Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
WIRELINE COMPETITION BUREAU
LOW-INCOME BROADBAND PILOT PROGRAM
STAFF REPORT
WC DOCKET NO. 11-42
MAY 22, 2015
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Commission launched the Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program to study the key broadband 
adoption barriers – identified by the Commission in the 2010 National Broadband Plan as cost, digital 
literacy, and relevance – and how the Lifeline program, which has traditionally been focused on bridging 
the affordability gap for wireline and mobile wireless voice services, could best be structured to serve its 
statutory mission in the 21
st
century.  On the one hand, the 14 pilot projects shared a set of common 
elements that reflect the current model of the Lifeline program — e.g., all relied on existing ETCs to 
provide service, and the ETCs had to confirm that individuals participating in the pilot were eligible and 
qualified to receive Lifeline benefits — but on the other hand, each project tested different subsidy 
amounts, conditions to receiving service, and different outreach and marketing strategies.  The result was 
a highly diverse set of projects that employed different methods, implemented different strategies, and 
provided different services across different geographies. 
Participating providers were required to collect and submit a large amount of anonymized data so that 
the Commission and others could use such information for their own studies and observations.  The data 
collected during each project is being released with this Report to further enrich the public’s 
understanding of low-income broadband use.  This information is also available at 
https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/low-income-broadband-pilot-program.  The data provides an important 
perspective on how various policy tools can impact broadband adoption by low-income consumers.
This Report highlights several important patterns in the data relevant to any consideration of Lifeline 
support for broadband:
? First, many of the pilot projects provide information about Lifeline-eligible consumers’ 
preferences for service and their willingness to pay for services or hardware.  Within the 
fixed service projects, in particular, patterns suggest consumers were willing to pay for 
speeds within the mid-range of options, though there was little interest in the highest 
speed tiers.  For mobile service projects, when consumers were given the option between 
hotspot plans versus smartphone plans, the majority selected smartphone service plans.  
? Second, several of the pilot projects tested varying subsidy amounts or discounts offered 
to consumers for both the service and a device.  Patterns within the data indicate that cost 
to consumers does have an effect on adoption and which plans they choose.  In several of 
the projects, when given the choice among service plans, new adopters were willing to 
pay for broadband service, but tended to choose more modest and affordable speeds and 
data allowances.
? Third, requiring ETCs to offer or provide digital literacy training does not appear to be an 
efficient or effective model for converting non-adopters to adopters.  Participating 
consumers generally had little interest in training provided by the ETCs.  This raises the 
question of whether other organizations specializing in digital literacy training may be 
more successful at such training.
Additionally, it is important to note that, by design, the pilot projects only studied broadband adoption
among the subset of low-income consumers who were not current subscribers to any broadband service.
The Bureau encourages outside parties to use this Report, which summarizes each project, and the 
related data, to evaluate this important issue.  
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Heading Paragraph #
I. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 1
II. BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 3
III. SELECTION OF 14 PILOT PROJECTS............................................................................................... 7
IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED PILOT PROGRAM PROJECTS ........................................... 14
A. Mobile - Randomized Controlled Experiments ............................................................................. 14
B. Fixed – Randomized Controlled Experiments............................................................................... 24
C. Fixed – Quasi-Experimental .......................................................................................................... 31
D. Mobile – Non-Experimental .......................................................................................................... 41
E. Fixed – Non-Experimental............................................................................................................. 49
V. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................... 51
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) staff has prepared this Staff Report (Report) to 
summarize data from the Commission’s Low-Income Broadband Pilot Projects (Pilot Projects or Pilot 
Program).
1
  The Report discusses data collected in each of the 14 Pilot Projects. Together the Pilot
Projects studied the effects of varying subsidy amounts, hardware costs, access to digital literacy, 
technology offered (e.g., wireline, wireless), and service characteristics (e.g., smartphone, aircard).  
2. In order to prepare this Report, the staff spoke with the Pilot Project participant-providers for
each of the Pilot Projects.  The staff also reviewed quarterly and final reports submitted by the Pilot 
Project participants, as well as survey results and data submitted by the Pilot Project participants at 
various stages in the funding process to the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), the 
entity that performs the day-to-day administration of the program under Commission oversight.
2
  To 
protect consumer privacy, the Pilot Project participants did not share with the Commission or USAC any 
personally identifiable information about the consumers who participated in the pilots.
3
    
II. BACKGROUND
3. In February 2010, the Commission published the results of its first Broadband Consumer 
Survey, which focused on non-adopters and the issues they faced in adopting broadband.
4
  The survey 
results demonstrated how some demographic groups, such as low-income households, were less likely to 
                                                     
