEAD funding will be left out.
23
Requirement 13: Minority Business Enterprises (MBEs/Women’s Business
Enterprises (WBEs)/Labor Surplus Firms Inclusion
2.9.1 Text Box: Describe the process, strategy, and the data tracking method(s) the Eligible Entity will
implement to ensure that minority businesses, women-owned business enterprises (WBEs), and labor
surplus area firms are recruited, used, and retained when possible.
2.9.2 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will take all necessary affirmative steps to ensure minority
businesses, women’s business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms are used when possible, including
the following outlined on pages 88 – 89 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. Placing qualified small and minority businesses and women’s business enterprises on solicitation lists;
b. Assuring that small and minority businesses, and women’s business enterprises are solicited whenever
they are potential sources;
c. Dividing total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities to permit
maximum participation by small and minority businesses, and women’s business enterprises;
d. Establishing delivery schedules, where the requirement permits, which encourage participation by
small and minority businesses, and women’s business enterprises;
e. Using the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations as the Small Business
Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency of the Department of Commerce; and
f. Requiring subgrantees to take the affirmative steps listed above as it relates to subcontractors.
The grant contract template language that is used by OBD with grantees includes the following
language:
(a) The grantee must take all necessary affirmative steps to assure that targeted vendors
from businesses with active certifications through these entities are used when possible:
a. State Department of Administration's Certified Targeted Group, Economically
Disadvantaged and Veteran-Owned Vendor List
b. Metropolitan Council Underutilized Business Program: MCUB: Metropolitan Council
Underutilized Business Program
c. Small Business Certification Program through Hennepin County, Ramsey County,
and City of St. Paul: Central Certification Program
Additionally, Exhibit A—Federal Funding Required Provisions and Certifications includes the following
provision as part of the contract:
10.Required Certifications. Each of the following required certifications set forth below is a material
representation of fact upon which reliance is placed by the State prior to distributing federal funds. By
signing the Grant Contract Agreement, Grantee’s authorized representative who must be expressly
authorized to make the below certifications on behalf of Grantee, under penalty of perjury pursuant to
the laws of the State, certifies and attests to Grantee’s compliance with the following certifications in
Section 10 of Exhibit A. The following certifications shall apply to Grantee and Grantee’s contractors,
subgrantees and subrecipients. Grantee shall require and cause any Grantee’s contractors, subgrantees
24
and subrecipients used by Grantee in the performance of the Grant Contract Agreement to certify,
agree to, and be subject to and bound by each of the following certifications. The Grantee shall include
each of the following certifications in its agreements with its contractors, subgrantees and subrecipients.
Grantee may be required to provide any information identified or required in connection with the below
certifications as a precondition to receiving funds under the Grant Contract Agreement.
10.4 Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs & Equal Opportunity. This certification
requires Grantee and Grantee’s contractors, subgrantees and subrecipients to comply with any
applicable federal nondiscrimination requirements or laws providing for or requiring equal
opportunity in employment. Except as otherwise provided under 41 C.F.R. part 60, all contracts
that meet the definition of “federally assisted construction contract” in 41 C.F.R. part 60-1.3
must include the equal opportunity clause provided under 41 CFR 60-1.4(b), in accordance with
Executive Order 11246, “Equal Employment Opportunity” (30 FR 12319, 12935, 3 C.F.R. part,
1964-1965 Comp., p. 339), as amended by Executive Order 11375, “Amending Executive Order
11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity,” and implementing regulations at 41 C.F.R.
part 60, “Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity,
Department of Labor.” To the extent required by these Applicable Laws, Grantee and Grantee’s
contractors, subgrantees and subrecipients certifies during the performance of this Grant
Contract Agreement that it complies with 41 C.F.R. 60-1.4.:
If NTIA has additional language regarding requirements that need to be included in the subgrantee
selection process or included in contract language, OBD should be advised of such as soon as possible.
Again, because inclusion of any requirements may impact budgets, timetables, and participation in the
BEAD program by some providers, such requirements are best included as part of the RFP process that
will be used to solicit and select subgrantees.
