What is the erate program

We are a full-service E-Rate consulting company, and we have been helping Schools and Libraries with their E-Rate applications for over 15 years. Please reach out to us, and one of our dedicated consultants will return your message within 24 hours. Thank you. What is E-Rate. A special edition issue of the Register Here! E-Rate Ensuring that schools and libraries across the U. See full calendar. Eligible Applicants Public or private schools K , libraries, and groups of schools and libraries e.

Eligible Services Internet access, telecommunications services, and related equipment are eligible for discounts. The Process These steps will help applicants navigate the process to get funding. Calvary Day School Working with the eRate Program group has saved our school a great deal of money on our telecommunication and web hosting cost. Chaffee Public Schools I have been using eRateProgram for our eRate filing for the past 3 years and they have done an excellent job.

Our Services Successful E-Rate filing requires two different kinds of information: The first is applicant specific information supplied by the school. The second is E-Rate specific information coming primarily from the consultant , including: Knowledge of when and how to file required forms.

Proper documentation of information included on required forms. Adherence to best practices of all program rules, regulations, policies, procedures, guidelines and deadlines that impact funding.

Guidance to assure compliance with the competitive bidding process. Respond effectively to all levels of E-Rate reviews. Timely filing of appeals. Click here to view a list of the complete filing cycle Our Guarantee If you are not approved for E-Rate for any reason we will refund any fees paid for that filing year. Discounts Apply for the Whole Year When you are approved for funding we notify your service provider s to begin including your E-Rate as discounts.

Regardless of when you are approved, you will receive funding for the full twelve month funding year from July 1st through June 30th. Prior Years Filings Report We examine your funding history, discuss those findings with you, and take appropriate action to recover any remaining balance funds.

What is eRate? Billions of Dollars Returned E-Rate is a federal program that has distributed billions of dollars to schools to help cover phone services, Internet access, and now includes Wi-Fi equipment and maintenance.

Purchase and installation of Wi-Fi infrastructure and equipment: access points, controllers, switches, cabling and more. Schools have three ways to document their low-income students: Your school participates in the National School Lunch Program. They have much experience with E-Rates. We deny 18 other such requests. It grants seven one in part and denies three. South Bay seeks waiver of section The Bureau finds that Portales violated section The Bureau also finds that Portales did not have a signed contract in place when it filed its FCC Form in violation of section In each case, the schools are located in areas considered to be urban by E-rate program rules.

USAC reduced the discount rate for each applicant because it was not supported by sufficient documentation. We affirm USAC's decisions. We direct USAC to continue recovery actions against Marana and its service provider, Trillion, consistent with the order. We also grant 5 additional appeals concerning the same alleged issue involving WiscNet. Integrity or Petitioner of a Wireline Competition Bureau order. We therefore grant its request for review and direct USAC to apply this ruling to all pending appeals and applications.

To the extent funds have already been disbursed under this funding request to Katy or its service provider, Phonoscope, we direct USAC to institute or continue recovery actions against them. We grant those requests for waiver and remand the underlying applications to USAC.

We deny, however, the remaining eight requests for waiver. According to the FY eligible services list, presubscribed interexchange carrier PIC change charges and change fees were eligible for discounts. As the Bureau found in Barrow County School District Order, minor mistakes such as this do not warrant the complete rejection of this application given that the applicant made a procedural error and did not violate a Commission rule. On our own motion, we reverse our previous decision to deny priority two funding below 80 percent and direct USAC to make available funds for FY priority two requests at all discount levels.

These actions will expand opportunities for education and employment in many communities without increasing the size of the universal service fund.

The new cap represents a 0. Comments are due on July 15, , and reply comments are due on July 25, Upon review of the record, we find that a waiver of section The order finds that seven petitioners did not violate the Commission's competitive bidding rules. Consistent with precedent and based on our review of the record, we find that both petitioners have provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the entities at issue were eligible for support.

USAC denied petitioners funding on the grounds that they sought telecommunications services from providers that were not telecommunications carriers, in violation of E-rate rules.

We grant those requests for waiver and remand the underlying applications to the Universal Service Administrative Company for further action consistent with this order. As WCB found in Glendale Unified School District, minor mistakes such as this do not warrant the complete rejection of these applications given that the applicants made a procedural error and did not violate a Commission rule.

Therefore, we find good cause to grant the appeals and remand the underlying applications to USAC for further action consistent with this order. These projects will support mobile access to the Internet in order to improve educational opportunities for students or to help library patrons find and apply for jobs. The initiatives range from off-campus access to e-textbooks for students; to connectivity for netbooks for students living in remote, isolated areas; to access to flexible, online education programs for home-bound students unable to attend classes because of medical challenges.