1
See Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization et al., Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, WC Docket Nos. 11-42 et al., CC Docket. No. 96-45, 27 FCC Rcd 6656, 6800-01, para. 336 (2012) 
(Lifeline Reform Order) (determining to make Pilot Project data public for the benefit of all interested parties, 
including third parties that may use such information for their own studies and observations).
2
See generally PR Wireless, Inc. Final Report, WC Docket No. 11-42 (Feb. 12, 2015) (PR Wireless Report); 
Frontier Communications Final Report, WC Docket No. 11-42 (Jan. 26, 2015) (Frontier Report); Troy Cablevision, 
Inc. Final Report WC Docket No. 11-42 (Feb. 2, 2015) (Troy Cablevision Report); Virgin Mobile USA, LP Final 
Report, WC Docket No. 11-42 (March 24, 2015) (Virgin Mobile Report); Nexus Communications, Inc. Final 
Report, WC Docket No. 11-42  (May 18, 2015) (Nexus Report); XChange Telecom Final Report, WC Docket No. 
11-42 (March 3, 2015); TracFone Wireless, Inc. Final Report, WC Docket No. 11-42, (May. 18, 2015) (TracFone 
Final Report); Partnership for Connected Illinois Final Report, WC Docket No. 11-42 (March 4, 2015); T-Mobile 
Puerto Rico, LLC, WC Docket No. 11-42 (May 18, 2014) (T-Mobile Final Report). 
3
See Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 68001-01, para. 336.
4
John Horrigan, Broadband Adoption and Use in America (OBI, Working Paper No. 1, 2010) (Horrigan, 
Broadband Adoption and Use in America) at 11, http://www.fcc.gov/national-broadband-plan.  At the time, this 
survey was distinct given its focus on non-adopters of broadband at home.  Id.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
4
subscribe to broadband at home.  Building off these survey results, the 2010 National Broadband Plan 
recognized that although increasing numbers of consumers had broadband at home, some segments of the 
population — particularly low-income households — did not subscribe to broadband at levels similar to 
that of the population at large.
5
  The National Broadband Plan identified three major barriers to adoption
— cost, digital literacy and relevance — that kept non-adopters from subscribing to broadband service.
6
  
To help in overcoming cost barriers for low-income consumers, the National Broadband Plan 
recommended that the Commission implement a low-income pilot program to generate high-quality data 
about how best to design efficient and effective long-term broadband support mechanisms for low-income 
consumers.
7
4. In its 2012 Lifeline Reform Order, the Commission established an express goal for Lifeline to 
ensure the availability of broadband service for low-income Americans.
8
  As a first step in achieving this 
goal, the Commission directed the Bureau to launch a low-income broadband pilot program.
9
  In directing 
the Bureau to launch the Pilot Program, the Commission authorized up to $25 million to be disbursed 
directly to eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) for up to 12 months of subsidized broadband 
service, delivered either as a standalone service or as part of a bundle of voice and broadband services.
10
  
The Commission directed the Bureau to “solicit applications from ETCs to participate in the Pilot 
Program and to select a relatively small number of projects to test the impact on broadband adoption with 
variations in the monthly discount (phased down over time or constant) over a 12-month period.”
11
  
Carriers that sought to participate in the Pilot Program had to be designated as an ETC in the areas for 
which they proposed to offer service at the time they submitted their proposed projects for Bureau 
review.
12
  To encourage ETCs to partner with third-party organizations whose mission is to increase 
broadband adoption, the Commission directed the Bureau to give preference in the selection process to 
ETCs that partnered with non-ETCs to design and implement broadband pilot proposals that included 
components involving digital literacy and equipment.
13
  
                                                     
5
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, OMNIBUS BROADBAND INITIATIVE, CONNECTING 
AMERICA: THE NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN at 167-68 (2010) (NATIONAL BROADBAND PLAN), 
http://www.broadband.gov/plan.
6
Id. at 168-69.
7
Id. at 172-73.  In 2010, the Commission also hosted a roundtable discussion to solicit input on how to design a 
pilot program to test the effectiveness of supporting broadband services directed to low-income households.  See 
Wireline Competition Bureau Announces June 23, 2010 Roundtable Discussion to Explore Broadband Pilot 
Programs for Low-Income Consumers, WC Docket No. 03-190, Public Notice, 25 FCC Rcd 7272 (2010),  
http://www.fcc.gov/events/roundtable-discussion-explore-broadband-pilot-programs).
8
See Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 6673-74, paras. 33-34.
9
See id. at 6794-96, paras. 323-27. 
10
See id. at 6795, paras. 324-25.  The Commission determined that support would only be provided for broadband 
services, and not for the administrative or equipment costs of the ETCs and their partners.  See id. at 680 4-05, paras. 
345-49.
11
Id. at 6795, para. 325.
12
See Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 6800, para. 334.  To afford Tribes an increased opportunity to 
participate in the Pilot Program, the Commission permitted a Tribally-owned or controlled entity to submit a Pilot 
Program proposal for the geographic area defined by the boundaries of the Tribal land and associated with the Tribe 
as long as the Tribally-owned entity had an application for designation pending at the time it submitted its proposal.  
Id. at 6800, para. 335.
13
Id. at 6806, para. 352.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
5
5. In the Broadband Pilot Public Notice, the Bureau set forth the application criteria and 
procedures and set a deadline for application submission.
14
  Consistent with the framework established in 
the Lifeline Reform Order, the Bureau notified applicants that the Bureau would strongly favor pilot 
projects designed as field experiments that would test the impact on how variations on broadband service 
offerings impact adoption.
15
  To be eligible for funding, ETCs seeking to participate in the Pilot Program 
also had to commit to robust gathering, analysis, and sharing of data.
16
  Pilot Project participants were 
required to collect subscriber data regarding demographics and service usage throughout the course of the 
Pilot Project and submit such data to USAC.  To ensure the Commission received standardized data 
across all of the projects, the Bureau included the Low-Income Broadband Pilot Program Reporting Form
as an Appendix to the Broadband Pilot Public Notice, which comprised a uniform set of questions that 
subscribers participating in the Pilot Projects and the ETCs would need to complete and submit to USAC 
for collection.
17
  The Bureau made clear that all subscriber data collected within each of the projects must 
be submitted to USAC in anonymized form, and that the data would ultimately be made publicly 
available in anonymized form.
18
  The Bureau also strongly encouraged ETCs submitting applications to 
commit to the submission of a final report to share additional information with the Commission about 
lessons learned from the project.
19
      