Requirement 14: Cost and Barrier Reduction
2.10.1 Text Box: Identify steps that the Eligible Entity will take to reduce costs and barriers to
deployment. Responses may include but not be limited to the following:
a. Promoting the use of existing infrastructure;
b. Promoting and adopting dig-once policies;
c. Streamlining permitting processes;
d. Streamlining cost-effective access to poles, conduits, easements; and
e. Streamlining rights of way, including the imposition of reasonable access requirements.
OBD includes an opportunity for an applicant to identify whether its proposed project leverages existing
broadband networks or will be built in conjunction with other broadband infrastructure projects to
expand service areas to include unserved or underserved regions of the state and to identify the other
project and associated leveraged funds (such as ACAM, ReConnect, E-Rate or other federal, state or
local funding sources) See Section 6 (bottom of page 14) of the Border to Border/Lower Population
Density application here: 2023 Grant Instructions and Application Guide
25
Minnesota also has a Dig Once policy under Minnesota Statutes 116J.391 and the Minnesota
Department of Transportation works with broadband providers to give them advance notice of road
projects to plan and coordinate on installation. See http://www.dot.state.mn.us/broadband/
Finally, Minnesota has a Minnesota Business First Stop broadband working group that includes state
agencies with permitting responsibilities (MNDOT, MNDNR) to prioritize permitting for broadband
projects funded with state or federal funding, to identify training opportunities, and to develop
relationships to respond to permitting delays identified by broadband providers. The working group has
become more critical in purpose with the greater funding being made available for broadband
deployment at both the state and federal levels and the permitting requirements that vary by funding
source.
Requirement 15: Climate Assessment
2.11.1 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s assessment of climate threats and proposed mitigation
methods. If an Eligible Entity chooses to reference reports conducted within the past five years to meet
this requirement, it may attach this report and must provide a crosswalk narrative, with reference to
page numbers, to demonstrate that the report meets the five requirements below. If the report does not
specifically address broadband infrastructure, provide additional narrative to address how the report
relates to broadband infrastructure. At a minimum, this response must clearly do each of the following,
as outlined on pages 62 – 63 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. Identify the geographic areas that should be subject to an initial hazard screening for current
and projected future weather and climate-related risks and the time scales for performing such
screenings;
b. Characterize which projected weather and climate hazards may be most important to account
for and respond to in these areas and over the relevant time horizons;
c. Characterize any weather and climate risks to new infrastructure deployed using BEAD
Program funds for the 20 years following deployment;
d. Identify how the proposed plan will avoid and/or mitigate weather and climate risks identified;
and
e. Describe plans for periodically repeating this process over the life of the Program to ensure
that evolving risks are understood, characterized, and addressed, and that the most up-to-date tools and
information resources are utilized. 2.11.1.1 Optional Attachment: As an optional attachment, submit any
relevant reports conducted within the past five years that may be relevant for this requirement and will
be referenced in the text narrative above.
Severe weather events pose a significant threat to the environment, human health, and the economy,
and are projected to increase in occurrence and severity in the future. The BEAD Program is aimed at
supporting Eligible Entities in addressing these risks and minimizing their impacts. This proposal outlines
a plan for addressing climate threats within the Eligible Entity and proposed mitigation methods while
performing BEAD-funded activities.
26
OBD has reviewed the resources provided by NTIA. Temperatures in Minnesota have risen more than
2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the beginning of the twentieth century. While warmer temperatures will
reduce energy demand for heating and lengthen the growing season, it will also increase the magnitude
of naturally occurring droughts although spring precipitation is projected to increase by about 15 to 20
percent by midcentury. Extreme precipitation events are projected to increase in frequency and
intensity, resulting in increased flooding and associated impacts, such as increased erosion,
infrastructure damage, and agricultural losses. Given its location in the interior of North America and
lack of mountains, Minnesota is exposed to bitterly cold air masses in the winter and warm, humid air
masses from the Gulf of Mexico in the summer, resulting in large temperature variations.
Minnesota has had 57-billion-dollar disaster events between 1980 and October 2023. While the U.S.
billion-dollar disaster events are dominated by tropical cyclone losses, there have been none of those in
Minnesota. Minnesota’s billion-dollar events are predominantly from severe weather and to a lesser
extent, drought. There does not appear to be any region of the state or group of counties at significantly
greater risk for disaster than another region or county group.
