[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 6, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54311-54329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17927]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 171 / Tuesday, September 6, 2022 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 54311]]



FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

2 CFR Chapter LX

47 CFR Parts 0 and 54

[WC Docket No. 21-450; FCC 22-64; FR ID 101087]


Affordable Connectivity Program

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC 
or Commission) establishes the Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant 
Program (Outreach Grant Program), which will provide eligible partners 
grant funds to conduct outreach in support of the Affordable 
Connectivity Program (ACP).

DATES: Effective November 7, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, please 
contact, Jessica Campbell, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, 
Wireline Competition Bureau, at [email protected] or 202-418-
7400, or Rashann Duvall, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, 
Wireline Competition Bureau, at [email protected] or 202-418-1438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Second 
Report and Order (Report and Order) in WC Docket No. 21-450, adopted on 
August 5, 2022 and released on August 8, 2022. Due to the COVID-19 
pandemic, the Commission's headquarters will be closed to the general 
public until further notice. The full text of this document is 
available at the following internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-establishes-affordable-connectivity-outreach-grant-program-0.

I. Introduction

    1. In this final rule, the Commission establishes the Outreach 
Grant Program, which will provide eligible partners grant funds to 
conduct outreach in support of the Affordable Connectivity Program. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Infrastructure Act) 
appropriated $14.2 billion for the Affordable Connectivity Program, 
which provides qualifying low-income households discounts on broadband 
service and connected devices, and expressly authorizes the Commission 
to conduct outreach for the Affordable Connectivity Program, including 
providing grants to outreach partners. The Commission previously 
allocated up to $100 million of this budget for outreach, including an 
outreach grant program and outreach activities by the Commission's 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) as authorized in the 
Infrastructure Act, to be spent over five years.
    2. The Affordable Connectivity Program plays an integral role in 
helping to bridge the digital divide, which is an ongoing top priority 
for Congress and the Commission. To date, over 12 million low-income 
households participate in the Affordable Connectivity Program. However, 
a significant number of qualifying households have not yet enrolled in 
the Affordable Connectivity Program. The Commission previously 
recognized in the ACP Order, 87 FR 8346, February 14, 2022, that to 
achieve the program's full potential and reach as many eligible 
households as possible, households must be clearly informed of the 
program's existence, benefits, and eligibility qualifications, and how 
to apply. Through this Outreach Grant Program, the Commission seeks to 
enlist partners around the country to help inform ACP-eligible 
households about the program in their local communities, and to provide 
those partners with the funding and resources needed to increase 
participation among those Americans most in need of affordable 
connectivity.

II. Discussion

    3. In this final rule, the Commission discusses the goals and 
objectives of the Outreach Grant Program; provides examples of the 
types of outreach activities and expenses that may be considered for 
funding and types of eligible entities; allocates funding set-asides 
for specific types of grantees; establishes important safeguards to 
promote program integrity and guard against potential waste, fraud and 
abuse; adopts and implements regulations pertaining to grants in title 
2, subtitle B, and title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations; directs 
CGB, in coordination with the Office of General Counsel (OGC) and 
Office of the Managing Director (OMD) as appropriate, to develop, 
manage, and administer the Outreach Grant Program; provides guidance 
and regulatory requirements for the framework for the Outreach Grant 
Program; and addresses other requirements and administrative aspects of 
the Outreach Grant Program. While this final rule provides the 
necessary structure and guidelines for the Outreach Grant Program, 
consistent with its authority under applicable Federal statutes and 
regulations, additional details on specific grant program requirements 
and the application process will be provided in one or more Notices of 
Funding Opportunity (NOFOs) to be subsequently issued to solicit grant 
applications, in the awards to individual eligible grantees, and in 
orders and/or public notices issued by CGB in coordination with OMD, 
the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB), and OGC, as appropriate.
    4. The ACP Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), 87 FR 
8385, February 14, 2022, explained that a number of Federal statutes 
and regulations govern Federal grant programs, including 2 CFR parts 
25, 170, 175, 180, 182, and 200, and that appropriations riders may 
also impose additional conditions on Federal grant programs. Commenters 
did not specifically comment on the implementation of these provisions. 
Accordingly, the Outreach Grant Program will be structured in 
accordance with these regulations and any applicable statutes and 
Federal grant program conditions in appropriations riders. To fully 
implement the requirements of 2 CFR parts 25, 170, 175, 182 and 200 and 
any other non-self-executing requirements in 2 CFR (and other 
government-wide statutes and regulations applicable to grants and other 
awards of Federal financial assistance), the Commission grants CGB, in 
coordination with WCB, OGC, and OMD as appropriate, authority to adopt 
policies and procedures regarding such requirements

[[Page 54312]]

through inclusion in the NOFO, inclusion in the terms and conditions of 
each grant, adoption, modification, and/or clarification of 
regulations, issuance of orders or public notices on delegated 
authority, and/or through publicly available instructions provided to 
applicants and/or grantees.
    5. The Outreach Grant Program will provide funding to support 
eligible partners in their outreach efforts to increase awareness of 
the Affordable Connectivity Program among eligible households, and to 
encourage eligible households to participate in the Affordable 
Connectivity Program. The record, in particular, supports ACP outreach 
to diverse populations. For purposes of the Outreach Grant Program, 
diverse populations include people of color, persons with disabilities, 
persons who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who have been 
historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by 
persistent poverty or inequality.
    6. Federal grant regulations require Federal awarding agencies to 
incorporate into their grant programs ``clear goals and objectives that 
facilitate the delivery of meaningful results consistent with the 
Federal authorizing legislation of the program.'' Federal grant 
regulations also require that the program design ``align with the 
strategic goals and objectives within the Federal awarding agency's 
performance plan and should support the Federal awarding agency's 
performance measurement, management, and reporting as required by Part 
6 of OMB Circular A-11'' and ``align with the Program Management 
Improvement Accountability Act (Pub. L. 114-264).''
    7. The ACP FNPRM sought comment on the goal of the Outreach Grant 
Program. Pursuant to the Commission's Congressional authorization to 
conduct ACP outreach, the Commission establishes an Outreach Grant 
Program goal and related objectives to be consistent with the goals of 
the Affordable Connectivity Program, to reduce the digital divide and 
to promote awareness of and participation in the Affordable 
Connectivity Program, and the Commission's overall strategic goals and 
objectives that support bringing affordable broadband to low-income 
households.
    8. The Commission adopts the goal of facilitating the promotion of 
the Affordable Connectivity Program to increase awareness of and 
participation in the program among eligible households. This goal is 
sound, supported by the record, and can be measured with appropriate 
data collected from grantees and ACP program data. Additionally, 
progress towards this goal advances the goals of the program to 
``promote awareness and participation in the Affordable Connectivity 
Program,'' and to ``reduce the digital divide for low-income 
consumers.'' It also advances the Commission's overall strategic goals 
and objectives of facilitating access to and adoption of broadband 
internet by underserved, underrepresented, and low-income households. 
To meet this Outreach Grant Program goal, the Commission will provide 
funding to outreach partners to engage in targeted outreach to low-
income and diverse households nationwide both to gauge existing levels 
of ACP awareness and to promote increased awareness of and 
participation in the program by eligible households.
    9. To support the accomplishment of the goal of facilitating the 
promotion of the Affordable Connectivity Program to increase awareness 
of and participation in the program among eligible households, the 
Commission adopts three objectives for the Outreach Grant Program: (1) 
expand and support diverse and impactful outreach efforts nationwide to 
reach eligible Affordable Connectivity Program households, including, 
but not limited to, people of color, persons with disabilities, persons 
who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who are or have been 
historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by 
persistent poverty or inequality; (2) strengthen outreach partners 
nationwide by empowering them to mobilize people and organizations to 
help raise awareness about the Affordable Connectivity Program; and (3) 
increase enrollment in the Affordable Connectivity Program, 
particularly in areas served by the outreach grants, by 
underrepresented, underserved, and low-income households. These 
objectives are consistent with the authorizing language in the 
Infrastructure Act and are also consistent with the record and in 
alignment with the Commission's strategic goals and objectives 
identified in this document.
    10. The first objective--expanding and supporting diverse and 
impactful outreach efforts nationwide--implements the Commission's 
strategic goals of facilitating access to and adoption of affordable 
broadband internet service and promoting affordable access to reliable 
broadband networks by diverse populations in underserved areas 
including rural, high-cost, and insular areas. This objective is also 
supported by the record--many commenters highlight the need for ACP 
outreach, and, in particular, for outreach to diverse and underserved 
groups across diverse geographic regions. To accomplish this objective, 
the Outreach Grant Program will use eligibility criteria that encourage 
program participation by entities that are capable of meeting the goal 
of the program and will provide funding to support ACP outreach by a 
broad range of eligible outreach partners.
    11. The second objective--strengthen outreach partners--also 
implements the Commission's strategic goal of increasing broadband 
adoption and access and the strategic objective of communicating 
information about FCC programs and policies to help increase adoption 
of affordable broadband. It further implements the goals of the 
Affordable Connectivity Program to promote awareness of and 
participation in the program for eligible households. To accomplish 
this objective, the Outreach Grant Program will provide funding for 
outreach and will also provide prospective applicants technical 
assistance on the Outreach Grant Program application requirements and 
Outreach Grant Program rules and requirements and provide grantees with 
programmatic training and standardized outreach materials.
    12. The Commission's third objective under the Outreach Grant 
Program--increasing enrollment in the Affordable Connectivity Program 
by qualifying underrepresented, underserved, and low-income 
households--implements the Commission's strategic objectives of 
facilitating access to and adoption of broadband internet service, 
including by low-income and underserved populations, and the Affordable 
Connectivity Program's goal of reducing the digital divide. The 
Outreach Grant Program can facilitate universal access to affordable 
broadband internet service by raising awareness of and encouraging 
participation in the Affordable Connectivity Program among eligible 
households. To accomplish this objective, the Outreach Grant Program 
will provide funding to facilitate outreach by eligible partners and 
will encourage participation of partners who are capable of reaching 
underrepresented, underserved, and low-income households and helping 
them to enroll in the Affordable Connectivity Program.
    13. Consistent with Federal grant regulations, and the delegations 
of authority in this final rule, the Commission directs CGB, in 
consultation with WCB and the Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA), 
to develop meaningful performance measures to evaluate progress towards 
this goal and to collect the necessary

[[Page 54313]]