6. In December 2012, the Bureau issued an order announcing the selection of 14 Pilot Projects, 
authorizing up to $13.8 million in support for the projects which spanned 21 states and Puerto Rico.
20
  
The Broadband Pilot Order explained that the Pilot Program ran for an 18-month trial period, which 
began February 1, 2013.  The 18 months began with three months for ETCs to implement necessary back-
office functions, followed by up to 12 months of subsidized service, and concluding with three months
allotted for finalizing the data collection and for analysis.
21
  All participating subscribers had to be 
enrolled in the Pilot Projects within nine months of the commencement of the trial period, or no later than 
November 1, 2013.
22
  Each participating subscriber had the opportunity to receive a maximum of 12 
months of subsidized broadband service.
23
  As a condition to participation in the Pilot Projects, each 
                                                     
14
See generally Wireline Competition Bureau Announces Application Procedures and Deadline for Applications to 
Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC Docket No. 11-42, Public Notice, 27 FCC Rcd 
4840 (Wireline Comp. Bur. April 30, 2012) (Broadband Pilot Public Notice).  
15
The Bureau explained that “ETCs should submit a detailed description of the experimental design and other 
experimental protocols used suitable for a replication study, what variations on broadband service offerings [would] 
be tested (e.g., discount amount, duration of discount, speeds, usage limits, digital literacy training or any other 
factors impacting broadband adoption) and how the project(s) [would] randomize variations on broadband service 
offerings (e.g., geographic randomization).”  Id. at 4841.
16
See Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 6800-01, para. 336; see also Broadband Pilot Public Notice, 27 FCC 
Rcd at 4841.
17
Broadband Pilot Public Notice, 27 FCC Rcd at Appendix.  The Bureau explained that ETCs may collect the 
subscriber data themselves and submit to USAC, or may request that USAC collect through an electronic, online 
survey.  Id. at 4843.
18
See Broadband Pilot Public Notice¸ 27 FCC Rcd at 4843.  All participating ETCs were required to obtain 
subscribers’ consent to the collection and sharing of the information contained in the Low-Income Broadband Pilot 
Program Reporting Form.  See Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 6800-01, para. 336.  
19
See Broadband Pilot Public Notice¸ 27 FCC Rcd at 4843.  
20
See Lifeline and Link Reform and Modernization, WC Docket No. 11-42, Order, 27 FCC Rcd 15842, 15842, para. 
1 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 2012) (Broadband Pilot Order).  The Bureau received a total of 24 applications but 
narrowed its selection to the 14 projects detailed within this Report.  Id. at 15847, para. 14.  
21
Id. at 15849, para. 18.
22
Id. 
23
Id.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
6
subscriber had to certify that he/she did not have, at the time of enrollment or within the last 60 days prior 
to enrollment, the same type of Internet service the ETC was offering in their project.
24
  For example, if 
subscribers were already subscribing to a smartphone service plan prior to enrollment in the Pilot Project, 
they were precluded from receiving subsidized service for a smartphone service plan but were not
otherwise precluded from receiving wireline or wireless high-speed Internet service under the Pilot 
Project.
25
  Each participating subscriber also had to certify that he or she was eligible and otherwise would 
qualify to receive Lifeline benefits.
26
III. SELECTION OF 14 PILOT PROJECTS
7. Based on review of the 24 applications received in response to the Broadband Pilot Public 
Notice, the Bureau selected the following pilot projects summarized in Table 1 to participate in the Pilot 
Program.
27
Table 1: Low-Income Broadband Pilot Projects
Project States Key Questions Service & Device Methodology
TracFone FL, MA, 
MD, TX, 
WA, WI
Effect of monthly price and 
hardware cost on adoption
Mobile, Smartphone Geographically randomized 
controlled trial
Nexus CA, IA, 
LA, MI, 
MS, NJ, 
NV, OH
Effect of monthly price and 
digital literacy training on 
adoption and data plan choice
Mobile, Smartphone 
or MiFi
Randomized controlled trial
Virgin Mobile OH, MA Effect of monthly price and 
hardware cost on adoption 
and retention
Mobile, MiFi Geographically randomized 
controlled trial
Frontier OH, WV Effect on adoption and 
retention of a digital literacy 
incentive
Fixed Geographically randomized 
controlled trial
Vermont 
Telephone
VT Effect of price on adoption and 
retention
Fixed Comparison group quasi-
experiment
Xchange NY Effect of monthly price on 
adoption
Fixed Comparison group quasi-
experiment
Partnership for a 
Connected Illinois
IL Effect of digital literacy 
offering on adoption and 
retention
Fixed Comparison group quasi-
experiment
Troy Cable AL Effect of monthly price on 
adoption and retention
Fixed Comparison group quasi-
experiment
                                                     