Under legislation passed in the 2023 session, Minnesota has just stood up an Infrastructure Resilience
Advisory Task Force. See https://www.lcc.mn.gov/irtf/ Bree Maki, OBD’s Executive Director, is a member
of that Task Force. Rather than prejudge the work or outcome of this new task force, Director Maki will
participate on the Task Force and convey the issues related to broadband infrastructure and
requirements for the BEAD program in her work on the Task Force, keeping in mind the BEAD program
requirements to continually review and assess for climate resiliency over the life of the Program to
ensure that evolving risks are understood, characterized, and addressed, and that the most up-to-date
tools and information resources are utilized.
Requirement 16: Low-Cost Broadband Service Option
2.12.1 Text Box: Describe the low-cost broadband service option(s) that must be offered by subgrantees
as selected by the Eligible Entity, including why the outlined option(s) best services the needs of residents
within the Eligible Entity’s jurisdiction. At a minimum, this response must include a definition of low-cost
broadband service option that clearly addresses the following, as outlined on page 67 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. All recurring charges to the subscriber, as well as any non-recurring costs or fees to the
subscriber (e.g., service initiation costs);
b. The plan’s basic service characteristics (download and upload speeds, latency, any limits on
usage or availability, and any material network management practices);
c. Whether a subscriber may use any Affordable Connectivity Benefit subsidy toward the plan’s
rate; and
d. Any provisions regarding the subscriber’s ability to upgrade to any new low-cost service plans
offering more advantageous technical specifications.
Broadband service is not available if it is not affordable. As part of the application process, the proposed
pricing for broadband services must be provided, including the pricing for service that meets or exceeds
Minnesota’s 2026 speed goal of at least 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload and for federally
funded grant rounds, pricing for service that meets or exceeds 100Mbps symmetrical speeds. The
27
application also includes the requirement that providers identify any additional equipment charges
and/or any separately chargeable installation elements. Applicants must also identify their marketing
efforts to prospective broadband customers. An applicant must also provide information on how the
broadband service that will be offered is affordable to the target markets in the proposed project area.
See Section 7 of the grant application: 2023 Grant Instructions and Application Guide
For the BEAD application, OBD will add questions regarding the plan’s basic service characteristics
(download and upload speeds, latency, any limits on usage or availability, and any material network
management practices).
At a minimum, the subgrantee’s low-cost broadband option must:
a. Provide typical download speeds of at least 100 Mbps and typical upload speeds of at
least 20 Mbps, or the fastest speeds the infrastructure is capable of if less than 100
Mbps/20 Mbps;
b. Provide typical latency measurements of no more than 100 milliseconds;
c. Not be subject to data caps, non-governmental imposed surcharges, or usage-based
throttling, and be subject only to the same (or better) acceptable use policies to which
subscribers to all other broadband internet access service plans offered to home
subscribers by the participating subgrantee must adhere; and
d. In the event the provider later increases the speeds of one of its low-cost plans it will
permit Eligible Subscribers that are subscribed to that plan to upgrade to those new
speeds at little or no cost.
Subgrantee applicants must include in their application a commitment to charge a price for their low-
cost broadband option to low-income households that meet the eligibility requirements for ACP. The
price submitted by the applicant will meet the OBD’s definition of the low-cost service option if it is
consistent with the low-cost offerings the subgrantee applicant currently (at the time of the application)
makes available in unsubsidized areas within the State. Additionally, the low-cost broadband option
must be priced below the FCC’s Urban Rate Comparability benchmark, which is the federal gauge as to
whether rates in rural areas (which lack competition and which are where the vast majority of unserved
and underserved BSLs are located) are reasonable and hence affordable. If a provider’s rates for the
100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload and/or the 100MBps symmetrical services are above the
benchmarks for the corresponding speed, a selected subgrantee will be asked to lower their rates in
order to be awarded a Border-to-Border or Lower Population Density grant. Add to that the low-income
household benefit of the ACP (or its successor program), which all subgrantees are required to
participate in, and the result is the low-cost broadband option.