information from grant recipients, subrecipients, and Universal Service 
Administrative Company (USAC or ACP Administrator) to measure progress 
towards this goal. Further the Commission instructs CGB, WCB, and USAC 
to explore whether and how outreach activities could be linked to 
specific enrollments, which could help measure the success of specific 
outreach efforts. The Commission will use data collected as part of the 
Outreach Grant Program as an indicator to measure Affordable 
Connectivity Program awareness among eligible households, which will be 
necessary to monitor progress toward the goal established in this final 
rule. Accordingly, the Commission directs CGB, in coordination with OEA 
and WCB, to use the data collected from grant recipients, which may 
include consumer surveys, research efforts, and feedback sought from 
``our state, community and non-profit partners helping to educate 
consumers on the [ACP] application process'' to measure progress toward 
the goal the Commission has established for the Outreach Grant Program.
    14. In authorizing the Commission to conduct outreach, Congress 
recognized that multiple forms of outreach are appropriate to ensure 
that eligible households are aware of and encouraged to participate in 
the Affordable Connectivity Program. However, the Infrastructure Act 
does not specify the types of outreach activities that are fundable 
through the Outreach Grant Program. Accordingly, in the ACP FNPRM, the 
Commission sought comment on the types of outreach activities that 
should be eligible for outreach grant funds, and the Commission now 
provides examples of the types of outreach activities that may be 
funded through authorized grants. Any NOFO issued for the Outreach 
Grant Program will provide further guidance on allowable activities and 
costs consistent with the goal and objectives of the Outreach Grant 
Program and the applicable authority under Federal statutes and 
regulations governing Federal grant programs.
    15. Based on the Commission's careful review of the record, and 
CGB's outreach experience, the Commission finds that a wide range of 
activities including, but not limited to, in-person events, literature 
campaigns, digital campaigns, and paid media campaigns could provide 
meaningful, effective Affordable Connectivity Program outreach tailored 
to targeted communities. Accordingly, in this final rule the Commission 
does not prescribe a comprehensive list of fundable outreach activities 
for the Outreach Grant Program. Instead, the Commission more broadly 
directs that all grant-funded outreach activities must be designed to 
support the stated goal and one or more of the stated objectives of the 
Outreach Grant Program. Further information will be provided as part of 
any NOFO issued by CGB. Consistent with the delegations of authority in 
this final rule, the Commission directs CGB to determine whether 
certain types of outreach activities should be prioritized based on a 
reasoned evaluation of which outreach activities will best meet the 
Outreach Grant Program goal and objectives, except as otherwise 
directed herein.
    16. The record supports funding a wide range of outreach activities 
to ensure that grant program participants have the flexibility to 
tailor outreach to the specific community they are targeting. For 
example, Common Sense urges the Commission to give grantees flexibility 
to use a variety of approaches because ``no single outreach method will 
be appropriate for all communities'' given that the digital divide 
impacts a diverse range of communities that are geographically 
distinct, use a variety of languages and communication media, trust 
different organizations, and have varying levels of technological 
fluency. Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) recommends that the 
Commission give grantees ``maximum flexibility to conduct outreach 
activities including television and radio, social media, local 
newspapers (still common in rural communities), or community events'' 
to accommodate the needs of and most effective methods of reaching out 
to different communities. Similarly, the San Diego Association of 
Governments (SANDAG) states that ``[c]ommunity-focused outreach and 
engagement strategies are highly dependent on a community's political, 
social, and economic conditions'' and recommends that the Commission 
``should provide the flexibility for grantees to design community 
outreach and engagement based on localized community needs.'' The 
Commission agrees that funding a wide range of outreach activities 
through the Outreach Grant Program would best provide grantees 
flexibility to conduct outreach tailored to the specific community they 
are targeting and allow us to direct funding in a manner that optimizes 
its ability to meet the programs goals and objectives.
    17. Examples of the types of activities that commenters ask the 
Commission to fund through the grant program include, but are not 
limited to, in-person and virtual outreach events and campaigns, text 
messaging, phone banking, social media campaigns, literature campaigns, 
and paid media campaigns. Specifically, the National Hispanic Media 
Coalition (NHMC) recommends that the Commission ``prioritize investment 
in trusted messengers, culturally-relevant programming, and in-language 
materials.'' Based on its experience implementing other federally 
funded outreach campaigns, the National Urban League recommends that 
``community events, mailers, radio and television broadcasts, paid 
advertisements, ethnic media, newsletters, social media, and other 
outreach targeted to the populations covered in the [Infrastructure 
Act]'' be funded through the Outreach Grant Program. Several commenters 
support funding paid media campaigns such as public service 
announcements, radio and television ads, and billboards, particularly 
in communities most impacted by the digital divide. Other commenters 
emphasize the importance of traditional outreach campaigns, both 
virtual or in-person, including, but not limited to, community events, 
workshops, mailers, newsletters, phone banks, street teams/canvassers, 
and door knocking. Commenters also support funding social media and 
digital outreach, such as social media advertisements and text 
messaging campaigns. These types of activities are tested and proven in 
their ability to reach diverse and targeted audiences and may therefore 
be considered an allowable use of grant funds in any NOFO 
consideration.
    18. The Commission recognizes the importance of ensuring that 
grant-funded ACP outreach is accessible to all diverse, eligible low-
income households. Several commenters emphasize the value of 
multilingual outreach, such as making program information available in 
multiple languages and ensuring outreach staff are prepared to 
communicate in languages other than English. The ACP rules also require 
that service provider ACP outreach and other communications be 
accessible to individuals with disabilities. The Commission agrees with 
commenters that outreach in languages other than English is important 
and also continues to find that there is a need for ACP outreach to be 
accessible to individuals with disabilities. Accordingly, the 
Commission allows funding for multilingual and accessible outreach, and 
it strongly encourages grantees to conduct grant-funded outreach in the 
languages spoken in the areas and communities that they are targeting 
and to also ensure that the grant-funded outreach is accessible to 
individuals with disabilities.

[[Page 54314]]

    19. In addition, commenters emphasize the importance of providing 
ACP application assistance to eligible consumers in connection with 
fundable outreach activities. The Commission agrees that in-person 
application assistance would help many potential applicants who may 
experience difficulty completing and submitting an application on their 
own, and specifically finds that grant funds may be used for this 
purpose. The Commission notes that some commenters advocate for funding 
that would support the ability to provide potential applicants remote 
assistance with completing and submitting their applications. However, 
as explained in the ACP Order, to protect the program's integrity, the 
Commission requires ACP applicants to be physically present with the 
individual providing application assistance to complete, sign, and 
certify their application. This requirement provides an important 
safeguard against waste, fraud, and abuse by ensuring that the 
applicant is actually the person who signs and submits the application 
and has reviewed and acknowledged the required applicant 
certifications. The Commission therefore declines to provide grant 
funds for remote assistance with completing and submitting ACP 
applications.
    20. Although access to the National Verifier can facilitate ACP 
enrollment by allowing direct assistance to low-income households with 
completing and submitting an application in the National Verifier, the 
Commission declines to provide grantees access to the National Verifier 
as part of this grant program. For program integrity and administrative 
reasons, access to the National Verifier is limited to service 
providers and certain neutral, trusted, third-party entities (e.g., 
governmental entities and their partners). Further, grantees are able 
to conduct meaningful, effective ACP outreach and provide application 
assistance without having direct access to the National Verifier. 
However, the Commission separately has two limited scope and duration 
pilot initiatives through which some outreach grantees that are also 
neutral, trusted third party entities (such as state, regional, and 
local governments, schools or school districts, state and local housing 
authorities, Tribally Designated Housing Entities, associations 
representing multiple Tribally Designated Housing Entities, or other 
state, regional, and local government entities or public housing 
authorities and their partners, as permitted pursuant to pilot rules), 
may be able to obtain direct access to the National Verifier for 
purposes of helping eligible consumers apply for the Affordable 
Connectivity Program directly in the National Verifier.
    21. Consistent with Federal grant regulations, all outreach 
expenses funded through this grant program must be necessary and 
reasonable for the performance of the award. Many parties commented on 
the types of outreach expenses for which grant funds could be used. For 
example, commenters advocate for the ability to use outreach grant 
funds for a broad variety of costs. Specifically, commenters advocate 
for funding the following types of costs: grant application, 
compliance, and planning costs; advertising costs (e.g., traditional 
advertising, social media, and text messaging campaigns); indirect 
costs; travel costs for outreach (e.g., mileage, gas, and related 
travel incidentals); grant administration costs (e.g., reporting, 
evaluation, auditing); percentage of program costs for facilities to 
cover overhead; outreach personnel costs; costs for hosting outreach 
events (e.g., supplies, facility costs, incentives, and food and 
refreshments for households attending outreach events); costs to create 
and distribute materials such as toolkits, fliers, or train-the-trainer 
guides that enable other organizations to promote the Affordable 
Connectivity Program; costs for technology (e.g., tablets, laptop 
computers, and printers for use at outreach events) to support 
enrollment; costs to create, produce, and disseminate consumer outreach 
materials such as mailers and posters; and costs to translate and 
interpret ACP consumer outreach materials.
    22. Given the broad range of expenses that could be necessary and 
reasonable to provide meaningful, effective outreach to eligible 
households, the Commission declines to prescribe in this final rule a 
comprehensive list of allowable outreach expenses, but reiterate that 
all outreach expenses funded through this grant program must be 
necessary and reasonable for the performance of the award. To promote 
fiscal responsibility and ensure that the vast majority of the grant 
funding is targeted towards outreach activities, moreover, grants will 
be subject to a five percent cap on management and administrative 
expenses per individual award. In addition, the Commission makes clear 
that the grant funding is intended for eligible costs of ACP outreach 
for which applicants do not already have or expect to receive other 
funding. Grant funds may not be used to replace (supplant) funds that 
applicants have already obtained or expect to receive for the same 
purpose. The Commission directs CGB, in consultation with WCB, OMD, and 
OGC, to identify allowable and unallowable outreach costs for the grant 
program, subject to the necessary and reasonable for the performance of 
the award standard applicable to Federal grants, and to provide this 
information in any NOFO issued for the grant program. In making these 
determinations, CGB shall consider the goal and objectives and 
available funding for the Outreach Grant Program, the need for fiscal 
responsibility, and the restrictions on fundable costs in the 
applicable statutes and regulations governing Federal grants. CGB shall 
have the authority to make revisions to the types of allowable costs 
during the grant program and may also cap certain types of expenses. 
The Commission further notes that Federal grant regulations, which it 
has adopted herein for this grant program, prohibit the use of Federal 
funds for certain costs.
    23. The Commission takes seriously its obligation to guard against 
waste, fraud, and abuse in the use of Federal funds. To promote the 
integrity of the Outreach Grant Program and the Affordable Connectivity 
Program and to protect consumer choice among service providers, the 
Commission adopts several important program safeguards. In addition, 
costs funded through the outreach grants are subject to principles, 
restrictions, and limitations under the statutes and regulations 
applicable to Federal grant programs. For example, award recipients are 
prohibited from using grant funds for entertainment or to purchase 
alcohol, contracting with the enemy, and purchasing telecommunications 
and video surveillance services or equipment provided by prohibited 
companies.
    24. The Commission requires that all grantees not favor any 
particular service provider in performing outreach activities funded by 
this Outreach Grant Program. Service providers stand to benefit 
financially from the enrollment of additional eligible households in 
the Affordable Connectivity Program. Accordingly, it would be 
inappropriate to use Outreach Grant Program dollars in a manner 
intended to specifically increase a particular provider's program 
enrollment. Additionally, requiring grantees to maintain neutrality 
among service providers will protect eligible households' right to 
choose their ACP provider and the type of broadband service that best 
fits their needs. Neutrality with respect to participating providers is 
similarly a requirement for the ACP Navigator and Your Home, Your 
Internet Pilots that were established in the ACP Order and the

[[Page 54315]]

Your Home, Your Internet Pilot Order, published elsewhere in this issue 
of the Federal Register, respectively, and these same concerns equally 
apply in the context of the Outreach Grant Program.
    25. Consistent with this outreach neutrality requirement, grantees 
may not direct, steer, incentivize or otherwise encourage eligible 
households to enroll with a particular ACP provider or one of a 
specific group of ACP providers (including, but not limited to, 
broadband industry groups such as trade associations) when conducting 
grant-funded outreach activities, and grantees must make clear that 
eligible households may enroll with the ACP provider of their choice. 
In addition, grantees may not use service provider-branded items such 
as outreach materials, gifts, or incentives when conducting grant-
funded outreach activities. Grantees also may not offer or provide 
consumers gifts or incentives provided by service providers when 
conducting grant-funded outreach activities. Such gifts and incentives 
could compromise the grantee's neutrality with respect to ACP service 
providers and could also improperly influence eligible households' 
choice of provider. Furthermore, grantees may not otherwise accept 
funding in any form, including in-kind contributions, from a 
participating provider or a specific group of participating providers 
(including, but not limited to, broadband industry groups such as trade 
associations) for the purpose of conducting grant-funded outreach 
activities. The Commission recognizes that it may be beneficial in some 
instances to have service provider representatives in attendance at 
grant-funded outreach events to provide eligible households information 
on the available service offerings to which they may apply their ACP 
benefit. The Commission does not prohibit this, provided that all ACP 
participating providers that provide service in the area where the 
outreach is conducted have the same opportunity to attend and provide 
information on their services to which the ACP benefit can be applied. 
The Commission also does not prohibit including information in 
connection with grant-funded outreach on how to find an ACP service 
provider. Accordingly, outreach funded through the Outreach Grant 
Program can direct eligible households to the Companies Near Me Tool 
and can include a list of all providers serving the areas where the 
outreach is performed. The Commission makes clear that this service 
provider neutrality requirement does not preclude grantees from 
otherwise collaborating with state agencies, public interest groups, 
and non-profit organizations to carry out public awareness campaigns 
that highlight the value and benefits of broadband internet access 
service and the existence of the Affordable Connectivity Program, as 
required under the Infrastructure Act.
    26. The Commission also prohibits entities conducting outreach 
funded through the Outreach Grant Program from providing any form of 
compensation to individuals engaged in grant-funded outreach activities 
based on the number of ACP applications or enrollments resulting from 
their grant-funded outreach activities. The Commission's rules for the 
Lifeline program similarly prohibit participating providers from 
offering or providing commission or other compensation to enrollment 
representatives or their direct supervisors that is based on the number 
of consumers who applied for or are enrolled in Lifeline with that 
particular provider. The ACP rules also prohibit participating 
providers from offering or providing to enrollment representatives, 
their direct supervisors, or entities operating on behalf of a 
participating provider, any form of compensation that is based on the 
number of ACP applications or enrollments with that provider, revenues 
the provider receives or expects to receive through the Affordable 
Connectivity Program, or any other compensation based on ACP 
applications, enrollments, or other revenues. Based on the Commission's 
experience administering the Lifeline program and the Affordable 
Connectivity Program, it finds that allowing grantees to provide such 
compensation in connection with grant-funded outreach activities could 
compromise the integrity of the program and its goals. Therefore, the 
Commission prohibits grantees from providing compensation to their 
personnel, representatives, or others acting on their behalf based on 
the number of ACP enrollments or applications submitted in connection 
with outreach activities funded under the Outreach Grant Program.
    27. Consistent with Federal regulations that the Commission has 
made applicable to this grant program, it notes that grantees may not 
``earn or keep any profit resulting from'' an Outreach Grant Program 
award. For example, a grantee may not accept or receive payment or 
other compensation (other than funded, allowable outreach expenses) in 
exchange for hosting an outreach event or providing application 
assistance to an ACP applicant at a specific site as part of the 
Outreach Grant Program. The Commission also notes that grantees may not 
charge low-income households a fee for educating them about or 
providing them with assistance in submitting an ACP application. This 
ensures that outreach grant partners do not make a profit from or 
otherwise financially benefit from conducting ACP outreach through the 
Outreach Grant Program.
    28. To further promote program integrity, the Commission prohibits 
the use of grant funds to support or obtain gifts or incentives to 
offer or provide to encourage consumers to learn about, apply for, or 
enroll in the Affordable Connectivity Program. At least one commenter 
advocates for the ability to use grant funds to provide incentives to 
encourage consumers to learn about and apply for the Affordable 
Connectivity Program. The Commission finds that gifts and incentives 
supported by or offered when conducting grant-funded outreach 
activities may induce households to submit an ACP application that they 
may not have otherwise submitted primarily to obtain the gift or 
incentive or may encourage an ACP participating household to attempt 
multiple enrollments to obtain the gift or incentive even though the 
ACP benefit is limited to one per household. These outcomes may result 
in waste, fraud, and abuse, and thus the Commission prohibits the use 
of grant funds for these practices.
    29. Outreach by a range of entities is critical to maximizing the 
impact of the Affordable Connectivity Program. While the Infrastructure 
Act authorizes the Commission to provide grants to outreach partners, 
it does not specify the types of entities that qualify as outreach 
partners. In the following, the Commission provides examples of the 
types of entities that may be eligible to participate in the Outreach 
Grant Program as grantees and subrecipients. The Commission encourages 
entities of all types and diverse organizations, including 
organizations serving, led, and/or owned by persons of color, persons 
with disabilities, persons who live in rural or Tribal areas, and 
others who are or have been historically underserved, marginalized, or 
adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality, to submit 
applications for the Outreach Grant Program once a NOFO is released. 
Like commenters, the Commission is also mindful of the importance of 
equitable outreach efforts as it works to reach underserved communities 
most impacted by the digital divide, and it reminds prospective 
applicants of the Federal grant requirement to ``take all necessary 
affirmative steps to assure that minority