24
Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 6803, para. 344 (concluding that “using the Pilot Program to subsidize 
broadband services purchased by consumers who have already adopted such services will not provide [the 
Commission] with sufficient and useful data about which such subsidies increase adoption”); Broadband Pilot 
Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 15848, para. 15.
25
Broadband Pilot Order, 27 FCC at 15848, para. 15.
26
See Lifeline Reform Order, 27 FCC Rcd at 6796, para. 343.
27
An expanded description of each selected project is included in Section IV.  The ETCs that submitted the selected 
applications were required to implement their projects pursuant to the terms and conditions contained within each of 
their applications, and any supplemental information that was filed in response to staff inquiry.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
7
Gila River AZ Effect of monthly price on 
adoption
Fixed Individual randomized controlled 
experiment
Hopi AZ Effect of monthly price on 
adoption
Fixed Individual randomized controlled 
experiment
PR Wireless PR Consumer preferences for 
devices
Mobile, Smartphone 
or MiFi
Nonexperimental
T-Mobile Puerto 
Rico
PR Consumer preferences for 
devices
Mobile, Smartphone 
or MiFi
Comparison group quasi-
experimental/Nonexperimental 
(No variation in offerings, 
variation in advertising)
Puerto Rico 
Telephone Co.
PR Consumer preferences for 
speeds
Fixed/Mobile, Tablet Nonexperimental
NTCA IA, NM Consumer preferences for 
speeds
Fixed Nonexperimental (comparison of 
non-similar areas)
Table 1 briefly explains what key question(s) each project was designed to answer, what mode of service 
was studied, what methodological design was employed, and the location of the pilot project.  
8. The Bureau selected projects that would provide the most useful data regarding the impact of 
subsidy amounts on adoption or those that might reveal other useful information such as consumers’ 
preferences for certain types of devices or services.  Within the 14 Pilot Projects, the subsidy amount 
ranged from $5 per month to as much as $39.95 per month.  The Pilot Projects also tested a range of 
monthly end-user charges, such as $40, $35, $20 or $10, with some projects testing lower charges and 
others testing higher charges.  All of the projects included some end-user charge at service inception, 
periodically throughout the project, or both.  
9. Methodology of the Low-Income Broadband Pilots.  The Bureau explicitly sought to fund 
projects designed as field experiments when requesting applications for participation in the pilot program.  
The Bureau did this “[t]o ensure that the Pilot Program gathers high-quality data that will help identify 
effective approaches to increasing broadband adoption and retention.”
28
  A field experiment uses 
randomization and variation of policy variables so that a causal link may be established between a policy 
and an outcome of interest.
29
  Within the Pilot Projects, the Bureau aimed to gather information about 
how monthly or one-time discounts, digital literacy training, or specific product offerings could influence 
low-income broadband adoption.
10. Having the right methodological design for the Pilot Projects was helpful for the Bureau in 
learning about causal impacts of the program.  In a 2012 report, the Government Accounting Office 
(GAO) stated that, in order “[t]o isolate the program’s unique impacts  . . . an impact study must be 
carefully designed to rule out plausible alternative explanations for the results.”
30
  The GAO explained
                                                     
28
Broadband Pilot Order, 27 FCC at 15844-45, para. 7.
29
See, e.g., COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISORS, 2014 ECONOMIC REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT, 
CHAPTER 17, at 272-274 (March 2014) https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-of-
the-President/2014; Steven D. Levitt and John A. List, Field Experiments in Economics: The Past, the Present and 
the Future, European Economic Review, Vol. 53, Issue 1, at 1-18 (Jan. 2009) 
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292108001153; Glenn W. Harrison and John A. List, Field 
Experiments, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 42, No. 4 at 1009-1055 (Dec. 2004) 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3594915?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.
30
U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, REPORT TO CONGRESSIONAL REQUESTERS, GAO 
12-208G, DESIGNING EVALUATIONS: 2012 REVISIONS at 39 (2012) (2012 GAO Report).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
8
that a number of methodologies are available for evaluation, including “experimental, quasi-experimental, 
and non-experimental designs”
31
and that “field experiments  . . . take place in much less contrived, more 
naturalistic settings” than laboratory experiments.
32
  With this understanding, the Bureau in the 
Broadband Pilot Public Notice specifically encouraged applications for projects designed as field 
experiments.
33
  Unlike a simple survey (a “stated preference” approach), the pilot participants made actual 
offers to Lifeline eligible households and observed those household’s behavior (a “revealed preference” 
approach).   
11. The 14 selected projects each implemented one of three methodological designs.  Using the 
GAO’s terminology concerning evaluations, these are as follows:
? Randomized Controlled Experiment – Compares outcomes for a randomly assigned treatment 
group and a nonparticipating control group.  Multiple treatment groups may also be compared.  
Randomization may be conducted on the individual level or some other aggregate level, such as a 
geographic area.  Such designs provide the opportunity for highly credible estimates of the causal 
impact of a policy.
? Comparison Group Quasi-Experiment – Compare outcomes for program participants and a 
comparison group while seeking to control for key characteristics, such as through matching.  
Such designs provide an opportunity to estimate the impact of policies, subject to how well 
possible confounding variables are able to be controlled for.
? Non-experimental – Does not compare outcomes across groups and therefore cannot be used to 
draw causal inferences.  Such designs may be used to observe behavior, such as how a household 
behaves when given a choice over multiple options.
12. Several of the Pilot Projects with large customer bases randomly assigned potential 
subscribers to different offers (such as different price points and hardware discounts) and thus generated 
data suitable for parsing the independent effects of such factors on low-income adoption.
34
  Some of the 
smaller projects did not use random assignment but offered variations in comparable areas.
35
  This non-
random approach also had the potential to yield significant information on the most effective approaches 
to increasing adoption by low-income consumers.  Finally, a set of non-experimental projects, while 
unable to provide data on how differing policies might affect behavior, provided important data in the 
real-world setting (as opposed to surveys) on what types of plans or devices consumers will choose when 
given the option.
36
  Several projects closely monitored their marketing strategies and number of offers 
given to eligible consumers and tracked responses.
37
  Table 2 reports the total number of unique 
subscribers included in each project’s pilot data filings with USAC.
38
                                                     