We find that USAC correctly applied the rules for the alternative discount mechanisms to determine the applicant's discount level. Benedict, et al: In this order, we grant 45 appeals of decisions by the Universal Service Administrative Company USAC that reduce or deny funding from the schools and libraries universal service support program also known as the E-rate program for various funding years because USAC found that the applicants failed to timely submit FCC Forms To provide further guidance to E-rate program participants, the Bureau provides effective dates for each of the adopted proposals in the Sixth Report and Order and a list of frequently asked questions regarding the rules adopted in the Sixth Report and Order.

Permits 5 petitioners to remove ineligible services from their applications and receive funding for at least their eligible P1 services, and 3 other petitioners to separate priority 1 and 2 services, so that they can receive funding for the P1 services.

Consistent with precedent, this order directs USAC to provide applicants with a limited day opportunity to file additional documentation to support their requested discount levels. Based on precedent in the Albert Lea Order, we find that Somerville did not violate the program's competitive bidding rules by failing to note on the FCC Form that it was seeking a multiyear contract with voluntary contract extensions.

We find that these transfers are permitted under the E-rate program rules. In this order, the Commission upgrades and modernizes the E-rate program to bring fast, affordable Internet access to schools and libraries across the country, and eliminates rules that no longer serve their intended purpose.

These revisions fall into three conceptual categories: 1 enabling schools and libraries to better serve students, teachers, librarians, and their communities by providing more flexibility to select and make available the most cost-effective broadband and other communications services; 2 simplifying and streamlining the E-rate application process; and 3 improving safeguards against waste, fraud, and abuse.

The Commission grants 97 requests and 2 requests in part because the petitioners either timely filed their FCC Forms or the petitioners have demonstrated that special circumstances exist justifying a waiver of the filing deadline. The Commission denies requests and 2 requests in part because the petitioners failed to present special circumstances justifying a waiver of the filing deadline.

WCB finds that the school's assessment was correct and that USAC should have used a different method to calculate the discount level. WCB finds that the Illinois BOE was exercising a voluntary renewal option in its state master contract and, therefore, was operating under a valid contract.

After August 31, , if a recipient of universal service support payments fails to provide the required financial institution information on its FCC Form to enable payment by EFT, USAC will not make universal service support payments to that entity until the entity provides the required information.

Additionally, the petitioners did not show special circumstances necessary for the Commission to waive the day deadline for filing an appeal. Specifically, this NPRM represents the first step toward upgrading the use of broadband by students and our communities through the E-rate program to create more opportunities for educational advances, economic growth, government delivery of services, and civic engagement.

This NPRM seeks comment on a package of potential reforms to the E-rate program that could be implemented in funding year July 1, — June 30, The reforms proposed in this NPRM fall into three conceptual categories: streamlining the E-rate application process, providing greater flexibility to choose the most cost-effective and educationally useful broadband services, and expanding the reach of broadband to the classroom.

As the Bureau found in Alaska Gateway School District and Alcona County Library, we find that complete rejection of these applications is not warranted, given that the applicants missed a USAC procedural deadline and did not violate a Commission rule.

Therefore, we remand the underlying applications to USAC for further action consistent with this order. The rule mandates that service providers cannot charge schools, school districts, libraries, library consortia, or consortia including any of these entities a price above the lowest corresponding price for supported services, unless the Commission, with respect to interstate services or the state commission with respect to intrastate services, finds that the lowest corresponding price is not compensatory.

Accordingly, comments will be due on April 5, , and reply comments will be due on April 19, In the notice of proposed rulemaking, the Commission seeks comment on revising its rules to make the change permanent. This change will leverage universal service funding to serve a larger population at no increased cost to the E-rate program. Among other things, section of the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, titled Promoting Online Safety in Schools, revised section h 5 B of the Communications Act of , as amended, by adding a new certification requirement for elementary and secondary schools that have computers with Internet access and receive discounts under the E-rate program.

The Commission also proposed to revise related Commission rules to reflect existing statutory language more accurately. Interested parties may file comments on or before February 18, , and reply comments on or before March 5, The comment cycle will not be set until after the Federal Register publication, which has not yet happened.

As soon as a summary of the further notice is published in the Federal Register, WCB will release a public notice with the correct comment deadlines.

We will consider all comments that already have been filed in response to the FNPRM and note that commenters may refile or supplement comments already filed. Additionally, the report and order clarifies the E-rate program eligibility of text messaging, video on-demand servers, ethernet, web hosting, wireless LAN controllers, VoIP-related services and requirements, and virtualization software.

