Broadband Policy Cornerstones: Speed and Scalability
States can protect broadband investments with speed standards and scalable network requirements
This analysis is part of a series exploring policy cornerstones that states can adopt to pursue universal broadband connectivity.
To help states ensure that all communities have high-speed internet access, The Pew Charitable Trusts has identified four cornerstones of a durable, comprehensive policy framework for universal broadband connectivity. Speed and scalability—along with dedicated deployment funding and affordability requirements—are crucial elements that states must address as they work to expand and sustain broadband service.
Speed defines whether a network can meet the current needs of households and businesses. Scalability determines whether those networks can continue to deliver that level of service over time. Neither component is sufficient on its own: Speed standards without complementary scalability requirements could result in networks that meet today’s needs but cannot keep pace with future demand; conversely, scalability requirements without speed floors fail to establish a baseline that networks must meet when they are built.
Historically, federal broadband funding programs have been built around speed benchmarks without accompanying scalability requirements, even though consumer demand and broadband applications evolve quickly. Internet service providers (ISPs), the recipients of this funding, have at times fallen short of even these fixed benchmarks. For example, both the Connect America Fund Phase II Model (CAF II) in 2015 and the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) in 2020 invested billions of dollars in broadband networks that quickly became outdated—and left communities with inadequate service—as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) updated its speed threshold in 2015 and 2024. Independent analysis of CAF II results found that hundreds of thousands of locations lacked service that met the model’s speed requirements—or had no service at all. According to a separate analysis, ISPs that won RDOF awards later defaulted on commitments to serve 1.9 million of the 5.2 million locations included in the program. These experiences demonstrate the limitations of relying solely on fixed speed targets, as well as the difficulty of translating funding commitments to functioning, durable networks.
Federal policy has gradually adapted to address these challenges. With the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, a $42.45 billion initiative enacted as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, Congress required that priority broadband projects “easily scale speeds over time” to “meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses,” effectively embedding scalability directly in statute. Other programs, including the Treasury Department’s Capital Projects Fund and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s ReConnect program, address scalability through administrative rulemaking outside of statute.
These developments at the federal level reflect growing recognition that broadband policy must account not only for current performance but also for future demand. But the evolution of BEAD demonstrates another challenge: Although Congress established scalability in statute as a program objective, administrative changes later altered the weighting of that objective during grant selection. Further, federal scalability requirements remain tied to individual funding programs and can change as those programs expire or as priorities shift.
BEAD represents a one-time investment rather than a permanent policy framework, and as states assume an even larger role in broadband planning and investment, they will need to determine how to preserve speed and scalability standards over time. State standards can provide greater continuity than federal ones because, unlike federal requirements tied to time-limited programs, they can persist across funding cycles, helping public investments retain their value.
For that reason, Pew recommends that states incorporate both speed and scalability requirements into statute. This analysis will examine how states have set performance standards and why both speed and scalability are essential cornerstones of any state broadband policy to ensure universal access.
How speed and scalability fit within the broadband policy cornerstones
In the policy framework recommended by Pew, speed and scalability work in tandem with the other cornerstones, which are dedicated deployment funding and affordability requirements. As performance standards, speed and scalability set expectations for the quality and durability of publicly funded networks, and they help ensure that any affordable service offered to consumers is worth the cost of subscription.
Funding provides the resources to build and upgrade networks; speed and scalability standards determine whether those investments continue to deliver value over time. Together, they help states maximize the long-term return on public dollars.
Speed and scalability also reinforce affordability goals. Networks that cannot support modern applications or maintain adequate performance are less likely to attract and retain subscribers, as research shows that households place significant value on speed and reliability when deciding whether to subscribe. Affordability policies help ensure that consumers can pay for service, but that investment pays off only if the underlying network is one they find to be worth keeping.
Why speed and scalability matter
In broadband policy, speed refers to the rate at which a device receives or sends data and is measured through download and upload speeds, typically expressed in megabits per second (Mbps). These thresholds establish a baseline, identifying whether locations have adequate service and ensuring that networks built with public dollars can support modern uses. The FCC currently uses a benchmark of 100/20 Mbps, and the BEAD program relies on this threshold as its minimum service standard.
Scalability ensures that networks can increase speed, accommodate additional users, and support evolving applications without requiring complete reconstruction. Because consumer demand and network requirements continually evolve, speed standards alone cannot guarantee that investments remain effective over time. And because networks can take years to build, scalability is essential to ensure that they meet future needs rather than becoming outdated soon after completion. Network quality—including reliability, latency, and capacity as well as speed—also affects consumer satisfaction and subscription rates, making scalability important for network sustainability. A study of rural households found significant differences in broadband satisfaction by connection type, with fiber—a technology capable of scaling to higher speeds—receiving the highest ratings.