31
Id. at 39.
32
Id. at 41.
33
See Broadband Pilot Public Notice¸ 27 FCC Rcd at 4841-42.
34
See, e.g., TracFone Pilot Project; Virgin Mobile Pilot Project; Frontier Pilot Project.
35
See, e.g., Troy Cablevision Pilot Project; Vermont Telephone Pilot Project.
36
See, e.g., T-Mobile Pilot Project; NTCA Pilot Project.
37
See, e.g., TracFone Final Report; Virgin Mobile Final Report, Troy Cablevision Final Report.
38
For consistency, all data reported in the tables are based on submissions to USAC and not data reported in other 
places by the pilot participants.  Furthermore, the subscriber total in this document are based on the number of 
subscribers listed in pilot ETC’s “Block E” data submission to USAC.  If other data blocks submitted to USAC 
differed from Block E, the Block E data was used.  The datasets released for each pilot contain all data submitted so 
interested users can explore any such differences.   A description of each data block submitted to USAC is available 
at http://usac.org/_res/documents/li/pdf/broadband-pilot/13.02.25_FCC_KickOff_Presentation.pdf .      
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
9
Table 2: Low-Income Broadband Pilot Subscribers, by Project
Project Total Pilot Subscribers
TracFone 667
Nexus 274
Virgin Mobile 901
Frontier 118
Vermont Telephone 77
Xchange 214
Partnership for a Connected Illinois 150
Troy Cable 127
Gila River 84
Hopi 111
PR Wireless 2,475
T-Mobile Puerto Rico 3,033
Puerto Rico Telephone Co. 354
NTCA 49
Table reports the total number of unique subscribers included in each project's pilot data filings with USAC. Totals 
include all subscribers who received service for any period of time during the pilot, whether they received a 
discount or not. 
13. In addition to providing a wealth of quantitative information, many of the pilots also provided
qualitative information about ways in which a broadband discount program could be incorporated into 
Lifeline.  Together, the 14 pilot projects provided a highly diverse set of scenarios for studying factors 
influencing broadband adoption among low-income households and for understanding the preferences of 
Lifeline-eligible consumers.
IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED PILOT PROGRAM PROJECTS
A. Mobile - Randomized Controlled Experiments
1. Nexus (OH, MI, IA, NV, CA, LA, MS, NJ)  
14. Overview and Description of Offerings.  The Nexus Pilot Project, which operated in 8 states, 
studied the effect of varying subsidy amounts and digital literacy offerings on adoption of mobile 
offerings.  Table 3a shows the characteristics of each treatment offered.  Nexus conducted a large, 
randomized controlled experiment by offering each group of potential subscribers one of the six 
treatments.  Treatments varied by the level of the subsidy and whether an offer of digital literacy training 
accompanied the solicitation. Groups were randomly offered plans based on the last two digits of their 
existing Nexus account number, and Nexus directly contacted households with a specific offer.    
Consumers, having been made an offer, then could choose to either purchase a smartphone or aircard plan 
(device priced at $49.99) with a monthly data allowance of 200 megabyte (MB), 500 MB, 1gigabyte (GB) 
or 2GB.   While the discount amount was the same within each treatment, customers would have to pay 
more for larger plans.  This design allowed for cleanly estimating the causal effect of the discount level 
on consumer choice.
39
  Table 3a sets forth the treatments.
                                                     
