The federal government is pouring billions of dollars into expanding broadband internet access. But it’s at the state level where the financial rubber meets the fiber-optic road. History suggests some states are ahead of the game while others will have to play catch-up.

The recently signed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act includes significant funding to expand broadband access, to help households pay for their monthly broadband connections and to help people learn how to productively use those connections. This legislation represents Congress’ first formal recognition of the essential nature of high-speed internet.

Historically, broadband funding has been distributed from federal entities like the Federal Communications Commission or U.S. Department of Agriculture directly to internet providers. The Government Accountability Office, which monitors and audits government operations, has been critical of these efforts.

This time, however, states are at the center of the funding that is coming down the pipeline. The US$42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program, known as BEAD, requires each state to generate a five-year action plan laying out how it will use the funds, including a process for prioritizing locations that are classified as “unserved” or “underserved.”

Similarly, the $2.7 billion Digital Equity Act requires each state to establish an organization responsible for developing a digital equity plan, which will help to disburse subgrants. Digital equity means ensuring that every community has adequate access to the technologies and skills needed to fully participate in society.

From newbies to wily veterans

Not all states are equally positioned to handle the funds that will flow down from the federal government. Some states have operated formal broadband offices for years, and many have extensive experience running their own broadband grant programs. In others there are multiple agencies with jurisdiction over broadband, so even deciding who will develop the action plan may be challenging.

Some states have built detailed broadband maps that move beyond the highly criticized FCC versions, and clearly depict areas without access. Others were early adopters of “digital inclusion” efforts and have an established base of nonprofits and public entities that have already been successful at this type of work.

In short, states have varying track records when it comes to broadband projects. Rolling out billions of dollars of funding will be a challenge for states without a history of evaluating applications – or those that are brand-new to the quickly growing field of digital equity.

Why each state gets $100 million

The largest portion of the forthcoming broadband funding is the BEAD program focused on the provision of new broadband infrastructure. Each state will be awarded an initial amount of $100 million, with the remainder of the $42.5 billion allocated based on the percentage of unserved locations across states. The states are then responsible for disbursing these funds as subgrants. Unserved locations can include agricultural and business sites, not just households.

So, while it might seem unfair that Vermont, with fewer than 50,000 people classified as unserved, receives the same initial allocation as Texas, with over 1.2 million people unserved, this investment is less than 15% of the total BEAD funding. The $100 million should also provide an incentive for states to establish their five-year action plans and to set up offices capable of awarding grants within their borders.

The task of setting up a process to handle grant applications and assess which ones should be funded is not trivial. Recent research has defined a competitive grant program as a key component of state broadband policy, including the establishment of evaluation criteria.

States with existing broadband offices and grant programs will be well positioned to hit the ground running. States that to date don’t have broadband offices are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont and Wyoming. The District of Columbia also does not have a broadband office. These governments will need to put considerable time and effort into establishing ground rules and recruiting and educating employees to handle the grant evaluation process.

The law also adds several points related to grant awards that will be new for most states, regardless of how long their broadband office has been in place. One prevents states from excluding cooperatives, local governments, nonprofits and public utilities when considering who is eligible for the broadband funds.

The second requires grant awardees to establish a low-cost service option, leaving the definition of “low-cost” up to the state. Similar state-level efforts have not fared well in the past, and there is likely to be opposition from awardees about price and eligibility.

Digital equity

While federal programs to address broadband infrastructure have been around for a while, the focus on digital equity is new. Here, again, some states are at an advantage.

California has had a program emphasizing digital literacy, accessibility and broadband adoption, with grant programs in each, for over 10 years. Maine and North Carolina were also early to set up digital inclusion efforts, and Washington dedicated $7.5 million in state funding before the passage of the infrastructure act.

Most other states are newcomers to the topic, although there are resources to help them get started.

State policies – and experience – matter

A growing body of evidence suggests that state-level broadband policies matter. Case studies of successful state programs show a range of promising practices, including stakeholder engagement and program evaluation.

[Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend. Sign up for our weekly newsletter.]