Minnesota believes this approach best effectuates the purposes of the BEAD Program first and foremost
by ensuring that the low-cost service option, combined with ACP participation – the two statutorily
prescribed affordability measures in the IIJA – will enable affordable broadband service to be offered to
eligible subscribers. Secondly, the speed, service, and upgradability elements will ensure that eligible
subscribers receive high-quality low-cost broadband service over the funded network.
OBD recognizes that there may very well exist a monthly rate to be paid by a low-income household
when one compares a provider’s resulting rates at the various speeds to the amount of the ACP benefit.
However, that difference also existed when the FCC established the Urban Rate Comparability standard
for determining a benchmark to gauge rates for universal service. OBD is also attempting to balance the
needs of small, rural providers and their ability to participate in the BEAD subgrantee selection process.
28
Small, rural providers generally do not have the urban customers nor the business customer base
necessary to cross-subsidize low-income households (nor did these and similar providers when they only
offered telephone service—hence the longstanding history of universal service in this country). If the
provider does not have the revenue stream from the more profitable business or urban customers, it
cannot on its own subsidize rates to low-income households that result in a $0 or nominal monthly rate
and still make the business case to participate in the BEAD program. The alternative is to recognize that
the BEAD subgrantee selection process will only include large, national providers as participants, which
we are not willing to do. Smaller providers often have unique expertise in serving some of the hardest-
to-reach communities.
To the extent that additional affordability measures are believed to be necessary by NTIA, those
measures should be addressed and funded at the national level. If broadband service is considered a
basic necessity in this country, then the requirement to ensure it is available and affordable to all
households should not be placed only on the provider serving each of those households. Rather, the
solution needs to be a shared responsibility, as it is for telephone service (Lifeline and Minnesota’s
Telephone Assistance Plan), heating assistance (LIHEAP--the federal Low Income Energy Assistance
Program, the Salvation Army’s HeatShare and Utility Assistance Programs), water (Low Income
Household Water Assistance Program) and food (food shelves, free school lunches and breakfasts,
Meals on Wheels, SNAP). Additional solutions may also be addressed in state Digital Opportunity Plans
where identified by the state as a significant barrier to broadband adoption and use.
2.12.2 Checkbox: Certify that all subgrantees will be required to participate in the Affordable Connectivity
Program or any successor program.
Subgrantees will be required to participate in the FCC’s Affordable Connectivity Plan (ACP) or any
successor program. Eligible subscribers to the ACP can have the subsidy applied to their selected service
option.
The Eligible Entity certifies that all subgrantees will be required to participate in the Affordable
Connectivity Program or any successor program:
X___Yes
____No
Requirement 20: Middle Class Affordability Plans
2.13.1 Text Box: Describe a middle-class affordability plan that details how high-quality broadband
services will be made available to all middle-class families in the BEAD-funded network’s service area at
reasonable prices. This response must clearly provide a reasonable explanation of how high-quality
broadband services will be made available to all middle-class families in the BEAD-funded network’s
service area at reasonable prices.
The Minnesota Border-to-Border and Lower Population Density broadband grant programs both
emphasize a public-private partnership, or at a minimum, a strong demonstration of community support
for a project (See Section 8, page 14 of the application). That partnership and/or demonstration of
community support indicates 1.) that the community finds the service to be provided under that grant
application is of high-quality and desired by the residents and businesses located in that area, and 2.) at
29
the rates offered by their provider partner. That showing provides OBD with information that the rates
are reasonable in that service area, given the community support for the project, and that the project
will have a high take rate, ensuring the success of the project.
Additionally, similar to the low-income broadband offering, OBD compares the rate information
provided in the application to the FCC’s Urban Rate Comparability benchmarks, the measure that the
FCC uses to determine the reasonable comparability for universal service purposes. If a provider’s rates
for the 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload and/or the 100MBps symmetrical services are above
the benchmarks for the corresponding speed, a selected subgrantee will be asked to lower their rates in
order to be awarded a Border-to-Border or Lower Population Density grant. This federally developed
gauge is another measure used to ensure middle class affordability.