39
See Application of Nexus Communications, Inc., WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (Nexus Application); see 
also Supplement to Nexus Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed August 22, 2012); Second Supplement to Nexus 
Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 24, 2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
10
Table 3a: Nexus Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
Control Group - With DL $0.00 $0.00 Yes 0
Control Group - Without DL $0.00 $0.00 No 34
Test Group I - With DL $15.00 $0.00 Yes 1
Test Group I - Without DL $15.00 $0.00 No 55
Test Group II - With DL $20.00 $0.00 Yes 4
Test Group II - Without DL $20.00 $0.00 No 180
15. Implementation and Results.  Nexus relied primarily on direct marketing texts to existing 
Lifeline subscribers.  However, in Ohio only it also marketed the service to new subscribers located in 
low-income neighborhoods by conducting in-person direct action outreach, which brought training 
capabilities directly into the neighborhoods.  For new customers subscribing through this outreach, Nexus 
offered all customers on a given day only one of the treatments containing a digital literacy offer to 
provide variation in the treatments.  Each day Nexus varied the offer available as part of the direct 
outreach.  
16. When subscribing, customers chose to apply a fixed discount amount to one of several plans 
that varied by device type or data allowance.  The plans available are shown in Table 3b as are the 
number of customers choosing each plan.  The table shows the unsubsidized service and equipment costs 
to which the discount for a given treatment would be applied.  For example, a new subscriber in “Test 
Group 1” (see Table 3a) would be able to apply a $15 monthly discount to any of these plans.  If the 
subscriber chose the 200MB Smartphone plan, then the monthly end-user charge would be $9.99 (= 
$24.99 - $15).  As shown in the table, a large fraction (82 percent) of customers chose smartphone plans 
while the remaining 18 percent chose the data-only device.  Furthermore, customers tended to choose 
smaller and less expensive data allowances.
Table 3b: Nexus Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
200MB Data Allowance – Aircard $24.99 $49.99 36
200MB Data Allowance – Smartphone $24.99 $49.99 96
500MB Data Allowance – Aircard $29.99 $49.99 8
500MB Data Allowance – Smartphone $29.99 $49.99 95
1GB Data Allowance – Aircard $39.99 $49.99 1
1GB Data Allowance – Smartphone $39.99 $49.99 20
2GB Data Allowance – Aircard $49.99 $49.99 2
2GB Data Allowance – Smartphone $49.99 $49.99 16
2. TracFone Smartphone Project (FL, MD, TX, WA, WI, MA)  
17. Overview and Description of Offerings.  TracFone’s Pilot Project studied the effects of 
varying subsidy amounts and discounted hardware through mobile smartphone service plans—all of 
which included unlimited voice/text and 2GB of data.  The price per month for the service plans offered 
to TracFone’s existing Lifeline customers differed depending on the amount of the discount applicable to 
the monthly service and the price charged for the smartphone.  In this way, TracFone’s pilot addresses the 
effect of both recurring monthly discounts and one-time upfront discounts on hardware.  
18. Implementation and Results.  TracFone divided five states (FL, MD, TX, WA, WI) each into 
five regions and then randomly assigned each region in a state to one of five treatments.  The treatments 
varied in the monthly recurring cost and one-time upfront cost to the consumer.  Table 4a shows the 
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
11
characteristics of each treatment.
40
  TracFone received the largest enrollment in the lowest cost plan (free 
phone, $10 monthly end-user charge).
19. TracFone also non-experimentally offered digital literacy training and discounted service in 
Boston to 300 existing customers.  This treatment required subscribers to complete digital literacy 
training provided by Open Air Boston in order to receive a free Android data handset and discounted 
service.  TracFone reported that only 12 approved customers completed the digital literacy course within 
the [60] day period required, though many more received at least one month of subsidy.
41
  The treatment 
in Boston is shown at the bottom of Table 4a but is not considered part of the experimental design and is 
not useful for making inferences about the effect of digital literacy on adoption. 
Table 4a: TracFone Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
Free Phone $10 Service $25.00 $29.99 No 250
Free Phone $20 Service $15.00 $29.99 No 193
Standard Phone, $10 Service $25.00 $0.00 No 77
Standard Phone, $20 Service $15.00 $0.00 No 46
Control Group - Discounted Phone, Paid Service $0.00 $0.00 No 16
Free Phone, $10 Service w/ Digital Literacy (Boston) $25.00 $120.00 Yes 85
20. TracFone offered a single plan to pilot participants that provided unlimited talk and text and 
2GB of monthly data.  Table 4b shows the details of this plan.
Table 4b: TracFone Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
Unlimited voice, Text, 2GB Data $35.00 $29.99 667
3. Virgin Mobile (MA, OH)  
21. Overview and Description of Offerings.  The Virgin Mobile Pilot Project studied the effects 
of a subsidy and discounted equipment through mobile broadband service offerings using MiFi devices.  
Virgin Mobile randomly assigned offers based on Zip Code and offered one of four pricing options to a 
large sample. Each plan included up to 1 GB of mobile data.  Those low-income consumers in Ohio were 
also offered digital literacy training, though this was not experimentally varied.  Table 5a shows the four 
main treatment groups, separating each main group by whether digital literacy was offered.  While 
customers receiving the $20 monthly subsidy paid nothing each month, these customers did have to pay a 
one-time upfront activation fee of $20.  The $50 devices offered in the pilot were discounted by $40 for 
some treatments and undiscounted for others.
                                                     
40
Note that while TracFone’s data submission reports an equipment discount of $29.99, its final report explains that 
it actually offered better phones but with a larger discount so that the end user charge for the phone remained at 
$29.99 for the standard phone and $0 for the free phone.  See TracFone Final Report.
41
See TracFone Final Report; see also TracFone Wireless, Inc.’s Application to Participate in the Broadband 
Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program for Smartphones, WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (TracFone Smartphone 
Application); see also Supplement to TracFone Smartphone Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed August 27, 2012); 
Second Supplement to TracFone Smartphone Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 24, 2012); Third 
Supplement to TracFone Smartphone Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 27, 2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
12
Table 5a: Virgin Mobile Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
Group 1; No Discount on Device or Service; with Digital 
Literacy
$0.00 $0.00 Yes 24
Group 1; No Discount on Device or Service; without 
Digital Literacy
$0.00 $0.00 No 31
Group 2; Discount on Device and Service; with Digital 
Literacy 
$20.00 $40.00 Yes 286
Group 2; Discount on Device and Service; without 
Digital Literacy
$20.00 $40.00 No 178
Group 3; Discount on Service, but not Device; with 
Digital Literacy
$20.00 $0.00 Yes 97
Group 3; Discount on Service, but not Device; without 
Digital Literacy
$20.00 $0.00 No 77
Group 4; Discount on Device, but not Service; with 
Digital Literacy
$0.00 $40.00 Yes 126
Group 4; Discount on Device, but not Service; without 
Digital Literacy
$0.00 $40.00 No 82
22.   Implementation and Results.  Virgin Mobile marketed each of the four offers to 
approximately 26,000 existing customers in Massachusetts and approximately 38,000 existing customers 
in Ohio. Each customer received only one offer. Thus, a total of approximately 104,000 Massachusetts 
customers and 150,000 Ohio customers received an offer for service from Virgin Mobile. All marketing 
was in the form of a two-sided trifold mailer that contained a description of the program, offer and the 
necessary qualifications; promoted the benefits of broadband generally; displayed an image of the 
broadband device; and referred Ohio customers to a technology training program offered at no charge by 
a partner organization, Connected Nation. Most customers received one mailer, although some received a 
follow up mailer.
42
  