The report and order also clarifies that telephone broadcast messaging, unbundled warranties, power distribution units, softphones, interactive white boards and e-mail archiving are ineligible for universal service funding.

It also seeks comment on the tentative conclusion that eligible products and services should be listed in the ESL as opposed to being individually listed in the rules, and that USAC should be required to submit any proposed changes to the ESL to the Commission by March 30 of each year, instead of June 30, as currently required.

Comments are due 30 days after publication in the Federal Register and reply comments are due 45 days after publication in the Federal Register. The Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act added a new certification requirement for elementary and secondary schools that have computers with Internet access and receive discounts under the E-rate program.

The notice of proposed rulemaking also proposes to revise related Commission rules to reflect existing statutory language more accurately. Comments are due November 20, and reply comments are due December 11, Exigent admitted to multiple violations of the rules, including improper service provider involvement in the competitive bidding process and failure to require applicants to pay the non-discounted portion of the price of services and equipment.

Specifically, the applicants sought funding for dark fiber service after funding year , when dark fiber was no longer eligible for support. The Division denies one request for waiver of the rule requiring the filing of an FCC Form prior to entering into an agreement for services and another request for waiver of all E-rate filing deadlines. Integrity , finding that USAC acted consistent with its policies in requiring Integrity to file a compliance plan and suspending funding.

The order finds that Howe ISD requested ineligible services and directs USAC to continue its commitment adjustment recovery actions regarding this matter. DA Letter: Word Acrobat. The Division finds that the petitioners correctly classified their requested services as Priority One services and remands the underlying applications to USAC for further action consistent with this order.

The Division finds that the issue raised here was recently addressed by the Bureau in the Brewster Academy Order and remands the underlying applications to USAC for further action consistent with the Brewster Academy Order. The Division finds that the issues raised here are similar to those addressed by the Commission in the Bishop Perry Order. To the extent necessary, the Division waives section The Division finds that the issues raised in 3 appeals were recently addressed by the Commission in the Adams County Order.

The Division further finds that the appeals of 11 petitioners should be granted on the merits and remands the underlying applications to USAC for further action consistent with this order.

The Division finds that if the petitioners had been given the opportunity to explain the reason for their service category selection, USAC may not have reclassified their funding requests and their requests for discounts may have been funded. USAC found that the petitioners failed to use price as the primary factor in their vendor selection processes or that the selected service providers improperly participated in the competitive bidding processes. The Division remands this appeal to USAC to give Aguadilla an additional opportunity to provide evidence that it did not violate the E-rate program rules in any of the three ways identified in the audit report relied upon by USAC.

The Division grants the appeal, finding that, based on the record, no competitive bidding violation occurred, and remands the matter to USAC for appropriate action. The Division finds good cause exists to grant and remand the appeal to USAC and directs USAC to suspend its recovery of the disbursed E-rate funding in accordance with the terms expressed herein and review its audit findings in light of the invoices presented.

Consistent with precedent, the Division waives the requirement that the FCC Form be certified prior to the filing of FCC Form , finding that Radford made a procedural error in not submitting the certification. The Division also notes that the funding requests that were denied were part of a Virginia statewide master contract for which Virginia filed certified FCC Forms , either as existing contracts or when issuing requests for proposals for new services.

Based on the record, it appears that this matter can be resolved through further discussions between USAC staff and Trenton. The Division therefore directs USAC to contact Trenton to resolve the inconsistencies in the submitted information and review this matter in light of any additional information provided by Trenton. Iowa seeks a waiver of the E-rate rules similar to the relief that was granted for Hurricane Katrina victims on behalf of victims of storms and floods in Iowa this past spring and early summer.

Comments are due October 1, , and reply comments are due October 8, Comments are due November 13, , and reply comments are due December 15, Comments are due September 18, , and reply comments are due October 3, Inter-Tel , seeking partial reconsideration of the Approach Learning Order. In that order, the Bureau addressed several appeals of USAC decisions relating to alleged violations of the Commission's competitive bidding requirements under the E-rate program.

On reconsideration, the Bureau finds that the relief extended in the Approach Learning Order applies to any work that Inter-Tel had not yet performed for funding request numbers , , , Comments are due August 14, , and reply comments are due August 21, Comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking will be due 30 days after its publication in the Federal Register, and reply comments will be due 45 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Upon realizing that it had inadvertently failed to include two of its three funding requests as part of its FY application, Mineola asked USAC if it could submit the missing two pages, including the two funding requests, to be included with its application as submitted to USAC.

Based on the information provided to us by USAC staff, we find that this was a clerical error that can be corrected, pursuant to Commission precedent. DA Word Acrobat.