6. Application Filing Guidelines, Timelines, and Requirements

We recognize the need to begin issuing grants under the CASF Consortia program on an expedited basis so that the benefits of the program can begin to be realized. Accordingly, prospective Consortia may begin submitting applications for CASF Consortia grants upon adoption of this decision. Applications must be submitted to the Commission within 60 calendar days from the effective date of this decision in order to be reviewed and acted upon in the first round of grant approvals. Completed applications should be submitted in the format specified below. Applications received after 60 calendar days will be reviewed and acted upon in a subsequent round of approvals.

The Consortia applications will not be formally filed with the Commission's Docket Office, but will instead be submitted through the procedures set forth below. Since these applications are not to be filed with the Commission's Docket Office, they will not be assigned formal proceeding number(s), but will be tracked separately by the Commission's Communications Division.

Completed applications for Consortia grants must be submitted as follows:

1. Via an electronic format at the Commission's website at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/Telco/Information+for+providing+service/CASFConsortiaGrant.htm ; and

2. Via U.S. mail in the form of a paper copy mailed separately to the CPUC Communications Division, Attention: CASF Consortia Grant Account, 505 Van Ness Ave., Third Floor, San Francisco, CA  94102.

The Commission will post the name of each Consortium that submits an application for a grant, its contact information, and region(s) proposed to be covered within 14 days from the submission deadline on the CASF Consortia Grant Account webpage at http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/Telco/Information+for+providing+service/CASFConsortiaGrant.htm. Otherwise, given that multiple applicants may potentially be competing for the same grant money, we will not post the full contents of each application on the webpage. However, parties seeking to review the contents of a Consortium application may contact the respective Consortium to request an electronic or paper copy for review.

In the opening comments, both DRA and TURN raise the issue of transparency in the application process. This issue has been raised previously by both parties in the processing and award of CASF infrastructure grants and has been responded to by the Commission repeatedly, in responses to comments of parties in the approved CASF grant resolutions.

TURN states that the CASF process was shrouded in confidentiality and that the Commission's approach to rewarding grants was a "black-box" with interested parties and the public at-large having no ability to understand the nature of the applications nor the approach and analysis used by Commission staff to pick grantees." DRA likewise states that the Assigned Commissioner's Ruling inexplicably fails to acknowledge this issue or adopt any of DRA's recommendations and procedures to promote public awareness and participation in the grant application process. Thus, DRA requests that the Consortia grant applications and signed affidavits be made publicly available by either posting on the Commission's website and/or e-mailing them to the service list for this proceeding. DRA believes the Commission should also allow an opportunity to comment on the Consortia applications before a draft resolution comes before the Commission.

We disagree with TURN claim that the CASF process of awarding grants was a "black box" with the public and other interested parties not made aware of the nature of the applications nor the approach and analysis used by Commission staff to pick grantees. While it is true that the specifics of the applications other than the Census Block Groups (CBs), ZIP Codes, and maps of the areas proposed for CASF infrastructure grant funding are not made public prior to the issuance of the draft resolution for public comment, i.e., served to parties on the service list and posted on the Commission website, the Commission followed the process set forth in Resolution T-17143. The Commission has already addressed the rationale for not revealing all information relative to the application in various decisions and approved funding resolutions.

We disagree with claims that the public and other parties are not aware of the process and analysis used by the Commission staff to pick grantees. The Commission issued Resolution T-17143 to ensure that all applicants submit a standard set of documents and meet the requirements specified. Staff evaluates the applications according to the process outlined in said resolution. Further, each draft funding resolution explains the process followed in reviewing the application and is made available to parties on the service list and posted on the Commission's website to give parties the opportunity to comment before the Commission votes on the resolution.

We find no merit in making the Consortia application and affidavit public, i.e., served on the service list and posted on the website, i.e., before a draft resolution comes before the Commission. If the intent is to afford the public an opportunity to comment on a proposed Consortia award and to know the identity of any party receiving its funding and representing its interests, the 30-day comment period on the draft resolution satisfies this concern regarding notice and comment.

Although this decision lays out the CASF application requirements in reasonable detail, as specified herein, we recognize that questions may remain concerning the proper preparation and submission of applications. We will thus provide a forum for submitting such questions electronically via the e-mail addresses referenced below. Responses to inquiries will be posted on the CASF website. Accordingly, prospective applicants may contact the CASF Consortia Grant Administrator for questions on the application process at:

CASF_Consortia_Grant_Application_Questions@cpuc.ca.gov

and for Consortia Grant Account program questions at:

CASF_Consortia_Grant_Administrator@cpuc.ca.gov

Each application must be accompanied by the items set forth the checklist in Attachment F. We describe the contents in further detail below:

At a minimum, each Consortium application shall provide the following required information:

Each Consortium applicant must submit an Action Plan and Work Plan as part of the application. The Action Plan and the Work Plan will serve as the tools in the initial review of the applications.10 The Action Plan is an outline of the Consortium's priorities as they relate to the region's needs for broadband deployment, access, and adoption. The Work Plan should include more detailed functions and activities related to implementing the Action Plan.

The Action Plan and Work Plan documents are to be tailored to fit the needs of a given region's constituents and geography, incorporating core responsibilities, including goals, measurable deliverables, expected outcomes, and specific timeline milestones as they relate to broadband deployment, access, and adoption.