[[Page 54316]]

businesses, women's business enterprises, and labor surplus area firms 
are used when possible.'' The Commission also encourages entities 
participating in the Commission's ACP Navigator and Your Home, Your 
Internet Pilot Programs, through which limited trusted entities may be 
granted access to the National Verifier to assist eligible households 
to complete and submit the ACP application, to apply for outreach 
grants to enhance their participation in those pilot programs.
    30. The Infrastructure Act authorizes the Commission to provide 
grants to outreach partners to encourage eligible households to enroll 
in the Affordable Connectivity Program. At a minimum, then, outreach 
partners must be capable of conducting ACP outreach, that is, 
communicating or engaging with eligible low-income populations to 
inform or educate them about the Affordable Connectivity Program, to 
increase their awareness of the program, and to encourage or assist 
them to apply for the program. Moreover, eligible entities must be able 
to satisfy all legal requirements applicable to Federal grantees. For 
instance, to be eligible, an entity must be able to comply with Federal 
grant regulations adopted by the Commission, to obtain and report an 
FCC Registration Number (FRN), and to register with, and maintain an 
active registration with, the System for Award Management (SAM). 
Additionally, entities seeking to participate must satisfy statutory 
requirements, such as those restricting grant eligibility of entities 
indebted to the United States. Accordingly, the Outreach Grant Program 
will be open to entities capable of (a) directly or indirectly (through 
subrecipients) conducting outreach to increase awareness of and to 
encourage or assist with applying for the Affordable Connectivity 
Program; and (b) complying with all applicable policies and rules 
adopted herein, including the adopted requirements of 2 CFR part 200, 
any policies and rules that may be subsequently adopted on delegated 
authority by CGB to implement the Outreach Grant Program, and any other 
applicable grant-related statutes and regulations. The Commission 
strongly encourages eligible entities interested in applying for the 
Outreach Grant Program to familiarize themselves with regulatory and 
statutory requirements by closely studying applicable grant regulations 
and the relevant NOFO.
    31. The ACP FNPRM sought comment on the types of entities that 
should be deemed eligible to apply for outreach grant funds and 
proposed, at a minimum, that non-profit organizations and trusted 
community organizations be eligible. Commenters support making the 
Outreach Grant Program open to a wide range of public and non-profit 
entities. The Commission agrees that the Outreach Grant Program should 
generally be open to a variety of entities to encourage participation 
from a diverse range of outreach partners, in terms of type and size, 
and to maximize the reach and impact of the grant program. Consistent 
with the record and the goal and objectives of the grant program, and 
subject to the basic eligibility criteria in the document, governmental 
and non-governmental entities are eligible for the grant program. Based 
on the Commission's review of the record, the types of entities 
eligible to participate in the Outreach Grant Program include, but are 
not limited to:
     Tribal governments and subdivisions thereof, as well as 
tribal organizations;
     State governments and subdivisions thereof (including the 
District of Columbia and U.S. Territories);
     Local governments and subdivisions thereof (including 
county, borough, municipality, city, town, township, parish, local 
public authority, special district, intrastate district, council of 
governments, and agencies or instrumentalities of multi-regional or 
intra-state or local government);
     Public housing authorities;
     Social service providers (e.g., food banks, community 
transportation, childcare);
     Education organizations, such as schools and other 
institutions of higher education;
     Workforce development training organizations;
     Non-profit organizations;
     Community-based organizations (including faith-based 
organizations and social service organizations);
     Community anchor institutions (e.g., healthcare providers 
and healthcare organizations and libraries and library consortia);
     Public service organizations; and
     Consortia of the entities listed in the document.
    Depending on the outreach target or audience for a particular NOFO 
and where appropriate to meet a specific program goal or objective, CGB 
is authorized to modify, expand, or limit the types of entities that 
may be eligible to receive grant funds under a particular funding 
opportunity in this grant program.
    32. The ACP FNPRM asked whether the eligibility of non-profit 
organizations should be limited to organizations with 501(c)(3) status. 
This refers to section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, under 
which an organization will be tax-exempt if it is ``organized and 
operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 
501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private 
shareholder or individual.'' The exempt purposes are charitable 
(including ``relief of the poor, the distressed, or the 
underprivileged'' and ``eliminating prejudice and discrimination''), 
religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public 
safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, 
and preventing cruelty to children or animals. To qualify for 501(c)(3) 
status, an organization must pass ``organizational'' and 
``operational'' tests, and must not be an ``action organization,'' 
meaning that it ``may not attempt to influence legislation as a 
substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any 
campaign activity for or against political candidates.''
    33. Several commenters suggest limiting eligibility for non-profit 
organizations to those with 501(c)(3) status. The National Digital 
Inclusion Alliance (NDIA), for instance, ``urges the Commission to 
consider only nonprofits with 501(c)(3) status as eligible grantees 
under the program.'' Likewise, the Hawaii Broadband and Digital Equity 
Office recommends giving award preference to 501(c)(3) non-profit 
organizations but allowing non-profit organizations who lack that 
status to be subgrantees. In contrast, the National Lifeline 
Association (NaLA) contends that the Commission should ``avoid 
categorical limitations on the types of entities that can participate'' 
and asserts that there is ``no reason to require grant recipients to be 
charitable organizations with 501(c)(3) status.''
    34. The Commission declines to limit the eligibility of non-profits 
to organizations with 501(c)(3) status. As NDIA acknowledges, this tax 
status has limited relevance to whether an applicant can perform 
effective ACP outreach. The commenters who suggest the 501(c)(3) 
limitation do not explain why it is necessary or explain how this 
limitation would support the purposes of the Outreach Grant Program. 
Making 501(c)(3) status an eligibility criterion could exclude 
organizations that are capable of engaging in effective outreach 
efforts but are outside the scope of the 501(c)(3) category, such as 
social welfare organizations and civic leagues. The Commission also 
notes that 501(c)(3) status is not necessary to evaluate an applicant's 
general eligibility to receive Federal grants or ability to comply with 
the applicable

[[Page 54317]]

Federal grant regulations--Federal grant regulations require a robust 
risk assessment of all Federal grant applicants. Further, numerous 
other Federal grants are open to non-profit organizations that do not 
have 501(c)(3) status with the Internal Revenue Service. For these 
reasons, the Commission does not limit the eligibility of non-profits 
to organizations with 501(c)(3) status, but it does authorize CGB to 
require an applicant to provide proof of non-profit status as 
appropriate.
    35. The Commission also declines to categorically exclude for-
profit organizations from participation in the grant program. The 
California Emerging Technology Fund (CETF) argues that private, for-
profit companies should be ineligible entities for outreach grants. In 
contrast, Centri Tech and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce advocate 
eligibility for both non-profit and for-profit entities, like minority 
businesses. The Commission agrees that there may be some for-profit 
entities that could provide meaningful outreach, such as healthcare 
providers or minority businesses, and CETF does not identify any reason 
to exclude such entities at the eligibility stage. The Commission 
reiterates, however, that grantees may not make a profit from or 
otherwise financially benefit from conducting ACP Outreach through the 
Outreach Grant Program.
    36. Although the illustrative list of eligible entity types 
incorporates a wide range of organizations, to promote the integrity of 
the grant program, the Commission concludes that broadband providers 
and their subsidiaries, affiliates, representatives, contractors, and 
agents will not be eligible to participate in the Outreach Grant 
Program or receive awards, either as grantees, pass-through entities, 
or subrecipients. Given that broadband providers individually benefit 
from customer enrollments in the Affordable Connectivity Program, 
awarding grant funds to help broadband providers increase awareness of 
and enrollments in the Affordable Connectivity Program presents a 
significant conflict of interest and would not be a fiscally 
responsible use of Federal funds. Excluding broadband providers from 
receiving grant awards would not hinder the goal or objectives of the 
grant program. Broadband providers that participate in the Affordable 
Connectivity Program are already obligated by statute and regulation to 
engage in ACP outreach efforts and should not receive Federal funds to 
accomplish these obligations. Additionally, because broadband providers 
benefit financially from ACP enrollment, they already have sufficient 
incentive to engage in outreach.
    37. Further, the Commission is not persuaded by NaLA that it should 
permit broadband industry trade associations to receive grant awards. 
Although the Commission agrees with NaLA that its approach to program 
eligibility should be ``inclusive,'' broadband provider trade 
associations present conflict of interest concerns that charitable non-
profit organizations, for instance, do not. Just as the Commission 
finds that permitting broadband providers to participate in the 
Outreach Grant Program presents a conflict of interest, it finds that 
the same conflict of interest is inherent where an industry association 
or trade association made up of or representing the same broadband 
providers may be seeking government funds to increase its members' 
consumer enrollments in the Affordable Connectivity Program. Therefore, 
the Commission also prohibits broadband industry groups and trade 
associations that represent broadband providers from receiving awards 
through the Outreach Grant Program, either as grantees, pass-through 
entities, or subrecipients.
    38. Additionally, consistent with the Federal grant regulations, 
entities that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or 
ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or 
activities will be ineligible for participation in the Outreach Grant 
Program. The Commission currently has pending a notice of proposed 
rulemaking to adopt and implement the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) Guidelines for suspension and debarment (non-procurement) in 2 
CFR part 180, and it asked for comment about the implementation of that 
part in the ACP FNPRM. Commenters did not address suspension and 
debarment procedures in response to the ACP FNPRM. To mitigate the 
potential for waste, fraud, and abuse in the grant program, the 
Commission determines here that those rules, should they be adopted, 
will apply to the Outreach Grant Program. Additionally, certain 
entities may be ineligible by statute. For example, 501(c)(4) non-
profit organizations that engage in lobbying activities are ineligible 
for Federal grants, as are organizations that are indebted to the 
United States and have judgment liens filed against them.
    39. CGB has extensive experience and expertise in conducting 
outreach and working with a range of outreach partners, including most 
recently for the Affordable Connectivity Program and the Emergency 
Broadband Benefit Program (EBB Program). The Commission directs CGB to 
develop, administer, and manage the Outreach Grant Program in 
compliance with the Federal laws and regulations applicable to Federal 
grant programs, and consistent with the program goal and objectives and 
requirements the Commission establishes in this final rule. The 
Commission modifies Sec. Sec.  0.11, 0.141, and 0.231 of the 
Commission's rules to reflect CGB's and OMD's additional 
responsibilities for the grant program and related delegations of 
authority. In carrying out these delegated functions, CGB shall consult 
with WCB, OMD, and OGC as appropriate to ensure that the grant program 
is in compliance with the applicable statutes and regulations for 
Federal grant programs and the Affordable Connectivity Program, and to 
ensure that the grant program is otherwise meeting the program 
objectives, goals and requirements outlined in this final rule. The 
Commission further directs CGB, in coordination with OMD, OEA, and OGC 
as needed, to engage with the National Telecommunications and 
Information Administration, and other Federal agencies that administer 
broadband funding programs to promote information sharing and 
collaboration across broadband-related investments across the Federal 
Government and to avoid unnecessary duplication.
    40. Although the Infrastructure Act authorizes the Commission to 
issue grants to outreach partners, the Infrastructure Act does not 
specify a budget for these grants, leaving the Commission with 
authority to determine how much of the overall ACP appropriation should 
be expended on this grant program. In the ACP Order, the Commission 
established a budget of up to $100 million for all outreach for the 
Affordable Connectivity Program, which includes the Outreach Grant 
Program as well as the Commission's own non-grant outreach efforts 
permitted by the Infrastructure Act. This budget recognizes the need 
for extensive outreach for the Affordable Connectivity Program, while 
also leaving ample funds from the total $14.2 billion ACP budget to 
provide the ACP benefit to as many eligible households as possible for 
as long as possible. As explained in the ACP Order, the $100 million 
outreach budget reflects the Commission's consideration of the 
estimates for the costs of Commission outreach for the Affordable 
Connectivity Program and the Commission's costs for Digital Television 
Transition outreach (which included broad paid media campaigns).
    41. The allocation of the $100 million budget for ACP outreach 
takes into consideration the costs of the