Network demands will continue to evolve, often faster than broadband infrastructure can be replaced. Applications in remote work, video conferencing, telehealth, and artificial intelligence-enabled services increasingly rely not only on download speeds but also on upload capacity, low latency, and reliability. Analysis of consumer and business use consistently shows increased demands on network performance. Because public investments made today fund networks that may remain in service for decades, scalability requirements can help ensure that funded networks are capable of supporting future uses before those applications are widely adopted, preserving the long-term value of broadband investments.
In addition to establishing performance requirements in statute, states can use reporting requirements, speed testing, construction milestones, and grant-enforcement provisions to confirm that publicly funded networks deliver the service levels promised. These accountability mechanisms help protect public investments and ensure that statutory standards translate into real-world network performance.
State approaches to broadband speed and scalability
State approaches to speed standards generally fall into three categories. Nine states defer to the FCC’s broadband definition, allowing their standards to adjust when federal benchmarks change. Nineteen states currently maintain their own speed standard of 100/20 Mbps, and three have adopted standards exceeding 100/20 Mbps. Nineteen other states do not define broadband speed in statute at all.
Most states that define broadband speed in statute updated their standards between 2021 and 2023 to meet the increased speed thresholds tied to COVID-era federal broadband programs, including BEAD. States that defer to the FCC effectively adopted the commission’s 100/20 Mbps benchmark when the agency revised its broadband standard in 2024. Iowa, Kentucky, and Maine have adopted standards exceeding 100/20 Mbps, reflecting a greater emphasis on future network performance and capacity.
States similarly take varied approaches to scalability. In California, new broadband investments must be “robust” and “scalable” infrastructure that can support “realtime interactive applications.” Hawaii prioritizes scalability in statute by weighting the state’s grant scoring in favor of networks capable of “high scalability.” In Tennessee, state funding is directed toward “broadband services scalable to download and upload speeds higher than the minimum speeds required” by the state at the time of the investment. Minnesota’s Border-to-Border grant program requires investments in networks capable of scaling to symmetrical download and upload speeds of at least 100 Mbps.
A few states have also begun linking speed requirements directly to scalability goals. Texas, for example, defines broadband as networks capable of delivering speeds of 100/20 Mbps and, in the same statute, establishes a preference for funding networks that are capable of meeting scalability criteria established by the state broadband development office. Maryland similarly requires broadband investments to support speeds that meet or exceed FCC standards while ensuring that networks “address current and future requirements and uses by communities, businesses, schools, health care providers, and other stakeholders.”
Speed, scalability, and technology choices
Speed and scalability requirements affect the technology choices that states face when funding broadband projects. Although most federal programs and states maintain a technology-neutral approach, broadband technologies have trade-offs in cost, performance, and long-term viability.
Fiber offers speed, reliability, and scalability advantages. However, states must weigh those benefits against higher up-front construction costs, longer deployment timelines, and permitting challenges. Alternatives such as fixed wireless and low-earth-orbit (LEO) satellites can be deployed more quickly and at a lower initial cost but face challenges related to spectrum availability, topography, weather disruptions, and frequent equipment upgrades.
These trade-offs have generated debate among policymakers and researchers. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation has argued that overreliance on fiber can increase deployment costs and delay service in high-cost locations, while other analyses have emphasized fiber’s long-term performance and lower life-cycle costs. Long-term comparisons have shown that fiber’s higher initial construction costs can be offset by lower ongoing costs and equipment replacement, whereas fixed wireless and LEOs, while less expensive to deploy, can generate greater upkeep expenses. When policymakers factor long-term speed and scalability into their decisions, these trade-offs become even more critical.
While fixed wireless and LEO technologies continue to improve, questions remain regarding their ability to meet future capacity and performance demands. Scalability requirements do not demand that states select a particular technology, but they do call upon policymakers to consider whether publicly funded networks can continue meeting network performance expectations long after deployment funds are spent.
Prioritizing speed and scalability typically means higher up-front deployment costs but lower long-term costs. This is why these standards are so important: Speed and scalability can shape the long-term value of networks built with public funds.
Conclusion
States pursuing speed and scalability requirements in statute can help ensure that publicly funded networks meet current needs and remain capable of supporting future demands. By establishing both short- and long-term requirements, states can also reduce the likelihood that additional public investment cycles will be needed to address lagging networks.
Federal broadband programs can establish important requirements and incentives, but those policies are tied to individual programs and may change as administrative priorities shift. State statutory standards, by contrast, remain in effect until state policymakers revise them, providing a more durable framework for protecting public investments. Without such requirements, states risk funding networks that meet minimum standards at the time of construction but struggle to support future economic, educational, healthcare, and civic needs.
Speed and scalability requirements are not simply technical specifications; they are policy tools that can help states define what quality broadband service looks like. Together, they help establish a foundation for broadband infrastructure that can continue delivering value long after network construction is complete.
Colby Humphrey leads research for The Pew Charitable Trusts’ broadband access initiative.
People