Requirement 17: Use of 20 Percent of Funding
2.14.1 Text Box: Describe the Eligible Entity’s planned use of any funds being requested, which must
address the following:
a. If the Eligible Entity does not wish to request funds during the Initial Proposal round, it must
indicate no funding requested and provide the rationale for not requesting funds.
b. If the Eligible Entity is requesting less than or equal to 20 percent of funding allocation during
the Initial Proposal round, it must detail the amount of funding requested for use upon approval of the
Initial Proposal, the intended use of funds, and how the proposed use of funds achieves the statutory
objective of serving all unserved and underserved locations.
c. If the Eligible Entity is requesting more than 20 percent (up to 100 percent) of funding
allocation during the Initial Proposal round, it must detail the amount of funding requested for use upon
approval of the Initial Proposal, the intended use of funds, how the proposed use of funds achieves the
statutory objective of serving all unserved and underserved locations, and provide rationale for
requesting funds greater than 20 percent of the funding allocation.
2.14.2 Financial Data Entry: Enter the amount of the Initial Proposal Funding Request. If not requesting
initial funds, enter ‘$0.00.’ $651,839,368
2.14.3 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will adhere to BEAD Program requirements regarding
Initial Proposal funds usage. If the Eligible Entity is not requesting funds in the Initial Proposal round and
will not submit the Initial Funding Request, note “Not applicable.” X_Yes ___No
Requirement 18: Eligible Entity Regulatory Approach
2.15.1 Text Box
a. Disclose whether the Eligible Entity will waive all laws of the Eligible Entity concerning
broadband, utility services, or similar subjects, whether they predate or postdate enactment of the
Infrastructure Act that either (a) preclude certain public sector providers from participation in the
subgrant competition or (b) impose specific requirements on public sector entities, such as limitations on
the sources of financing, the required imputation of costs not actually incurred by the public sector
entity, or restrictions on the service a public sector entity can offer.
30
b. If the Eligible Entity will not waive all such laws for BEAD Program project selection purposes,
identify those that it will not waive (using the Excel attachment) and their date of enactment and
describe how they will be applied in connection with the competition for subgrants. If there are no
applicable laws, note such.
Under Minnesota law, political subdivisions are eligible applicants for the Border-to-Border and Lower
Population Density programs. Minnesota law contains no restrictions such as on limitations on the
sources of financing or the required imputation of costs not actually incurred by the public sector entity.
Minnesota Statute 429.021 provides that a municipality has the power:
(19) To improve, construct, extend, and maintain facilities for Internet access and other
communications purposes, if the council finds that:
(i) the facilities are necessary to make available Internet access or other communications services
that are not and will not be available through other providers or the private market in the reasonably
foreseeable future; and
(ii) the service to be provided by the facilities will not compete with service provided by private
entities.
If a location is eligible for BEAD Funding through the Border-to-Border grant program, then under
existing statutory language, a municipality would have the ability to apply for grant funding under
current law as the facilities are not available and will not be available in the foreseeable future and
would not compete with service provided by private entities.
OBD would note that Minn. Stat. 237.19 is also often cited as a barrier to municipal broadband
ownership. However, that statute is in the chapter related to telephone regulation in Minnesota and is
in regard to the offering of telecommunications exchange service and is not applicable to broadband
service.
Requirement 19: Certification of Compliance with BEAD Requirements
2.16.1 Check Box: Certify the Eligible Entity’s intent to comply with all applicable requirements of the
BEAD Program, including the reporting requirements. _X__ Yes ____No
2.16.2 Text Box: Describe subgrantee accountability procedures, including how the Eligible Entity will, at
a minimum, employ the following practices outlined on page 51 of the BEAD NOFO:
a. Distribution of funding to subgrantees for, at a minimum, all deployment projects on a
reimbursable basis (which would allow the Eligible Entity to withhold funds if the subgrantee fails to take
the actions the funds are meant to subsidize);
b. The inclusion of clawback provisions (i.e., provisions allowing recoupment of funds previously
disbursed) in agreements between the Eligible Entity and any subgrantee;
c. Timely subgrantee reporting mandates; and
d. Robust subgrantee monitoring practices.
31
Minnesota’s Border to Border and Lower Population Density Program are conducted on a
reimbursement basis and that will continue under federal BEAD funding. Per NTIA’s recommendation,
and assuming allowed by state law, Minnesota would like to retain the ability to do fixed amount
subawards only to the extent it might be necessary to incent a provider to deploy broadband
infrastructure to locations that otherwise are not included in an application on a reimbursement basis.