[[Page 54318]]

Commission's outreach for the Digital Television Transition and EBB 
Program and comments in the record concerning the costs of outreach 
activities. This funding allocation will enable CGB to provide grant 
awards to respond to the need for extensive, meaningful outreach by 
numerous, diverse eligible outreach partners, while also enabling CGB 
to conduct its own outreach as authorized in the Infrastructure Act. 
The Commission makes clear that CGB is not required to spend this full 
amount. CGB is authorized, in coordination with OMD, to decide if and 
when to reallocate any remaining unused funds from individual outreach 
grants for any outreach allowed under the statute or none at all.
    42. The Commission directs CGB to designate up to $60 million of 
the ACP outreach budget for competitive allocation to eligible 
entities. Of the $60 million set-aside for competitive allocation to 
eligible entities, $27 million will be reserved for States and U.S. 
Territories, with a minimum allocation to grantees in each State and 
U.S. Territory for ACP outreach activities, consistent with this final 
rule and the program's goal and objectives. In establishing the minimum 
funding allocation to each State and U.S. Territory, CGB shall allocate 
an equal amount of funding for each state, the District of Columbia, 
and Puerto Rico, but may allocate a lesser minimum amount to the 
remaining U.S. Territories. To facilitate coordination, States and U.S. 
Territories may choose, but will not be required, to establish a single 
point of contact to, among other things, coordinate among entities 
within the State or U.S. Territory that have relevant outreach 
responsibilities related to implementing the Outreach Grant Program. 
The Commission further directs CGB to designate a minimum of $10 
million of the ACP outreach budget for competitive allocation to 
eligible Tribal governments and Tribal organizations, including 
Tribally Designated Housing Entities, to be used specifically for ACP 
outreach to persons who live on qualifying Tribal lands as defined in 
Sec.  54.1800(s) of the Affordable Connectivity Program rules.
    43. To maximize the impact of the dollars allocated for ACP 
outreach, the Commission seeks to build upon existing initiatives that 
it has already determined will support the goal and objectives 
established in this final rule to increase awareness of and 
participation in the Affordable Connectivity Program; specifically, the 
ACP Navigator Pilot and Your Home, Your Internet Pilot Programs. 
Appropriately targeted outreach funding could further the scope of 
outreach and enrollment activities conducted by participants in these 
pilots, which in turn would promote the success of these pilots and 
provide the Commission with valuable information on what is needed to 
increase awareness and aid in the enrollment of targeted populations, 
including households that participate in Federal Public Housing 
Assistance Programs. In establishing the parameters of both pilots, the 
Commission will inform potential participants that are eligible for 
grants of its intent to make available outreach grant funds to support 
their pilot program activities, and will encourage and enable eligible 
entities participating in one or both of these pilots to apply for 
Outreach Grant Program funding. Therefore, the Commission directs CGB 
to set aside up to $5 million each, for a total of up to $10 million of 
the ACP outreach budget, for outreach grants specifically for eligible 
entities participating in either or both the ACP Navigator or Your 
Home, Your Internet Pilot Programs. The Commission makes clear, 
however, that CGB is not required to award this full amount to pilot 
participants. The Commission also makes clear that while it directs CGB 
to set aside a specific funding allocation solely for grants to 
eligible entities participating in Your Home, Your Internet or the ACP 
Navigator Pilot, eligible entities participating in both or either of 
these pilots are not limited to applying for that targeted funding, and 
may apply for a grant in any funding opportunity for which they 
qualify.
    44. The Commission expects that the allocated budget established 
today for the Outreach Grant Program will support extensive, meaningful 
outreach by numerous eligible outreach partners. The Commission 
acknowledges that certain commenters advocate for a total budget larger 
than $100 million for outreach grants and other outreach. However, the 
Commission declines to increase this budget. The $100 million budget 
the Commission set for all ACP outreach reflects the critical need for 
extensive ACP outreach and the fact that the Affordable Connectivity 
Program has a limited budget, while also ensuring that ample funding 
remains for providing broadband and device discounts to eligible ACP 
households for as long as possible. Increasing the total budget for ACP 
outreach, including the grant program, as these commenters suggest 
would reduce the amount of funding available to provide the ACP benefit 
to as many eligible households for as long as possible.
    45. The Commission otherwise declines in this final rule to 
prescribe a specific number of funding opportunities for the Outreach 
Grant Program. CGB should determine how quickly and in what amounts to 
disperse funding across the duration of the Outreach Grant Program. The 
Commission also directs CGB, in coordination with WCB and OMD, to 
decide whether to make the grant funds available through one or 
multiple NOFOs. CGB shall also determine the size of each grant awarded 
to each eligible outreach partner within the budget limit the 
Commission establishes herein based on an application process that 
complies with the applicable Federal grant regulations. The Commission 
notes that some commenters advocate for front-loading the grant funds 
to maximize the impact of the outreach grants in the early years of the 
Outreach Grant Program where the need for outreach is likely to be the 
greatest. The Commission agrees that this would be an appropriate 
approach for CGB to consider in deciding funding allocations, including 
the allocation of the funding set aside for pilot participants, and 
allocation for competitive grants to eligible entities, to include set-
asides to States and U.S. Territories, as well as Tribal organizations, 
for this Outreach Grant Program. To determine the funding allocation 
across the grant program, including whether to issue one or multiple 
NOFOs, the Commission directs CGB to consult with OMD, WCB, OEA, and 
OGC as appropriate to ensure compliance with the applicable statutes 
and regulations governing Federal grant programs and the requirements 
the Commission establishes in this final rule, to also ensure 
consistency with the Outreach Grant Program's goal and objectives, and 
to further its interest in maximizing the impact of the grant funds as 
early as practicable in the course of the Affordable Connectivity 
Program.
    46. The ACP FNPRM sought comment on whether the grant program 
should be a one-time funding opportunity or a multiple-year program. 
Certain commenters advocate for allowing eligible outreach partners to 
apply for grant funds throughout the Affordable Connectivity Program. 
The Commission permits CGB to continue to make grant awards until the 
Affordable Connectivity Program's end is announced consistent with any 
wind-down processes established by WCB, or until all grant funds 
allocated for outreach in this final rule is disbursed. When the ACP 
FNPRM was released, the Commission capped outreach funding to $100 
million over the next five years.

[[Page 54319]]

However, increased subscriber numbers could accelerate the depletion of 
the Affordable Connectivity Fund prior to the allotted 5-year-period 
for outreach spending. CGB shall coordinate with WCB on the wind-down 
process to be established pursuant to the direction the Commission 
provided in the ACP Order. At the point when the forecasted end of the 
Affordable Connectivity Program is announced pursuant to those wind-
down procedures, the Commission expects that new grantees would not 
have sufficient time to implement and execute new outreach efforts, and 
any new grant awards would be highly unlikely to have meaningful impact 
on increasing awareness of and enrollment in the Affordable 
Connectivity Program. Accordingly, the Commission finds that it would 
not be fiscally responsible to issue new grant awards after the 
forecasted end of the Affordable Connectivity Program is announced 
pursuant to the wind-down procedures established by WCB, unless 
additional spending is otherwise authorized by Congress. To effectuate 
the Commission's direction here, CGB is authorized to cancel, withdraw, 
or set aside any open NOFO and to cease processing any grant 
applications once the forecasted end of the ACP is announced. The 
deadline the Commission establishes for making new grant awards 
provides CGB flexibility to continue to make new grant awards for as 
long as practicable, while also ensuring that grant funds are being 
used in a fiscally responsible manner. Entities that receive grant 
awards may continue to use their grant funds for outreach until ACP 
enrollments cease, pursuant to any ACP wind-down procedures established 
by WCB. To the extent that uncommitted funding remains in the Outreach 
Grant Program budget or awardees have unused grant funds after the end 
of the Outreach Grant Program, but before the end of the Affordable 
Connectivity Program, the remaining funds may be allocated back to the 
larger ACP budget to pay for broadband service and connected devices.
    47. As explained in the ACP FNPRM, 2 CFR part 200 outlines numerous 
requirements for the administration and management of Federal grant 
programs. As required under Federal grant regulations, the Commission 
formally adopts and implements the Uniform Administrative Requirements, 
Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. In the 
following, the Commission also provides additional guidelines and 
requirements for the development, administration, and management of the 
grant program. CGB must develop, administer, and manage the Outreach 
Grant Program in compliance with the applicable Federal laws and 
regulations for grant programs and in compliance with the goal and 
objectives and any other requirements that the Commission has 
established for the Outreach Grant Program. This authority includes 
developing and administering, and the issuance of NOFO(s), establishing 
terms and conditions of each grant, adopting, modifying, and/or 
clarifying implementing regulations, and issuing orders, public 
notices, and/or publicly available instructions provided to applicants 
and/or grantees. Further, CGB shall consult with OMD, WCB, and OGC as 
appropriate to ensure compliance with these requirements and the 
requirements outlined in this final rule.
    48. Federal agencies administering Federal grant programs are 
required to release a NOFO for grant opportunities. The NOFO provides 
detailed information about the specific grant opportunity, including 
information about the amount of funding available, eligible entities, 
fundable expenses and activities, application and evaluation process, 
reporting requirements, and other rules and requirements for the grant 
opportunity. The Commission directs CGB to develop and issue a NOFO for 
any funding opportunity for the Outreach Grant Program, in compliance 
with the applicable Federal regulations concerning NOFOs and the 
requirements the Commission establishes in this final rule, and 
consistent with the goal and objectives for the Outreach Grant Program. 
CGB shall consult with WCB, OGC, and the Office of the Inspector 
General (OIG) as appropriate to ensure that any NOFO issued for the 
grant program complies with the applicable Federal statutory 
requirements and regulations and any rules, requirements and policies 
set forth in this final rule.
    49. The authorizing statute and Federal grant regulations do not 
require the Commission to adopt a matching requirement for the grant 
program. Accordingly, the Commission has the discretion to determine 
whether to require grant recipients to provide matching funds or 
contributions. Benefits Data Trust opposes a match requirement, while 
other commenters discuss the significant budget limitations faced by 
many of the types of organizations that are eligible for the grant 
program.
    50. Based on the Commission's careful review of the record and in 
consideration of the urgent need for outreach by a diverse range of 
eligible outreach partners, it finds that a matching requirement for 
the Outreach Grant Program would likely thwart the potential 
effectiveness and impact of the grant program. The record demonstrates 
that many prospective eligible outreach partners are already facing 
significant budget constraints. Therefore, a matching requirement for 
the Outreach Grant Program would likely discourage or delay 
applications from potential outreach partners, particularly smaller 
organizations. A matching requirement may also lead potential outreach 
partners to design and propose more limited-scope outreach efforts to 
ensure they have sufficient funding or resources to satisfy a matching 
requirement. These outcomes would potentially minimize the number of 
eligible households touched by grant-funded outreach and, thus, would 
not serve the goal or objectives of the Outreach Grant Program. 
Accordingly, the Commission declines to adopt a matching requirement 
for this grant program. Consistent with this decision, grantees that 
are pass-through entities also may not require a match from 
subrecipients. While the Commission declines to adopt a matching 
requirement as a condition of receiving an outreach grant, it 
recognizes that matching funds can maximize the effectiveness and 
impact of the limited outreach grant program funds. Accordingly, as 
explained in the following, for purposes of prioritizing grant awards, 
the Commission directs CGB to consider whether the applicant proposes a 
cost match or cost share, among other factors.
    51. The Infrastructure Act does not specify the type of grant that 
the Commission may issue for the grant program. Therefore, the 
Commission has the authority to make this determination. For Federal 
grants, the potential types of grants include, but are not limited to, 
discretionary grants (which generally require a competitive process) 
and formula grants (which generally provide set amounts of funding 
based on specific criteria). The Commission concludes that competitive 
funding opportunities would best further the goal and objectives of the 
Outreach Grant Program, encourage participation by a diverse range of 
outreach partners, and maximize the impact of the grant program as 
early as practicable. The Commission also concludes that it would be 
appropriate to issue more than one NOFO. To the extent that more than 
one funding opportunity is released for this grant program, it will be 
necessary to allocate