23. Virgin Mobile noted that participation in all of the offers was considerably less than expected.  
The offer with a $30 upfront cost ($10 for the phone and $20 activation fee) but no monthly recurring 
charges attracted the most customers. The offer with a $50 upfront cost for the phone and $20 monthly 
recurring charge attracted the fewest customers. In terms of usage, only a handful of participants 
exceeded 1 GB of data in any given month. The vast majority of participants used well below 1 GB of 
data.  Customers who enrolled from Groups 1 or 4 with a monthly recurring charge could choose to pay 
and receive service (or not) in any given month, meaning they could opt to manually replenish their 
service.  Groups 2 or 3 had no monthly charge and were automatically replenished for the duration of the 
pilot.
43
Table 5b: Virgin Mobile Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
1GB Data Limit/Month, One Time (Manual Replenish) 
$20.00 $50.00 263
1GB Data Limit/Month, Recurring Fee (auto) $20.00 $50.00 638
                                                     
42
See generally Virgin Mobile Final Report.
43
See Virgin Mobile Final Report.  Virgin Mobile USA, L.P. Application to Participate in the Broadband Adoption 
Lifeline Pilot Program, WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (Virgin Mobile Application); see also Supplement to 
Virgin Mobile Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed August 31, 2012); Second Supplement to Virgin Mobile 
Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 7, 2012); Third Supplement to Virgin Mobile Application, WC 
Docket 11-42 (filed September 24, 2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
13
B. Fixed - Randomized Controlled Experiments 
1. Frontier (OH, WV)  
24. Overview and Description of Offerings.  Using fixed broadband service, Frontier, in 
partnership with Connect Ohio (a subsidiary of Connected Nation) and Future Missions, launched a pilot 
project throughout the entire Ohio service territory of Frontier North, Inc. and in the area surrounding 
Parkersburg, West Virginia.  Frontier studied the impact of a financial incentive to take digital literacy 
training on broadband adoption.  It also allowed for observing the new adopters’ broadband choices, their 
willingness to take digital literacy training, and their interest in purchasing computers at a discounted
price.
25. As detailed in Table 6a, this project used a test group and a control group.  Frontier gave 
treatment group consumers a choice between (1) not taking digital literacy training but still receiving a 
$20 monthly discount, (2) taking digital literacy training and receiving a $30 monthly discount while also 
waiving a one-time $34.99 charge, or (3) taking digital literacy training and having a $20 monthly 
discount while also receiving a free computer.
44
  The control group was offered a $20 monthly discount 
with no other requirements (though digital literacy training was available to this group). This design 
therefore generated data on the effect of such a “digital literacy incentive” on adoption, how much of a 
factor “lack of an adequate computer” is as an adoption barrier, and how much some consumers will 
forego in discounts to not take a digital literacy class.  Within Ohio, Frontier randomized the treatment 
and control offerings by Zip Code while only the control was offered in West Virginia. Regardless of 
whether a customer was in the treatment or control group, consumers could choose from a menu of 
maximum download speeds: 1 megabit per second (Mbps); 6 Mbps; 12 Mbps; and 24 Mbps.  This 
provides data on which services low-income, recent non-adopters are willing and able to purchase at a 
discount.
Table 6a: Frontier Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
Treatment: Offered Choice of Extra Discount or Free 
Computer for Taking Digital Literacy Training
$20.00 if training 
not taken/$30 if 
training taken and 
discount selected
$199 if free 
computer chosen
Yes 92
Control: No Extra Discount for Taking Digital Literacy 
Training
$20.00 $0.00 Yes 26
26. Implementation and Results.  The solicitation period began May 1, 2013 and ended October 
31, 2013.  The solicitation was directed to existing and potential customers that did not subscribe at the 
time to Frontier’s broadband services.  Table 6b shows which plans customers chose and how many 
customers took digital literacy training to obtain either the free computer or the additional $10 monthly 
discount and $34.99 fee waiver.  In Table 6b, the treatment and control groups are further separated based 
on the consumers’ decisions given the offer made to them.  The first three sets of rows show for the 
treatment group what decisions consumers made.  Each treatment group member was given the choice to 
either not take digital literacy training and simply receive a $20 monthly subsidy, take the training and 
receive an activation fee waiver of $34.99 and an additional $10 subsidy on top of the $20 subsidy, or 
take the training and receive a free computer in addition to the $20 monthly subsidy.  The results show 
that many of the treatment group subscribers opted not to take digital literacy for an additional discount or 
free computer.  The last two sets of rows show the control group, finding that without the incentive few 
subscribers chose to take digital literacy training.  Among the four speed plans, the 6 Mbps plan was the 
most popular in all groups.
                                                     