The Action Plan should represent the viewpoints of its consensus of stakeholders and anchor institutions, and it should be aimed at increasing broadband deployment, access, and adoption in the Consortium's respective region. The Action Plan should reflect the priorities of the Consortium's members for broadband deployment, access, and adoption, and should set forth overall Consortium program goals, outcomes, metrics11, and strategies to accomplish said goals.

The Work Plan is an expansion of the Action Plan that shows how each priority in the Action Plan will be carried out. The Work Plan should include more detailed functions and activities related to implementing the Action Plan. The Work Plan should include a timeline identifying milestone dates for completion of key Work Plan activities proposed to be funded; the timeline shall describe each of the quarterly milestones to be accomplished. A Work Plan for each funding year is to be submitted, e.g., Work Plan Year 1, Work Plan Year 2, Work Plan Year 3. A sample Work Plan format is shown in Attachment C.

A proposed budget detailing the expected costs to be covered by the Work Plan including explanation of how any other costs related to the Work Plan, if any, will be funded, e.g., matching funds from other sources, is required as part of the application. The requested amount of Consortia grant funds should be based upon and consistent with the budget presented in the application. A yearly budget must be submitted for each funding year. A sample Budget format is included in Attachment D.

Each applicant's proposed consortium budget must expressly exclude any costs for activities or programs within the consortia region that are separately funded from any other sources in order to ensure that CASF grants do not duplicate funding from any other sources. The proposed consortium budget must be accompanied by a description of any existing broadband adoption or deployment activities funded by any other state or federal grants within the same region, together with confirmation showing that the CASF consortium budget does not duplicate any other sources of funding. For example, CETF has previously received federal grants for broadband awareness and adoption in various California regions. The consortium application must therefore identify any such CETF grants that cover the region within which the CASF consortium grant would apply, and show that the requested CASF consortium funding would not duplicate any CETF grant funding.

Each regional Consortium must retain at least one Fiscal Agent with lead responsibility and legal authority to represent the Consortium for purposes of sponsoring the application, and for administration of Consortium activities, including receipt and disbursement of Consortium grant funds. In any event, the Fiscal Agent must affirmatively agree, on behalf of the Consortium, to comply with the Commission's directives and conditions relating to the review, approval, and administration of any Consortia application grants. This requirement is to provide assurance that Consortium members or contractors retained by the Consortium are capable and committed to delivering on the commitments to be funded.

The Fiscal Agent may be a local public institution e.g., city, county, academic institution, tribal government, etc., as defined under Section 50001 of the Government Code, or a town, as defined by Section 21 of the Government Code. The Fiscal Agent may also possibly be a certificated telecommunications carrier. The Fiscal Agent must submit a letter stating its commitment to act as a Fiscal Agent for the Consortium. The letter must include:

· The name and contact information of the responsible party within the agency, including the person responsible for the administrative tasks, if different.

· Affirmation that the work outlined in the Consortium Work Plan will be completed and verification by an Attestation Report prepared by an independent, licensed Certified Public Accountant will be submitted annually to the Communications Division. The letter must also state the Consortium's acceptance of the Fiscal Agent's rights, duties, and responsibilities.

Any subsequent change in the Fiscal Agent must first be approved by the Commission resolution.

As part of the application, an applicant's Fiscal Agent must sign an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, that to the best of their knowledge all the statements and representations made in the Consortium application are true and correct.12 A sample Affidavit form is provided in Attachment E.

DRA recommends that the Affidavit include a clause that the Regional Consortia members and associated Fiscal Agent agree to comply with Rule 1.1 of the Commission's Rule of Practice and Procedures and that the Commission incorporate language comparable to that of an application for Certification of Public Convenience and Necessity. We concur with DRA's recommendation, and thus shall require Regional Consortia to certify within the affidavit that:

No member, officer, director, partner of a Consortium or its Fiscal Agent has: 1) filed for bankruptcy; 2) was sanctioned by the Federal Communications Commission or any state regulatory agency for failure to comply with any regulatory statute, rule, or order; nor 3) has been found either civilly or criminally liable by a court of appropriate jurisdiction for violation of § 1700 et. seq. of the California Business and Professions Code, or for any action which involved misrepresentations to consumers, nor is currently under investigation for similar violations.

If the Consortium fails to perform in good faith, or in accordance with the expectations set forth in its Action Plan, Work Plan, and Consent Form, as affirmed in the affidavit, the Commission may withhold subsequent grant disbursements or suspend or terminate the Consortium grant, as warranted.

9 As prescribed in Public Utilities Code Section 281, eligible consortium members may include, as specified by the Commission, representatives of organizations, including, but not limited to those listed below. The Commission will give consideration to all consortia, both new and pre-existing, that are committed to pursuing projects consistent with the objectives stated in Public Utilities Code Section 281(a). Consortium members should include and be supported by a significant cross-section of stakeholders/representatives of community anchor institutions such as city and county government, community service districts, health care, primary and higher education, public safety, libraries, community-based organizations, tourism, parks and recreation, agriculture, and other business groups.

10 Specific information that should be included in both the Action and Work Plans are shown in Attachment A, and sample Action Plan and Work Plan format is shown in Attachment B and Attachment C, respectively.

11 Metrics is a measurement used to gauge quantifiable components of performance, e.g., survey of 150 community-based organizations, etc.

12 Rule 1.1 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Previous PageTop Of PageNext PageGo To First Page