[[Page 54320]]

funding for each funding opportunity consistent with the allocations 
specified in this final rule or as it may be necessary to set award 
ceilings or floors.
    52. The Commission directs CGB to decide whether funding will be 
released through one or more funding opportunity, determine the 
allocation of funding for any funding opportunity under the Outreach 
Grant Program consistent with the allocations specified in this final 
rule, and establish minimum funding amounts for States and U.S. 
Territories or award floors or ceilings to the extent necessary. CGB 
may roll over unused funding from one set-aside to another, or from one 
funding opportunity to another. CGB's determinations on the number of 
funding opportunities and related funding allocations must be 
consistent with the goal and objectives of the grant program and must 
also promote the Commission's interests in maximizing the impact of the 
Outreach Grant Program as early as practicable and encouraging 
participation by a diverse range of outreach partners across diverse 
geographic regions. To make these determinations, the Commission 
directs CGB to consult with WCB, OMD, OEA, and OGC as appropriate to 
ensure compliance with Federal grant laws and regulations and 
requirements in this final rule, and to ensure consistency with the 
goal and objectives of this grant program. Any NOFO issued for this 
grant program shall provide specific detail on the grant opportunity 
including, but not limited to, the type of grant, the total amount of 
funding for the grant opportunity, and any ceilings and floors for the 
grant opportunity.
    53. The ACP FNPRM asked whether use of outreach grant funds should 
be limited to named grantees or pass-through entities, or whether 
subgrantees, that is, subrecipients, could use funds for outreach. The 
Commission also sought comment on the prevalence of subrecipient models 
in Federal grant programs, and the advantages and disadvantages of a 
subrecipient model. Many commenters advocate for allowing pass-through 
entities to use subrecipients to conduct outreach under the Outreach 
Grant Program, and explain that the subrecipient model has proven 
highly effective in other contexts. According to commenters, a 
subrecipient model facilitates the participation of smaller entities 
that may not have the capacity or resources to apply for grants and 
comply with reporting requirements and allows for leveraging pass-
through entity resources and expertise.
    54. Based on the Commission's careful consideration of the record, 
it agrees that allowing pass-through entities to use subrecipients 
would best promote the goal and objectives of the Outreach Grant 
Program and maximize the potential scope and impact of grant-funded 
outreach. Allowing the subrecipient model would also facilitate the 
administration of the Outreach Grant Program by reducing the number of 
grants awarded and requiring management. Consequently, the Commission 
directs CGB to permit the use of subrecipients, where appropriate 
(e.g., grant awards to a national organization or to a state or local 
government), for funding opportunities for the Outreach Grant Program. 
Any subrecipients must satisfy the eligibility requirements the 
Commission establishes in this final rule. To ensure full transparency 
regarding any subrecipients, grantees who are pass-through entities 
must inform CGB of which subrecipients they use, as well as the amount 
of each subaward. Pursuant to Federal grant regulations, pass-through 
entities are responsible for conducting risk assessments of potential 
subrecipients, monitoring their subrecipients and ensuring their 
subrecipients' compliance with the requirements of applicable Federal 
laws and regulations and this grant program. Consistent with the 
delegations of authority in this final rule, CGB, in consultation with 
OMD, may require pass-through entities to have additional policies and 
procedures in place to ensure subrecipient compliance with the grant 
requirements, terms and conditions.
    55. The ACP FNPRM also sought comment on the application process 
and requirements for the grant program, noting that in previous 
comments, the National Digital Inclusion Alliance proposed that the 
application process be as minimally burdensome as possible, especially 
for small organizations that have limited capacity to participate in 
large Federal grant programs. This view is shared by many other 
commenters, who urge the Commission to avoid creating a program so 
complex that it discourages applicants. Commenters also advocate for an 
``accessible and non-burdensome application process.'' The Commission 
acknowledges commenters' desire for minimal administrative burden for 
applicants and agree that an overly complex application process could 
deter applicants who could provide meaningful outreach.
    56. The Commission directs CGB to develop an application process, 
which may include relevant application templates and any supplements as 
appropriate, for the Outreach Grant Program in compliance with the 
applicable Federal guidance and regulations and consistent with the 
goal and objectives of the grant program. Among these regulations, 2 
CFR 200.207, as implemented by the Commission, requires use of standard 
OMB-approved grant applications and provides for agency use of any 
supplemental application requirements. CGB may determine the types of 
eligible entities outlined in this final rule that may be eligible for 
a particular funding opportunity for the grant program. To develop such 
an application, the Commission directs CGB to consult with WCB, OMD, 
and OGC as appropriate to ensure compliance with the applicable Federal 
laws and regulations and to also ensure consistency with the program 
goal and objectives. In developing the application process for the 
grant program, the Commission further directs CGB to carefully balance 
minimizing the burden to potential applicants (as discussed in the 
comments) and the need for sufficient information to allow reviewers 
effectively to analyze applications and comply with Federal grant 
regulations, and select applications best positioned to conduct 
effective, meaningful outreach.
    57. Any application for the grant program must collect information 
sufficient for meaningful review. At a minimum, applicants must submit 
the following information as part of an application package: (a) 
project summary; (b) detailed budget; (c) budget narrative supporting 
the budget and demonstrating that it is consistent with the 
requirements in the NOFO; and (d) any mandatory forms for Federal 
grants. As part of the project summary, applicants will provide: a 
description of the geographic areas that will be targeted and served 
through the proposed outreach; constituencies intended to be targeted 
and served, to include members of an unserved or marginalized 
community; an estimated number of households or individuals to be 
targeted; whether the outreach will target communities that have low 
ACP participation rates; description of the applicant's role in the 
community which it is serving; description of the applicant's outreach 
goals and milestones and for their proposed outreach; and a description 
of whether the applicant is proposing a cost-match or cost share for 
their proposed outreach. These and additional project summary 
information requirements will be captured in detail as part of the NOFO 
release. To guard against duplicative funding and ensure that outreach 
grant program funding will be

[[Page 54321]]

awarded for new outreach efforts and not outreach efforts for which an 
applicant already has funding or expects to receive funding, applicants 
will also be required to disclose support or funding for outreach 
received from broadband providers and other sources, or certify that 
they received no such support or funding, and to explain the need for 
additional funding from the Outreach Grant Program if they have already 
received, are receiving, or expect to receive other support or funding 
for ACP outreach. The Commission directs CGB to work with OEA to 
collect information on how grantees will gather data and track metrics 
related to meeting the Outreach Grant Program's goal and objectives. 
CGB may require any additional information necessary to evaluate grant 
applications and ensure compliance with the applicable Federal laws and 
regulations applicable to grants. CGB may also issue more than one 
application process or template to accommodate different types of 
grants, or different grant opportunities under the grant program, as 
necessary.
    58. Red Light Rule. The Outreach Grant Program will be subject to 
the red light rule that the Commission implemented to satisfy the 
requirements of Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996. Under the red 
light rule, the Commission will not take action on applications or 
other requests by an entity that is found to owe debts to the 
Commission until full payment or resolution of that debt. If the 
delinquent debt remains unpaid or other arrangements have not been made 
within 30 days of being notified of the debt, the Commission will 
dismiss any pending applications. Consistent with practices in the 
Lifeline program and other programs such as the Telecommunications 
Relay Service, the red light rule is not waived for the Affordable 
Connectivity Program and its Outreach Grant Program. If a prospective 
grant applicant is on red light, it will need to satisfy or make 
arrangements to satisfy any debts owed to the Commission before its 
application and/or election notice will be processed. The Commission 
directs CGB and OMD to ensure that a process is in place to check an 
entity's red light status prior to processing a grant application, 
disbursement, or other request from the entity consistent with the red 
light rule.
    59. Treasury Offset. Grant outreach grantees will be subject to 
Treasury Offset. The Treasury has several collection tools, including 
its offset program, known as the Treasury Offset Program (TOP), through 
which it collects delinquent debts owed to Federal agencies and states 
by individuals and entities, by offsetting those debts against Federal 
monies owed to the debtors. Grant recipients that owe past-due debt to 
a Federal agency or a state may have all or part of their payments 
offset by Treasury to satisfy such debt. Prior to referral of its debt 
to Treasury, entities are notified of the debt owed, including 
repayment instructions. If the referred debt of a grantee remains 
outstanding at the time of a payment by the U.S. Treasury from the ACP 
Fund to that grantee, the grantee will be notified by Treasury that 
some or all of its payment has been offset to satisfy an outstanding 
Federal or state debt. Potential grant applicants who owe past due 
Federal or state debts are encouraged to resolve such debts and in 
doing so, consult the TOP Frequently Asked Questions for the Public, 
available at https://fiscal.treasury.gov/top/faqs-for-the-public.html, 
for delinquent debt that has been referred to Treasury, and for 
delinquent debt that the Commission has not yet referred to Treasury, 
consult https://www.fcc.gov/general/red-light-frequently-asked-questions.
    60. Additional Requirements. To be eligible to receive 
disbursements from the Affordable Connectivity Fund, grant applicants 
must obtain and report an FRN. Persons or entities doing business with 
the Commission are required to obtain an FRN, a unique identifier that 
is obtained through the Commission Registration System. Participating 
grant applicants must obtain an FRN if they do not already have one and 
report it as directed by the Commission.
    61. SAM Registration. All entities that intend to apply for a grant 
must also register with the SAM. SAM is a web-based, government-wide 
application that collects, validates, stores, and disseminates business 
information about the Federal Government's partners in support of 
Federal awards, grants, and electronic payment processes. With data in 
SAM the Commission has an authoritative source for information 
necessary to provide funding to applicants and to ensure accurate 
reporting pursuant to the Federal Funding Accountability and 
Transparency Act of 2006, as amended by the Digital Accountability and 
Transparency Act of 2014 (collectively the Transparency Act or FFATA/
DATA Act). Only grantees registered in SAM with an active registration 
will be able to receive reimbursement from the Affordable Connectivity 
Fund. Furthermore, participating grantees may be subject to reporting 
requirements. To the extent that participating grantees subaward the 
grant, as defined by FFATA/DATA Act regulations, such grantees may be 
required to submit data on those subawards.
    62. Do Not Pay. Pursuant to the requirements of the Payment 
Integrity Information Act of 2019, the Commission must ensure that a 
thorough review of available databases with relevant information on 
eligibility occurs to determine program or award eligibility and 
prevent improper payments before the release of any Federal funds. To 
meet this requirement, the Commission will make full use of the Do Not 
Pay system administered by the Treasury's Bureau of the Fiscal Service 
as has done for other payments from the Affordable Connectivity Fund. 
If a check of the Do Not Pay system results in a finding that an ACP 
grant recipient should not be paid, the Commission will withhold 
issuing commitments and payments. The Commission may work with the 
grant recipient to give it an opportunity to resolve its listing in the 
Do Not Pay system if the grantee can produce evidence that its listing 
in the Do Not Pay system should be removed. However, the grant 
recipient will be responsible for working with the relevant agency to 
correct its information before payment can be made by the Commission.
    63. The Commission directs CGB, in coordination with WCB, OGC, OEA, 
and OMD, to develop a robust application review process to ensure that 
the grant awards maximize the impact of grant funds on ACP awareness 
and participation among qualifying low-income households and also 
ensure the fiscally responsible use of government funds. To ensure 
compliance with the applicable Federal statutes and regulations, the 
review process must include, at a minimum, compliance, merit, and risk 
assessment components. Compliance review involves assessing whether 
application materials are complete and comply with NOFO requirements. 
Merit review involves objectively evaluating, using review and scoring 
criteria outlined in the NOFO, an applicant's outreach proposal for 
likely efficacy in meeting the Outreach Grant Program's objectives. 
Risk assessment review involves examining an applicant's fiscal 
stability and operational capabilities, including the risk associated 
with allowing the applicant to expend Federal funds. In developing the 
application review process, CGB shall consult with WCB, OMD, OEA, and 
OGC as appropriate to ensure compliance with the applicable Federal 
laws and regulations for grant programs, and to otherwise ensure

