As BEAD funding continues to shift, with changes on the federal level, there is a clear directive toward tech-neutral solutions, with non-fiber broadband options gaining momentum. These changing rulings demand a multi-faceted approach to fielding strategy, as the need to support the most cost-effective technology for each situation grows.
Beyond fiber, new BEAD guidelines are inclusive of a wider variety of connectivity options, including satellite and fixed wireless. Project priorities are now focused on providing consistent speeds (at least 100 Mbps download / 20 Mbps upload, with latencies at or below 100ms) that can scale to meet future needs and support post-5G technologies.
While non-fiber options are still plagued by questions of speed, stability, and latency, if and when they win funding bids, it is absolutely vital to build them on accurate, robust data.
With all ISPs now able to apply for BEAD funding, what parts of the fielding process must adapt?
Previously, BEAD funding focused almost exclusively on fiber broadband deployments, where fielding concerns mainly exist in the underground (2D) design space. Working along, under, or even through static planes like roads and buildings makes for a relatively straightforward design process. This primarily required BEAD funding to focus on underground-specific capture and planning methods, leaving a clear path forward for each application:
- conduct a feasibility study
- send out drones and/or ground crews to survey the area
- create prospective installation maps to distribute to engineering and field crews
The recent expansion of BEAD project options, such as fixed wireless and satellite, adds a complication to the original, basic fielding process: the third dimension. While 2D planning and feasibility considerations remain relevant between all technologies, potentially deploying these new options requires considerations for aerial (3D) data points. These expanded considerations now include:
- Line-of-sight
- Topography
- Vegetation analysis
Data Capture in the Third Dimension
Capturing this data in a reliable fashion mandates additional or expanded fielding technologies, with LiDAR and photogrammetry (often achieved via drones) being among the most popular options.
LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) utilizes highly precise light reflection times to build 3D data sets of a space, much like how radar uses radio waves. Projected either in a single specific direction or in multiple simultaneous directions (up to 360 degrees), LiDAR can be used to build extremely detailed point cloud data sets. However, the detail of these 3D maps can often come at the cost of inflated file sizes.
Photogrammetry, on the other hand, relies on continuous, overlapping photographs taken in a space, which are then used to determine distance using scale and established 2D measurements. These details can be expanded to create a 3D data set of a given area with additional details that LiDAR can't capture, including albedo, metallicity, and occlusion. Drones are the most common capture method for up-to-date photogrammetric baseline data, and offer a more data- and cost-conscious option.
New ISP Options Under Updated BEAD Guidelines
While previous BEAD guidelines focused almost entirely on fiber broadband expansion, the new June 2025 guidelines opened up applications to all ISPs, if they could provide the most cost-effective, reliable contract in a given area. This opens up a whole new world of potential services, but alongside fiber broadband, two options remain the most popular: fixed wireless and satellite.
By relying on centralized transmitters, fixed wireless can send wireless signals to any receiver within sight. This option is increasingly tantalizing for regions were laying cable underground is difficult or nigh-impossible; no wires are necessary to individual buildings, as long as they have line of sight between the transmitter and receiver. This does raise issues of erecting transmission towers tall enough to reach potential receivers in a reasonable area. Like fiber broadband, topography remains a concern, from the top-down as well as underground, and with that, vegetation management becomes increasingly key.
Satellite, on the other hand, relies very little on local geography. As long as a personal satellite can accurately receive signals from the transmitter satellite(s), the signal remains uninfluenced by topography or vegetation. Unlike fiber broadband, satellite methods suffer from much longer latencies and slower speeds, due in large part to the longer signal paths and limited available bandwidth.
Both fixed wireless and satellite options are susceptible to severe weather conditions interrupting service, through disrupted signal relays, damaged receivers, and changes to local vegetation/line-of-sight. This makes their services increasingly reliant on disaster management systems and relief efforts, in the case of extreme weather.
Both 2D and 3D applications open a wide range of questions with regards to data processing; large-scale projects can takes weeks, or even months, to properly evaluate, With potential BEAD funding on the line for all ISPs, speedy data processing is more important than ever, and so no matter what angle you’re tackling these changes from, finding the right methods and partners can be key to saving time and securing accurate outputs.