The pending broadband funds will build on many of these practices – for states that had the foresight to have them up and running. Other states will be at a disadvantage from the outset. We believe that these differences are likely to play an important role in the success of the overall program.

Brian Whitacre, Professor and Neustadt Chair, Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University and Christina Biedny, Ph.D. student in Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Modern society benefits when people understand science concepts. This knowledge helps explain how cryptocurrency works, why climate change is happening or how the coronavirus is transmitted from person to person.

Yet the average American spends less than 5% of their lifetime in classrooms learning about such topics. So, besides school, where else can people go to study and explore science?

Museums, zoos and libraries are certainly a great start. As a researcher of adult STEM education, I study less conventional ways for people of all ages to learn and participate in science.

Here are four alternative venues where the general public can enjoy nature, engage in hands-on science learning and get a behind-the-scenes look at scientific research in action.

1. National parks

Visitors to national parks dramatically increased over the past two years as the pandemic inspired people to go outside and enjoy nature more regularly. However, people often don’t realize that many parks offer lecture series, nature walks and interactive science learning opportunities for those interested in adding an extra layer of scientific and environmental knowledge to their outdoor experience.

For example, Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona offers Ranger Programs that teach the public about ongoing changes to the canyon from weathering and erosion. Great Smoky Mountains National Park, which spans Tennessee and North Carolina, offers its own education programming but also partners with local groups to offer guided nature hikes or trail-building volunteer opportunities.

For those who don’t wish to venture into the great outdoors, the National Parks Service has a variety of online resources, such as virtual park visits and webcams that present real-time views of weather, dramatic scenery, wildlife and more.

Find your nearest national park here.

2. University extension programs

Land-grant universities are charged with translating and delivering scientific research to the public and exist in every U.S. state and territory.

They often do this through what’s called “extension” programs. Master Gardener is a popular one, but there are many unique local options, too. For example, Colorado State University offers a Native Bee Watch program that trains volunteers to identify and monitor bees in their backyards or local natural areas. An extension program at University of Minnesota teaches volunteers how to detect aquatic invasive species in local rivers and lakes.

3. Biological field stations

Biological field stations are usually associated with universities or other research institutions. While scientific and environmental research is the primary focus, many field stations provide programs for adult learners, as well as opportunities to interact directly with scientists.

Field stations tend to be in more rural areas, where there are fewer zoos, museums, aquariums and other science-learning venues. Yet nearly 80% of the U.S. population lives within an hour’s drive of a biological field station. This map can help you identify one near you.

The W.K. Kellogg Biological Station in Michigan has a bird sanctuary that offers adult courses on botany, ornithology and nature drawing, as well as volunteer opportunities. There’s also a dairy center that hosts open-house events where visitors can learn about cutting-edge dairy management and research.

For learners who want to get involved in the scientific process, engage in a longer-term experience or participate as a family, Mohonk Preserve in upstate New York enlists volunteers to monitor bird activity and habitats, record the seasonal changes in plants and engage in other activities.

4. Marine labs

Marine laboratories are similar to biological field stations but are typically located on coasts or other water bodies.

Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute in Florida allows visitors to tour its research facilities and equipment, including an up-close view of its underwater vehicle. It also offers citizen science programs and a weekly lecture series on all things related to ocean science.

In Alaska, the Behind the Scenes program provides adults a look at the skills and science of running the Sitka Sound Science Center, like monitoring the genetic interaction of wild and hatchery salmon. Its feature event, the Sitka WhaleFest, includes wildlife cruises guided by scientists, science lectures and storytelling. For learners worldwide, the center hosts a podcast and offers recorded lessons on how to say the names of local animals in Tlingit, the language of the Sitka tribe.

As people continue to reap the mental and physical benefits of spending more time outdoors, I believe it’s important to mitigate any harm this extra activity may have on the environment. These four venues can help anyone learn more about the science behind natural spaces and also how to help preserve them.

[Get our best science, health and technology stories. Sign up for The Conversation’s science newsletter.]

Jill Zarestky, Assistant Professor of Education, Colorado State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.