[[Page 54322]]

consistency with the goal and objectives of the grant program.
    64. The ACP FNPRM sought comment on whether certain grant 
applications should be prioritized and evaluated. Based on the 
Commission's review of the record and experience administering the 
Affordable Connectivity Program, and its predecessor the EBB Program, 
it concludes that prioritizing certain applications will best promote 
the goal and objectives of the Outreach Grant Program, ensure that 
grant funding is targeted to where it will have the greatest impact on 
addressing the digital divide, and maximize the impact and 
effectiveness of the Outreach Grant Program funding. In evaluating 
applications, the Commission directs CGB, at a minimum, to prioritize 
applications based on the following criteria: (1) the extent to which 
an applicant would target unserved low-income households or individuals 
(i.e., households or individuals that are not currently on a low-income 
broadband plan or that do not have broadband service); (2) the extent 
to which an applicant would target outreach in communities that have 
low ACP participation rates (including people of color, persons with 
disabilities, persons who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who 
are or have been historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely 
affected by persistent poverty or inequality); and (3) whether an 
applicant proposes a cost-share or cost match. In evaluating grant 
applications from state governmental entities or territorial 
governmental entities, CGB may also consider prioritizing grants based 
on whether the state or territory has entered into or has committed to 
enter into a Computer Matching Agreement with USAC for purposes of 
verifying the eligibility of low-income consumers for the Affordable 
Connectivity Program. The prioritization factors outlined in this final 
rule and any other prioritization and evaluation factors shall be 
identified in the NOFO(s).
    65. Commenters suggest additional ways to prioritize or select 
applications to maximize the impact of the grant funds. CGB may decide 
to use additional prioritization factors to promote the goal of the 
Outreach Grant Program and maximize the reach, effectiveness, and 
impact of the grant funds. Consistent with the record, when developing 
prioritization criteria and evaluation criteria, CGB may also consider, 
for instance, an applicant's experience, ties to local communities, 
multilingual capabilities, ACP and digital equity experience, all of 
which may be relevant to the likelihood of success of an applicant's 
outreach plan. The following are examples of prioritization or 
evaluation factors that may be appropriate for CGB to use for purposes 
of maximizing the impact and effectiveness of the outreach grant funds:
     Experience with, and past success in, conducting outreach 
regarding government programs and resources, particularly providing 
resources and directing services (such as ACP application assistance) 
and education to people of color, persons with disabilities, persons 
who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who are or have been 
historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by 
persistent poverty or inequality;
     Existing relationships with the communities grant 
applicants expect to target (e.g., as ``trusted messengers''), or the 
ability to readily establish those relationships, particularly 
relationships with people of color, persons with disabilities, persons 
who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who are or have been 
historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by 
persistent poverty or inequality;
     Participation in the Commission's ACP Navigator or Your 
Home, Your internet Pilot Programs;
     Familiarity with the Affordable Connectivity Program and 
experience with or knowledge of digital equity and connectivity issues;
     Experience with or capability of providing multilingual 
outreach;
     A plan and/or demonstrated capacity to collect data and 
track metrics in order to comply with reporting requirements;
     Ability to provide outreach to multiple categories of 
outreach targets;
     Experience working with subrecipients with relationships 
to targeted communities, if an applicant intends to pass through awards 
to subrecipients.
    66. The ACP FNPRM also sought comment on whether and how grants 
should be distributed to achieve geographic diversity and diversity in 
recipient organization sizes and types. A few commenters advocate 
allocating grants based on geographic diversity. Others recommend 
ensuring funding to entities of various sizes. The Commission agrees 
that a diversity of award recipients and geographic areas would further 
the interest in nationwide ACP enrollment and outreach to target 
populations. Accordingly, in developing and administering the grant 
program, the Commission directs CGB to consider how best to ensure that 
grant awards are made to diverse geographic regions and entity sizes or 
types, whether through the funding announcement or evaluation process, 
and to consult with OEA and WCB to make these determinations.
    67. The Infrastructure Act does not establish a performance period 
for the outreach grants. In the ACP FNPRM, the Commission sought 
comment on an appropriate performance period for the outreach grants. 
The Commission directs CGB to determine the performance period for any 
grant opportunity issued for the grant program. The Commission notes 
that many commenters indicated that a one-year performance period would 
not provide grantees sufficient time to develop and implement their 
proposed ACP outreach, and that a more than one-year performance period 
is more likely to incentivize applications. To determine an appropriate 
performance period for the outreach grants, the Commission directs CGB 
to consider the time frames needed to implement and execute meaningful 
outreach efforts based on its own outreach experience and those of 
existing outreach partners. The Commission further directs CGB to take 
into account the ACP budget projections to ensure that the performance 
period maximizes the impact of grant funds as early as practicable. 
Consistent with Federal regulations, any NOFO issued for the Outreach 
Grant Program will specify the performance period. As such, applicants 
must submit a grant application with a budget spend or draw down plan 
to cover the period of performance, demonstrating a plan to execute 
outreach efforts and support grant award closeout activities within the 
established period of performance.
    68. Federal agencies administering grant programs are required to 
establish performance measures to ``show achievement of program goal 
and objectives, share lessons learned, improve program outcomes, and 
foster adoption of promising practices'' and establish reporting 
requirements. The ACP FNPRM sought comment on the performance measures 
and reporting requirements for the grant program. Given its extensive 
experience conducting outreach, the Commission directs CGB to develop 
performance measures and reporting requirements for the Outreach Grant 
Program in compliance with the applicable Federal regulations. The 
Commission directs CGB to consult with OEA, OMD, and WCB to determine 
the appropriate performance measures as well as data collection and 
reporting requirements and related deadlines for this grant program, 
and to ensure the metrics and reporting requirements comply with the

[[Page 54323]]

applicable Federal regulations, are consistent with the goal and 
objectives for the grant program, are tailored to accommodate a range 
of fundable outreach, and support a fiscally responsible administration 
of the program. The Commission further directs USAC to provide 
Commission staff upon request Affordable Connectivity Program data 
relevant to assessing the performance of the Outreach Grant Program, as 
determined by CGB, WCB, OEA and OMD.
    69. To develop the performance measures and related grantee 
reporting requirements, CGB should strike an appropriate balance 
between the need for robust metrics and reporting requirements to 
assess the performance of the grant program and need for financial 
reporting, and the administrative burden to grantees. The Commission 
notes that many commenters caution against overly burdensome reporting 
requirements, and advocate for reporting on no more than an annual 
basis. In addition, many commenters stress the need for any performance 
measures to take into account the various types of outreach that may be 
funded through the grant program--metrics that may be appropriate for 
one type of outreach (e.g., in-person events) may not be appropriate 
for other types of outreach (e.g., paid media). A few commenters also 
recommend collecting qualitative (such as personal stories) as well as 
quantitative data to measure performance. At a minimum, the Commission 
requires grantees to report on the outreach activities they performed 
with the grant funds, how the grant funds were spent, and the 
effectiveness of those outreach activities. Consistent with the 
applicable Federal regulations, any NOFO that is released for the grant 
program will provide specific detail on the performance measures and 
reporting requirements and any reporting deadlines. Grantees must 
comply with progress and financial reporting requirements for the grant 
program, as outlined in the NOFO.
    70. All awards made through the Outreach Grant Program will be 
subject to the audit and document retention requirements under the 
applicable Federal laws and regulations for grant programs. In addition 
to these requirements, the Commission directs CGB and OMD, to conduct 
compliance audits for grantees that are not subject to the single audit 
act requirements (i.e., non-Federal entities that do not expend Federal 
awards of $750,000 or more in the recipient's fiscal year) to ensure 
compliance with the Federal grant regulations, and any program rules 
and requirements outlined in the NOFO and grant award for individual 
grantees. Grantees must cooperate with any such audits and provide the 
requested documentation pertaining to their participation in the grant 
program. As noted in the following, failure to cooperate to the fullest 
extent required by the Commission or USAC staff may result in the 
termination of the award or disallowance of costs, subsequent recovery 
of funds by the Commission, or other enforcement actions.
    71. The Commission emphasizes that it is committed to program 
integrity, guarding against waste, fraud, and abuse and ensuring that 
funds disbursed through the Outreach Grant Program are used only for 
approved purposes. The Commission makes clear that the enforcement 
authority it has with respect to the Affordable Connectivity Program, 
including the authority to impose forfeiture penalties to enforce 
compliance, also applies to the Outreach Grant Program. The Commission 
also has tools beyond forfeiture to address grantee noncompliance, 
including imposing additional conditions, disallowing costs, and 
suspending or terminating awards. The Commission takes seriously its 
enforcement obligations. Consistent with the Infrastructure Act's 
requirement that the Commission act expeditiously to investigate 
potential violations of program rules and requirements and to enforce 
compliance, the Commission directs the Enforcement Bureau to 
expeditiously investigate potential violations of and enforce the 
Outreach Grant Program rules and grant award terms and conditions. The 
Commission also reserves the right to take appropriate actions, 
including, but not limited to, seeking recovery of funds.
    72. The ACP FNPRM sought comment on the types of technical 
assistance and other support the Commission could provide to 
prospective applicants and grantees in connection with the Outreach 
Grant Program. Specifically, the Commission sought comment on what 
might be valuable technical assistance to grantees and how technical 
assistance might evolve over the duration of the grant program 
implementation. The Commission also sought comment on the types of 
materials that it could provide outreach partners in connection with 
the Outreach Grant Program.
    73. Several commenters support providing technical assistance to 
applicants. NDIA urges the Commission to provide technical assistance 
to prospective applicants by hosting informational webinars, holding 
office hours for real-time applicant assistance, and providing 
applicants with links to grant-writing resources and tools. SANDAG 
requests that the Commission provide optional training sessions for 
grantees to attend that could ``answer questions regarding materials, 
provide step-by-step instructions on how to use tools, and serve as 
another opportunity to share best practices.'' The Hawaii Broadband & 
Digital Equity Office recommends that the Commission provide technical 
assistance online or in-person as needed and specifically ``conduct at 
minimum one annual `face-to-face' technical assistance meeting'' with 
representatives from both grantees and subgrantees.'' The Hawaii 
Broadband & Digital Equity Office also asks that the Commission provide 
technical assistance related to allowable costs associated with 
facilities, refreshments, mileage reimbursement, and incentives for 
enrollment engagements.
    74. The Commission agrees that CGB should provide opportunities to 
walk prospective applicants through the application process and further 
explain the purpose and scope of the grant program. Due to the 
competitive nature of the funding opportunities for this grant program, 
CGB cannot assist prospective applicants in preparing individual 
applications or developing outreach proposals, as this would undermine 
the integrity of the application and evaluation process. However, CGB 
will provide publicly available general information further explaining 
elements of the grant program and NOFO. The Commission also finds that 
it would be helpful to obtain feedback from participants concerning the 
administration and design of the grant program. The Commission 
therefore directs CGB to provide opportunities (e.g., webinars, fact 
sheets, frequently asked questions) to help prospective applicants 
understand the Outreach Grant Program and its requirements and to 
obtain feedback from grantees during their period of performance. The 
Commission directs CGB to determine the mechanisms for and timing of 
requesting any feedback from participants, and to provide information 
sessions tailored to specific funding opportunities, to make 
adjustments to the program administration as appropriate during the 
course of the grant program based on feedback from participants, and to 
provide new information sessions or training to reflect any such 
adjustments. In providing information sessions, the

[[Page 54324]]

