FCC Seeks Comments and Proposes Major Changes to E-Rate Program

July 27, 2026

Within the last month, the FCC has released two E-Rate Notice of Proposed Rule Makings (NPRMs) that could potentially have major impacts to the program and the administration of the Universal Service Fund (USF).   Below is a summary of both NPRMs and how you can participate in the comment period. 

On June 26, the FCC released “Ensuring Children’s Safe Use of Screens and E-Rate-Funded Services” and “Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding in the E-Rate Program” – (FCC-26-41) – which are premised on limiting student screen time in schools as a requirement to receive E-Rate funding.  But the NPRM goes far beyond just screen time, proposing specific changes and seeking comments on dozens of program areas.  For a list of all questions asked, go to All-Questions-from-FCC_26-41.xlsx, but most notably:  

  • Should the E-Rate program be limited or sunset to reflect today’s extensive connectivity rates? (paragraph 12)
  • Should CIPA compliance include [student] screen-time limits or monitoring? (paragraph 30)
  • To what extent should schools be required to provide parental “opt-out” of screen-based instruction or screen-use to receive E-Rate funding? (paragraph 31)
  • Should funding be eliminated from applicants with the lowest discount percentages? (paragraph 25)
  • Did Congress intend for the [FCC’s] decisions about the E-Rate program to be based on educational outcomes? If so, how should the Commission measure educational outcomes? (paragraph 28)
  • At what point should policymakers conclude that the program’s core objective has been achieved?
  • Does E-Rate support adopted in the 2014 Second E-Rate Order remain justified in light of today’s school connectivity rates and the availability of other federal funding sources?
  • Should E-Rate funding be phased out for schools and libraries in areas with the lowest NSLP participation rates, given the likelihood of greater resources and tax bases?
  • Does continued support for self-provisioned network construction and dark fiber risk displacing private investment or wasting federal resources on duplicative infrastructure? This is particularly relevant as programs like the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program administered by NTIA and established in 2021, aim to ensure high-speed broadband availability in any remaining unserved and underserved areas, including for community anchor institutions?
  • Should MIBS services be limited to the number of hours worked, with the requirement that tickets for work requested/performed and hours worked be included with requests for reimbursement?  Should MIBS be limited to smaller schools and libraries?

The NPRM includes an additional section which proposes: 

  • Strengthening program integrity by increasing oversight over consultants, including requiring annual disclosures and certification, creating a registration system, and prohibiting certain percentage-based fee arrangements.
  • Streamlining administrative processes, including stricter requirements for signed contracts, formalizing the service substitution process, establishing a June 30th deadline for submitting the FCC Form 473, modifying the FCC Form 479 submission requirements, and requiring all contracts to be signed after the allowable contract date.
  • Reconsidering the eligibielity of Managed Internal Broadband Services (MIBS)

Initial comments on these proposed rules are due 60 days after the FCC’s adoption and publication in the Federal Register, which has not yet happened.  Reply comments will be due another 30 days thereafter.  

If you choose to comment, I’ve provided step-by-step instructions at Filing-FCC-NPRM-Comments.pdf.

Proposed FCC Review of the USF Administration

In addition to the above NPRM, the FCC is proposing a review of the USF (E-Rate makes up one of four programs funded by the USF) and the Universal Service Administrative Company (“USAC”), the USF’s current administrator.  The  Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) will be voted on by the full Commission at the upcoming FCC Open Meeting on August 6th.  In summary, the NPRM would:

  • Seek comments on ways to streamline USAC processes or improve the transparency, accountability, and cost-effectiveness of USF administration, and propose to require USAC to report publicly on its speed of operations.
  • Seek comments on ways to improve the efficiency of audits of USF program beneficiaries and ensure that the Commission can timely recover improperly disbursed funding.
  • Propose modifying the Commission’s rules to codify the administrator’s ability to audit non-service provider beneficiaries of USF programs.
  • Propose modifying the Commission’s rules governing audit controls to codify USAC’s ability to calculate recoveries by extrapolating from a statistically valid sample of disbursements.
  • Seeking comments on ways to minimize the costs of USF administration.
  • Propose to update the Commission’s rules to reflect how USF funds are held in and disbursed from the U.S. Treasury.
  • Seek comment on the structure of USF administration and whether changes should be made to the administrator or its current responsibilities related to USF administration.
  • Seek comment on updating Commission rules regarding the USAC Board of Directors, including:
    • (1) enhancing measures taken to ensure Board members avoid conflicts of interest, 
    • (2) reducing the size of the Board, and 
    • (3) modifying the composition of the Board as well as Board committees.

If this NPRM is adopted next month, the USF comments will be due 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, with reply comments due 30 days thereafter.  
I know this is a lot of information to take in.  As things develop, more information will be provided.  
Sincerely,

Lorrie

Lorrie Germann
Pennsylvania E-Rate Coordinator
717-576-2737 – o
lgermann@e-ratepa.org
www.e-ratepa.org

Site designed and maintained by Silver Penny Studio