Contract provisions for the Border-to-Border and Lower Population Density broadband grant program
do currently include the following clawback language which will also be used for BEAD funded projects:
Recovery of Funds. If a State or federal audit takes exception to the Project(s) provided under the
Grant Contract Agreement for which federal funds have been paid or reimbursed, or if federal funds
are deferred and/or disallowed as a result of any audits (or expended in violation of the laws
applicable to the expenditure of such funds, including ARPA CPF Requirements), Grantee will be
liable to the State (or any other applicable governmental entity, including the United States
Department of Treasury) for the full amount of any such payment, reimbursement, or any claim
disallowed (or the amount of funds expended in violation of applicable laws or requirements) and
for all related penalties incurred. If the State or any federal governmental entity concludes that
Grantee has been paid for any cost that is unallowable, unallocable, or unreasonable under the
Grant Contract Agreement, Grantee will be liable to the State (or any other applicable governmental
entity, including the United States Department of Treasury) for such cost. Grantee shall pay to the
State (or any other applicable governmental entity, including the United States Department of
Treasury) all amounts for which the Grantee is liable under this section within ten (10) business days
of receiving a written demand or written notice. The State may withhold any payment under the
Grant Contract Agreement if Grantee fails to timely make any payment required by this Section. The
requirements of this Section shall apply to Grantee and Grantee’s contractors, subgrantees and
subrecipients. Grantee shall require and cause any Grantee Contractor or subgrantee or
subrecipient used by Grantee in connection with the Grant Contract Agreement to agree to and be
subject to and bound by such terms and provisions.
OBD follows Minnesota state grants management practices and requires bi-annual progress reports (due
January 15 and July 15 each year) as well as a close-out report. If a grantee is not current on its progress
report, it will not be reimbursed.
Subgrantee monitoring also follows state grant management practices. Those practices include an
annual site visit for projects at or above a grant amount of $250,000 and a once during the life of the
project for those projects receiving $50,000 to $250,000 in grant funding. Additionally, prior to close-
out, our mapping vendor does a field validation visit to each project to document that all locations have
been constructed and conducts on-site speed testing to verify the speeds indicated in the application
are being delivered.
2.16.3 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will account for and satisfy authorities relating to civil
rights and nondiscrimination in the selection of subgrantees. _X__ Yes ____No
2.16.4 Check Box: Certify that the Eligible Entity will ensure subgrantee compliance with the
cybersecurity and supply chain risk management requirements on pages 70 - 71 of the BEAD NOFO to
require prospective subgrantees to attest that:
32
Cybersecurity
1) The prospective subgrantee has a cybersecurity risk management plan (the plan) in place that
is either: (a) operational, if the prospective subgrantee is providing service prior to the award of the
grant; or (b) ready to be operationalized upon providing service, if the prospective subgrantee is not yet
providing service prior to the grant award;
2) The plan reflects the latest version of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity (currently Version 1.1) and the
standards and controls set forth in Executive Order 14028 and specifies the security and privacy controls
being implemented;
3) The plan will be reevaluated and updated on a periodic basis and as events warrant; and
4) The plan will be submitted to the Eligible Entity prior to the allocation of funds. If the
subgrantee makes any substantive changes to the plan, a new version will be submitted to the Eligible
Entity within 30 days.
Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM)
1) The prospective subgrantee has a SCRM plan in place that is either: (a) operational, if the
prospective subgrantee is already providing service at the time of the grant; or (b) ready to be
operationalized, if the prospective subgrantee is not yet providing service at the time of grant award;
2) The plan is based upon the key practices discussed in the NIST publication NISTIR 8276, Key
Practices in Cyber Supply Chain Risk Management: Observations from Industry and related SCRM
guidance from NIST, including NIST 800-161, Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management Practices for
Systems and Organizations and specifies the supply chain risk management controls being implemented;
3) The plan will be reevaluated and updated on a periodic basis and as events warrant; and
4) The plan will be submitted to the Eligible Entity prior to the allocation of funds. If the
subgrantee makes any substantive changes to the plan, a new version will be submitted to the Eligible
Entity within 30 days. The Eligible Entity must provide a subgrantee’s plan to NTIA upon NTIA’s request.
__X__ Yes ___N