Commission directs CGB to encourage applications from entities of all 
types and diverse organizations, including those serving, led, and/or 
owned by persons of color, persons with disabilities, persons who live 
in rural or Tribal areas, and others who are or who have been 
historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely affected by 
persistent poverty or inequality, and entities participating in the ACP 
Navigator Pilot and the Your Home, Your Internet Pilot Program.
    75. Commenters also request that the Commission develop and 
disseminate toolkits, outreach materials, and train-the-trainer guides 
related to conducting outreach to eligible households about and 
encouraging eligible households to enroll in the Affordable 
Connectivity Program. In addition, several commenters emphasize the 
importance of multilingual outreach and outreach resources, and request 
that the Commission provide grantees and subrecipients with 
multilingual outreach materials. While CGB already provides and 
continues to make available extensive outreach toolkits and ACP 
materials in multiple languages, the Commission directs CGB to evaluate 
whether revisions should be made to the existing toolkits, trainer 
guides, and or other outreach materials for use by grant program 
participants and to also evaluate whether new toolkits or materials or 
additional non-English translations would help promote the 
effectiveness and impact of the grant program. To carry out these 
responsibilities, CGB may engage consultants or contractors. Providing 
standardized materials would increase efficiency and expedite grantees 
and subrecipients' outreach, particularly for smaller organizations 
with limited resources, and would promote accurate and consistent ACP 
messaging. However, to maximize the impact of grant-funded outreach, 
the Commission encourages grantees to develop their own outreach 
materials tailored to the areas and communities that are the focus of 
their outreach.
    76. The Commission next addresses commenter requests for other 
types of support and assistance for grantees. For example, 
EducationSuperHighway requests that the Commission provide grantees a 
``sandbox,'' or virtual testing environment that would simulate the 
National Verifier application and enrollment process. Other commenters 
request additional training for individuals providing application 
assistance. The Commission finds that existing resources for partner 
organizations and potential grant resources for future grantees are 
sufficient to train and educate individuals providing consumers with 
application assistance. EducationSuperHighway and NDIA also ask that 
the Commission provide real-time support, either through live chat or a 
call center for grantees that provide application assistance. The 
Commission reminds prospective applicants of the existing ACP call 
center resources to answer questions about the application process. 
While extensive resources are already available to assist outreach 
partners with helping eligible consumers to navigate the ACP 
application process, CGB may, in consultation with WCB and USAC, 
explore the utility and feasibility of providing other avenues for 
providing assistance and technical support to grantees that provide 
application assistance.
    77. The Commission makes robust data available to track enrollments 
in the Affordable Connectivity Program and to allow grantees to 
identify potential areas where targeted outreach could be beneficial, 
including making aggregate enrollment data available by ZIP code, 
county, age, National Verifier selected eligibility criteria, and type 
of service. Additionally, as explained in the ACP Order, separate from 
the grant program, the Commission has directed WCB and OEA, with 
support from USAC, to collect data to develop metrics to determine 
progress towards narrowing the digital divide, and WCB, OEA, and USAC 
are continuing to explore potential metrics to track that goal. Some 
commenters request that the Commission collect and make available plan 
characteristic and pricing information for the Affordable Connectivity 
Program. The Commission is required by the Infrastructure Act to make 
additional information concerning ACP plan pricing and characteristics 
available through the Commission's Broadband Labels or ACP Transparency 
Data Collection proceedings. Once the Commission defines the 
requirements of those initiatives later this year, CGB may consider 
whether these data can be useful for participants engaged in or 
considering a meaningful outreach campaign. The Commission also 
believes the program data already publicly available to grant 
recipients is sufficiently robust that the Outreach Grant Program need 
not be delayed pending the resolution of those proceedings. Indeed, 
today, CGB currently conducts outreach, and coordinates outreach with 
other organizations without this data.
    78. At least one commenter requests that the Commission establish a 
grantee database of organizations engaged in Affordable Connectivity 
Program outreach efforts including organizations' contact information, 
details about service areas, expertise, and available resources. The 
purpose of this database would be to allow for resource sharing and 
coordination among grantees. Federal regulations already require 
Federal awarding agencies to announce all Federal awards publicly and 
to publish the required information about the award on a publicly-
available OMB designated website. To promote transparency, the 
Commission directs CGB also to provide publicly available information 
on the entities that have received awards through the Outreach Grant 
Program on the Commission's website. At a minimum this information 
should include the name of the awardee, the amount of the award, an 
abstract outreach project summary, and a main point of contact for the 
funding recipient. In addition, the Commission recognizes that grantees 
may be interested in additional information concerning other grantees 
and their outreach efforts to facilitate coordination and communication 
amongst grantees. Accordingly, the Commission directs CGB to explore 
the possibility of making available additional information on 
participants in this grant program to facilitate coordination and 
communication amongst grantees, and it expects CGB to determine how 
this information could be made available, and also the types of data 
that could be made available to facilitate coordination and 
communication amongst participants in the grant program. Based on 
grantees' willingness to participate, CGB may also establish and host 
an information sharing forum to exchange lessons learned and best 
practices among grant recipients in executing outreach activities.
    79. Additionally, some commenters request that the Commission issue 
unique grantee ID numbers to allow for tracking enrollments for 
specific outreach efforts, and communication and coordination amongst 
grantees. Although this proposal raises potential technical, 
administrative, and legal issues, the Commission agrees there may be 
utility in tracking enrollments based on grantees' outreach efforts, 
perhaps by requiring the use of an FRN, SAM registration number, or 
other unique identifier a grantee would be required to obtain as part 
of the Outreach Grant Program, to the extent this is technically and 
administratively feasible. The Commission nevertheless directs CGB and 
OEA to explore the feasibility and administrability of

[[Page 54325]]

tracking enrollments by grantee outreach effort and legality of 
disseminating this information.
    80. The Commission acknowledges that many commenters stress the 
importance of and need for data transparency concerning the Outreach 
Grant Program. To promote transparency, the Commission directs CGB, 
with assistance from WCB, OMD, OEA, and USAC as appropriate, to submit 
to them interim updates, and a final report detailing the results of 
the Outreach Grant Program. CGB shall submit the final report after the 
end of the grant program, after all grant awards have been closed out. 
At a minimum, the final report shall provide an assessment of the grant 
program's performance against the goal identified in this final rule 
and shall also summarize any lessons learned concerning the 
development, administration, and management of the Outreach Grant 
Program.
    81. Over 12 million low-income households have already benefited 
from ACP enrollment. Most providers offer plans that are either fully 
or largely covered by the monthly subsidy, allowing households to 
obtain affordable broadband to access job search and work options, 
educational, telehealth, and entertainment resources, and communicate 
with family and friends. However, tens of millions of eligible 
households have yet to enroll in the Affordable Connectivity Program. 
From the Commission's review of comments, it appears that many of these 
households have traditionally been the most underserved and 
underrepresented when it comes to broadband access. By increasing 
program awareness among this diverse and underserved population, the 
Outreach Grant Program will make substantial progress toward narrowing 
the digital divide.
    82. While the potential benefits of the Outreach Grant Program are 
substantial, the Commission seeks to provide funding to support 
outreach in the most cost-effective manner possible, and its discussion 
in this final rule reflects that goal. The Commission recognizes that 
outreach to a diverse and underserved population can be more 
effectively accomplished by providing support to a diverse group of 
qualified grantees that are capable of directly or indirectly (through 
subrecipients) conducting effective outreach activities or working 
directly with low-income populations to raise awareness of the 
Affordable Connectivity Program or provide application assistance. The 
Commission's decision to open eligibility up to a wide range of 
governmental and non-governmental entities should result in a wide 
range and variety of outreach efforts targeted towards different 
segments of the targeted low-income population by grantees and 
subgrantees capable of conducting this outreach. Further, the 
Commission only permits grantees to receive support for allowable costs 
consistent with the goal and objectives of the Outreach Grant Program.
    83. The Commission also extends to CGB the flexibility necessary to 
administer the Grant Program in a cost-effective manner. The Commission 
makes it possible for CGB to structure NOFOs for the grant program so 
as to make use of the performance measures that the Commission requires 
CGB to track, and grantees to provide, in order to make more cost-
effective funding allocation decisions for the duration of the grant 
program. For example, by not prescribing the number of funding 
opportunities or the size of grants at this time, the Commission allows 
CGB to make these determinations taking into account the information 
provided by potential outreach partners in the application process as 
well as enrollment, awareness or other programmatic data from the 
Affordable Connectivity Program to the greatest possible extent. 
Likewise, unless otherwise specified in this final rule, CGB has 
flexibility in how the overall grant program budget shall be 
distributed across one or more NOFOs. This prioritizes cost-effective 
spending by ensuring that funding decisions are driven by outreach 
needs and quality of grantee applications rather than presupposing 
uniformity. In taking these steps to maximize cost-effectiveness, the 
Commission compromises none of the integrity of the Outreach Grant 
Program: it still requires that grantees operate in a broadband service 
provider-neutral manner, prohibit grantee representatives from 
receiving compensation based on the number of ACP applications or 
enrollments attributable to their outreach (including enrollment 
assistance), prohibit grantees from earning or keeping any profit 
resulting from a grant award, and the Commission maintains full 
accordance with all Federal requirements for the administration and 
management of Federal grant programs.

III. Severability

    84. All of the rules that are adopted in this final rule are 
designed to work in unison to develop, administer and manage the 
Outreach Grant Program, provide grant funds to eligible outreach 
partners, and to protect the integrity of the Outreach Grant Program's 
administration. However, each of the separate rules the Commission 
adopts here serves a particular function toward these goals. Therefore, 
it is the Commission's intent that each of the rules adopted herein 
shall be severable. If any of the rules is declared invalid or 
unenforceable for any reason, it is the Commission's intent that the 
remaining rules shall remain in full force and effect.

IV. Procedural Matters

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

    85. Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 1752(h)(2) the collection of information 
sponsored or conducted under the regulations promulgated in this final 
rule is deemed not to constitute a collection of information for the 
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521.

B. Congressional Review Act

    86. The Commission has determined, and the Administrator of the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, concurs, that this 
rule is ``major'' under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 
The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order to Congress and 
the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    87. Regulatory Flexibility Act. Consistent with the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission included an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
by the policies and rules proposed in the ACP Order in WC Docket No. 
21-450. The Commission sought written public comment on the proposals 
in the ACP Order, including comment on the IRFA. No comments were filed 
addressing the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
conforms to the RFA.
    88. In the Infrastructure Act, Congress established the Affordable 
Connectivity Program, which is designed to promote access to broadband 
internet access services by households that meet specified eligibility 
criteria by providing funding for participating providers to offer 
certain services and connected devices to these households at 
discounted prices. The Affordable Connectivity Program funds an 
affordable connectivity benefit consisting of a $30.00 per month 
discount on the price of broadband internet access services that 
participating providers supply to eligible households in most parts of 
the country and a $75.00 per month

[[Page 54326]]

discount on such prices for households residing in qualifying Tribal 
lands.
    89. The Infrastructure Act also requires the Commission to conduct 
outreach efforts to inform potentially eligible households about the 
Affordable Connectivity Program and encourage them to enroll in the 
program, and it authorizes the Commission to provide grants to outreach 
partners in order to carry out this responsibility. With the 
expectation that the Affordable Connectivity Program will extend for 
multiple years, in this final rule the Commission promulgates rules and 
guidelines establishing the Outreach Grant Program. The Commission 
establishes a program goal and objectives, implements applicable 
Federal grant regulations, and provides a framework for the program.
    90. The Commission establishes rules and requirements in this final 
rule necessary to establish the Outreach Grant Program. Additional 
information on the Outreach Grant Program, including, but not limited 
to, the application process and reporting requirements will be provided 
in a subsequent NOFO. Establishing the Outreach Grant Program is 
consistent with our authorization under the Infrastructure Act and our 
ongoing efforts to bridge the digital divide by ensuring that eligible 
low-income households have access to affordable, high-quality, 
broadband internet access service.
    91. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines 
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one that: (1) is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).
    92. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. The Commission's actions, over time, may affect small 
entities that are not easily categorized at present. The Commission 
therefore describes here, at the outset, three broad groups of small 
entities that could be directly affected herein. First, while there are 
industry specific size standards for small businesses that are used in 
the regulatory flexibility analysis, according to data from the SBA's 
Office of Advocacy, in general a small business is an independent 
business having fewer than 500 employees. These types of small 
businesses represent 99.9% of all businesses in the United States, 
which translates to 32.5 million businesses.
    93. Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small 
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000 
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for 
small exempt organizations. Nationwide, for tax year 2020, there were 
approximately 447,689 small exempt organizations in the U.S. reporting 
revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and tax data 
for exempt organizations available from the IRS.
    94. Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census 
Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments indicate that there 
were 90,075 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general 
purpose governments and special purpose governments in the United 
States. Of this number there were 36,931 general purpose governments 
(county, municipal and town or township) with populations of less than 
50,000 and 12,040 special purpose governments--independent school 
districts with enrollment populations of less than 50,000. Accordingly, 
based on the 2017 U.S. Census of Governments data, the Commission 
estimates that at least 48,971 entities fall into the category of 
``small governmental jurisdictions.''
    95. Regional Planning Committees. Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA have developed a small business size standard specifically 
applicable to Regional Planning Committees (RPCs). The closest 
applicable industry with a SBA small business size standard is Business 
Associations, which comprises establishments primarily engaged in 
promoting the business interests of their members. Examples of such 
organizations include: real estate boards, chambers of commerce, trade 
associations and manufacturers' associations. The SBA small business 
size standard for Business Associations classifies firms with annual 
receipts of $8 million or less as small. For this industry, U.S. Census 
Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 14,540 firms that operated 
for the entire year. Of these firms, 11,215 had revenue of less than $5 
million. Based on this data, the majority of firms in this industry can 
be considered small.
    96. The Commission set aside six megahertz of spectrum in the 800 
MHz band for exclusive use by local, regional and state public safety 
agencies under guidelines developed by the National Public Safety 
Planning Advisory Committee (NPSPAC). The 800 MHz NPSPAC spectrum is 
administered on a regional basis by 55 public safety RPCs. RPCs consist 
of public safety volunteer spectrum planners and members that dedicate 
their time, to coordinate spectrum efficiently and effectively to make 
it available to public safety agency applicants in their respective 
regions. In the 700 MHz band the general use channels and some of the 
narrowband low power channels are subject to regional planning. There 
are 55 RPCs for the 700 MHz band whose task is to create a plan for 
General Use in their area and submit it to the Commission. RPCs are 
volunteer committees and the Commission does not have revenue 
information to which the SBA size standard can be applied. However, 
these committees typically have less than 5 members per region, 
therefore the Commission estimates that most RPCs are small.
    97. Grants to Consumer Outreach Partners. The Commission, like all 
other Federal agencies, is required to comply with government-wide 
regulations governing grant awards, codified primarily in title 2 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR), that apply to all Federal 
agencies. Those uniform Federal grant-related requirements, developed 
based on guidance provided over a number of years by OMB, were codified 
in an interim final rule that OMB and over 30 other Federal agencies 
jointly adopted and published in the Federal Register on December 19, 
2014 (Uniform Guidance, 79 FR 75871, December 19, 2014). In adopting 
their own rules to implement these standardized grant-making 
requirements, some agencies that joined in the issuance of the Uniform 
Guidance--including the Department of Commerce, whose rules apply to 
sub-agencies including the National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration, and the SBA--incorporated OMB's guidance without 
change. Other agencies that joined in the issuance of the Uniform 
Guidance, including the Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities 
Service (RUS), adopted additional language in their own regulations to 
provide more detail with respect to how they intended to implement the 
policy and to clarify

[[Page 54327]]

any pertinent exceptions to the general rules.
    98. OMB and the other agencies that joined in issuing the Uniform 
Guidance in 2014 concluded that, under the standards of the RFA, the 
requirements regarding grant awards would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. These 
agencies reached this conclusion based on the fact that largely 
identical generic requirements were already in place, and the Uniform 
Guidance simply codified them without any incremental impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    99. The grant-related rules adopted in this final rule follow the 
Uniform Guidance that applies to all Federal agencies. Like OMB, SBA, 
and other agencies that joined in issuing the Uniform Guidance in 2014, 
the Commission does not anticipate that such rules will have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
A subsequent Notice of Funding Opportunity will be issued with 
additional information on the Outreach Grant Program, including the 
application and reporting requirements. These requirements will be 
necessary to ensure high-quality applications and facilitate the 
evaluation of the applications, and to also ensure compliance with the 
requirements in the Uniform Guidance. In establishing these 
requirements, consideration will be given to the administrative and 
compliance burdens on Outreach Grant Program participants, including 
small entities.
    100. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, 
specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in 
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four 
alternatives (among others): ``(1) the establishment of differing 
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into 
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and 
reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the 
use of performance rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for such small 
entities.''
    101. The Commission concludes that the rules adopted in this final 
rule are not likely to have any significant economic impact on eligible 
small entities that voluntarily opt to apply for outreach grants or 
participate in the Outreach Grant Program as subrecipients. Moreover, 
regardless of size, all entities that apply for an outreach grant will 
need to satisfy the minimum application requirements outlined in the 
applicable Notice of Funding Opportunity and entities participating in 
the Outreach Grant Program will be required to comply with Outreach 
Grant Program requirements, including, but not limited to, progress and 
financial reporting consistent with the government-wide Uniform 
Guidance, which necessarily will be the foundation of our rules and 
requirements for the Outreach Grant Program. This final rule declines 
to adopt a matching requirement for the Outreach Grant Program, because 
it would likely discourage or delay applications from potential 
outreach partners, particularly smaller organizations. In developing 
the rules and requirements, including, but not limited to, the 
application requirements and reporting requirements, consideration will 
be given to the burdens on all participants, including small entities. 
The Outreach Grant Program will permit subrecipients where appropriate 
(e.g., awards to state or local government entities, or national 
entities), which will enable eligible small entities to participate in 
the Outreach Grant Program and benefit from the administrative capacity 
and resources of larger grantees with respect to reporting and other 
Outreach Grant Program requirements, which may minimize the 
administrative and compliance burdens for small entities that 
participate as subrecipients.

V. Ordering Clauses

    1. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
contained in Section 904 of Division N, Title IX of the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-260, 134 Stat. 1182, as 
amended by section 60502 of Division F, Title V of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-58, 135 Stat. 429 (2021), and 
the authority contained in sections 1, 4(i), 5(c), and 303(r), of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155(c), 
303(r), 1752, and the authority contained section 60502 of Division F, 
Title V of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, 47 U.S.C. 
1752(b)(10)(C), the Report and Order is adopted.
    2. It is further ordered, that parts 0 and 54 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 CFR parts 0 and 54, are amended as set forth in the 
following, and such rule amendments shall be effective sixty (60) days 
after publication of the text or summary thereof in the Federal 
Register.
    3. It is further ordered, that subtitle B of title 2 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations are amended as set forth in the following, and such 
rule amendments shall be effective sixty (60) days after publication of 
the text or summary thereof in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects

2 CFR Part 6000

    Accounting, Administrative practice and procedure, Grant programs, 
Grants administration, Loan programs, Nonprofit organizations, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

47 CFR Part 0

    Authority delegations (Government agencies), Communications, 
Communications common carriers, Classified information, Freedom of 
information, Government publications, Infants and children, 
Organization and functions (Government agencies), Postal Service, 
Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sunshine Act, 
Telecommunications.

47 CFR Part 54

    Communications common carriers, Health facilities, Infants and 
children, Internet, Libraries, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Schools, Telecommunications, Telephone, Virgin Islands.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Regulations

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends subtitle B of title 2 and parts 0 and 
54 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

Title 2--Grants and Agreements

Subtitle B--Federal Agency Regulations for Grants and Agreements

0
1. Under the authority of 47 U.S.C. 154(i) and 1752(b)(10)(C) and 2 CFR 
part 200, add chapter LX, consisting of parts 6000 through 6099, in 
subtitle B of title 2 to read as follows:

[[Page 54328]]

CHAPTER LX--FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

PART 6000--UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, COST PRINCIPLES, 
AND AUDIT REQUIREMENTS FOR FEDERAL AWARDS

PARTS 6001-6099 [Reserved]

PART 6000--UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS, COST PRINCIPLES, 
AND AUDIT REQUIREMENTS FOR FEDERAL AWARDS

Sec.
6000.1 Adoption of 2 CFR part 200.
6000.2 [Reserved]

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 154(i), 1752(b)(10)(C); 2 CFR Part 200.


Sec.  6000.1  Adoption of 2 CFR Part 200.

    Except as otherwise may be provided by this part, the Federal 
Communications Commission adopts the Uniform Administrative 
Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal 
Awards set forth at 2 CFR part 200.


Sec.  6000.2  [Reserved]

PARTS 6001-6099 [Reserved]

Title 47--Telecommunication

PART 0--COMMISSION ORGANIZATION

0
2. The authority citation for part 0 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 225, and 409, 
unless otherwise noted.


0
3. Amend Sec.  0.11 by adding paragraph (a)(11) to read as follows:


Sec.  0.11   Functions of the Office.

    (a) * * *
    (11) Advise the Chairman, Commission, and Commission Bureaus and 
Offices on matters concerning the development, administration, and 
management of the Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program.
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Sec.  0.141 by revising the introductory text and adding 
paragraph (l) to read as follows:


Sec.  0.141   Functions of the Bureau.

    The Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau develops and 
administers the Commission's consumer and governmental affairs policies 
and initiatives to enhance the public's understanding of the 
Commission's work and to facilitate the Agency's relationships with 
other governmental agencies and organizations. The Bureau is 
responsible for rulemaking proceedings regarding general consumer 
education policies and procedures and serves as the primary Commission 
entity responsible for communicating with the general public regarding 
Commission policies, programs, and activities in order to facilitate 
public participation in the Commission's decision-making processes. The 
Bureau also serves as the primary Commission entity responsible for 
administering the Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program for 
outreach, in coordination with the Office of the Managing Director, 
Office of the General Counsel, Wireline Competition Bureau, and Office 
of Economics and Analytics. The Bureau also performs the following 
functions:
* * * * *
    (l) Advises and makes recommendations to the Commission, or acts 
for the Commission under delegated authority, to develop, administer, 
and manage the Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program. This 
includes coordinating with the Office of the Managing Director (OMD) on 
interagency agreements with other Federal agencies as may be necessary 
to develop, administer, and manage the Affordable Connectivity Outreach 
Grant Program, including, developing, administering, and issuing 
Notices of Funding Opportunity for and making grant awards or entering 
into cooperative agreements for the Affordable Connectivity Outreach 
Grant Program. This also includes, with the concurrence of the General 
Counsel, interpreting rules and regulations pertaining to the 
Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program.

0
5. Amend Sec.  0.231 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (l); and
0
b. Removing the parenthetical authority citation at the end of the 
section.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  0.231  Authority delegated.

* * * * *
    (l) The Managing Director is delegated authority to issue subpoenas 
for the Office of Managing Director's oversight of audits of the USF 
programs and other financial assistance programs, and the Office of 
Managing Director's review and evaluation of the interstate 
telecommunications relay services fund, the North American numbering 
plan, regulatory fee collection, FCC operating expenses, and debt 
collection. Before issuing a subpoena, the Office of Managing Director 
shall obtain the approval of the Office of General Counsel.
* * * * *

PART 54--UNIVERSAL SERVICE

0
6. The authority for part 54 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, 205, 214, 219, 220, 
229, 254, 303(r), 403, 1004, 1302, 1601-1609, and 1752, unless 
otherwise noted.


0
7. Add subpart S, consisting of Sec. Sec.  54.1900 through 54.1904, to 
read as follows:

Subpart S--Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program

Sec.
54.1900 Applicability of Uniform Administrative Requirements for 
grants and cooperative agreements to non-Federal entities.
54.1901 Neutrality requirement.
54.1902 Prohibited activities and costs.
54.1903 Ineligible entities.
54.1904 Recordkeeping and audits.


Sec.  54.1900  Applicability of Uniform Administrative Requirements for 
grants and cooperative agreements to non-Federal entities.

    Federal awards to non-Federal entities are subject to the Uniform 
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements 
for Federal Awards at 2 CFR part 200, as adopted at 2 CFR 6000.1.


Sec.  54.1901  Neutrality requirement.

    Outreach conducted by Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and 
Subrecipients, as defined in 2 CFR part 200, through the Commission's 
Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program shall be neutral with 
respect to a particular participating provider (as defined in Sec.  
54.1800(r)(1) through (4)) or among a specific group of participating 
providers (including, but not limited to, broadband industry groups, 
such as trade associations).


Sec.  54.1902  Prohibited activities and costs.

    In addition to any prohibited activities or costs, or other 
restrictions on grantee activities and costs under 2 CFR part 200, as 
adopted at 2 CFR 6000.1, or any other Federal statutes and regulations 
governing Federal grants, the following prohibitions apply to Grantees, 
Pass-through Entities, and Subrecipients for the Affordable 
Connectivity Outreach Grant Program.
    (a) Prohibition against steering consumers to particular ACP 
participating providers. Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and 
Subrecipients (as defined in 2 CFR 200.1) shall not direct, steer, 
incentivize, or otherwise

[[Page 54329]]

encourage consumers to enroll with a particular participating provider 
(as defined in Sec.  54.1800(r)(1) through (4)) or among a specific 
group of participating providers (including, but not limited to, 
broadband industry groups, such as trade associations) when conducting 
grant-funded outreach activities. Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and 
Subrecipients shall also make clear that eligible households may enroll 
with the participating provider of their choice.
    (b) Prohibition against use of ACP participating provider-branded 
items. Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and Subrecipients shall not use 
participating-provider (as defined in Sec.  54.1800(r)(1) through (4)) 
branded items such as outreach materials, gifts, or incentives when 
conducting grant-funded outreach activities.
    (c) Prohibition against ACP participating provider gifts, 
incentives, and funding. Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and 
Subrecipients shall not:
    (1) Offer or provide consumers gifts or incentives provided by or 
funded by a participating provider (as defined in Sec.  54.1800(r)(1) 
through (4)) or a specific group of participating providers (including, 
but not limited to, broadband industry groups, such as trade 
associations) to encourage consumers to learn about, apply for, or 
enroll in the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) when conducting 
grant-funded outreach activities; or
    (2) Otherwise accept funding in any form, including in-kind 
contributions, from a participating provider or a specific group of 
participating providers for the purpose of conducting grant-funded 
outreach activities.
    (d) Prohibition against using grant funds for gifts and incentives. 
Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and Subrecipients may not use grant 
funds to obtain or support gifts or incentives to offer or provide to 
consumers to encourage consumers to learn about, apply for, or enroll 
in the Affordable Connectivity Program or otherwise engage with the 
Grantee, Pass-through Entity, or Subrecipient concerning the Affordable 
Connectivity Program when conducting grant-funded outreach activities.
    (e) Prohibition of certain compensation for individuals engaged in 
outreach. Grantees, Pass-through Entities, and Subrecipients shall not 
offer or provide any form of compensation that is based on the number 
of consumers or households that learn about, apply for, or enroll in 
the Affordable Connectivity Program to individuals conducting grant-
funded outreach activities, including but not limited to their 
personnel, their representatives, their contractors, or others acting 
on behalf of the entity to conduct grant-funded outreach.


Sec.  54.1903   Ineligible entities.

    (a) In addition to any participant restrictions in 2 CFR part 200, 
as adopted at 2 CFR 6000.1, the following entities may not receive 
awards, either as Grantees, Pass-through Entities, or Subrecipients 
under the Outreach Grant Program:
    (1) Broadband providers (including municipal broadband providers), 
their affiliates, subsidiaries, contractors, agents, or 
representatives; and
    (2) Broadband industry groups and trade associations that represent 
broadband providers.
    (b) For municipal broadband providers, the exclusion of broadband 
providers and their affiliates, subsidiaries, or representatives from 
eligibility does not extend to separate arms of the municipality that 
do not maintain, manage, or operate the municipal broadband network.


Sec.  54.1904  Recordkeeping and audits.

    Participants in the Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program 
must maintain records to document compliance with the rules and 
requirements for the Outreach Grant Program in accordance with 2 CFR 
200.334, 200.335, 200.336, and 200.338, as adopted at 2 CFR 6000.1, and 
shall provide that documentation to the Office of the Managing Director 
or any other FCC Bureau or Office, or their assigns, upon request in 
accordance with 2 CFR 200.337, as adopted at 2 CFR 6000.1.

[FR Doc. 2022-17927 Filed 9-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P