44
In this way, Frontier tied an attempt to overcome non-price barriers with an attempt to address the price barrier.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
14
Table 6b: Frontier Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
Treatment: 1Mb  & Declined Digital Literacy $31.99 $0.00 3
Treatment: 6Mb & Declined Digital Literacy $34.99 $0.00 30
Treatment: 12Mb & Declined Digital Literacy $44.99 $0.00 0
Treatment: 24Mb & Declined Digital Literacy $54.99 $0.00 0
Treatment: 1Mb & Took Digital Literacy;  Waive Non-
Recurring/+$10 per mo.
$31.99 $0.00 1
Treatment: 6Mb & Took Digital Literacy;  Waive Non-
Recurring/+$10 per mo.
$34.99 $0.00 43
Treatment: 12Mb & Took Digital Literacy;  Waive Non-
Recurring/+$10 per mo.
$44.99 $0.00 0
Treatment: 24Mb & Took Digital Literacy;  Waive Non-
Recurring/+$10 per mo.
$54.99 $0.00 0
Treatment: 1Mb & Took Digital Literacy, Free 
Computer
$31.99 $199.00 0
Treatment: 6Mb & Took Digital Literacy, Free 
Computer
$34.99 $199.00 15
Treatment: 12Mb & Took Digital Literacy, Free 
Computer
$44.99 $199.00 0
Treatment: 24Mb & Took Digital Literacy, Free 
Computer
$54.99 $199.00 0
Control: 1Mb  & Declined Digital Literacy $31.99 $0.00 0
Control: 6Mb & Declined Digital Literacy $34.99 $0.00 24
Control: 12Mb & Declined Digital Literacy $44.99 $0.00 1
Control: 24Mb & Declined Digital Literacy $54.99 $0.00 0
Control: 1Mb & Took Digital Literacy, No Incentive $31.99 $0.00 0
Control: 6Mb & Took Digital Literacy, No Incentive $34.99 $0.00 1
Control: 12Mb & Took Digital Literacy, No Incentive $44.99 $0.00 0
Control: 24Mb & Took Digital Literacy, No Incentive $54.99 $0.00 0
2. Gila River (AZ – Tribal)
27. Overview and Description of Offerings. The Gila River Pilot Project tested the effect on 
adoption of discounted prices and access to discounted equipment.  Gila River randomly assigned 
subscribers into five groups which varied by price points, speed, and access to equipment.  Households 
were then presented with a single offer based on their randomly assigned group.  As detailed in Table 7, 
the discount amounts for the broadband plans ranged from $23.24 to $38.24 which created variation in the 
prices paid by the end user.  Two groups were also offered a free desktop computer.  Consumers were not 
able to choose their speed but rather were offered a speed at a certain price and consumers decided 
whether to purchase the service.  Since the end-user charge and the speed changed together across 
treatments, the independent effects of either cannot be estimated (though the cost per Mbps varies 
independently).   Table 7 also shows how many subscribers signed up for each service, and for 
convenience end-user charges for each treatment is included in the leftmost column.
45
  
                                                     
45
See Gila River Telecommunications, Inc. Application to Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot 
Program, WC Docket 11-42 (filed June 29, 2012) (Gila River Application).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
15
Table 7: Gila River Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
$53.19 user cost: 1.5 - 4.8 Mbps/1Mbps $0.00 $0.00 Yes 0
$14.95 user cost: up to 5 Mbps/1Mbps $38.24 $0.00 Yes 18
$19.95 user cost: up to 10 Mbps/1Mbps $33.24 $0.00 Yes 16
$24.95 user cost: up to 15 Mbps/1Mbps  - Desktop $28.24 $200.00 Yes 28
$29.95 user cost: up to 20 Mbps)/1Mbps - Desktop $23.24 $200.00 Yes 22
28. Implementation and Results.  In its Pilot Project, Gila River marketed the broadband offerings 
to low income consumers by first reaching out to existing Lifeline voice subscribers by invitation to an 
initial free barbeque information meeting. In that gathering, Gila River held a random drawing to 
determine which of the 5 groups/offers each subscriber would be included.  Telephone numbers were 
called, not names, to depersonalize how a subscriber was assigned into one of the 5 groups (each offer 
was defined as its own group).  For those subscribers that did not enroll after the information meeting, 
Gila River continued to contact them to determine interest in the broadband pilot.  Once a telephone 
number was assigned to a group, Gila River did not permit changes from one offer to another.  As a final 
effort to enroll subscribers, Gila River placed print advertisement in the local Gila River Indian 
Newspaper monthly for the enrollment period.
46
3. Hopi Telecommunications (AZ – Tribal)
29. Overview and Description of Offerings.  The Hopi Telecommunications Project studied the 
effects of subsidy amounts and access to discounted equipment by making different offers to a control 
group and three treatment groups.  The groups were chosen by random assignment of households.  The 
control group was offered the choice of two speed plans at full price.  The treatment groups were each 
given one of the following offers: a flat subsidy of $39.95 for a 1.5 Mbps plan and a financed refurbished
computer, a flat subsidy of $39.95 for a 3 Mbps plan and a financed refurbished computer, or a flat 
subsidy of $39.95 and a choice of either speed but no discounted computer.
47
   
Table 8a: Hopi Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total Subscribers
No Discount, choice of 1.5 or 3 Mbps service, low-cost 
computer financed
$0.00 $0.00/financing avail. Yes 14
Discount on 1.5Mbps service, low-cost  refurbished 
computer financed
$39.95 $0.00/financing avail. Yes 31
Discount on 3 Mbps service, low-cost refurbished 
computer financed
$39.95 $0.00/financing avail. Yes 36
Discount on either 1.5 or 3 Mbps service, No access to 
computer
$39.95 $0.00 Yes 30
30. Implementation and Results.  In implementing the pilot, Hopi Telecommunications sent 
mailers to all existing Lifeline subscribers that were not subscribing to broadband service.  Hopi 
                                                     
46
See id. at 7-8.
47
See Hopi Telecommunications, Inc. Application for the FCC’s Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC 
Docket 11-42 (filed July 9, 2012) (Hopi Application); see also Supplement to Hopi Application, WC Docket 11-42 
(filed August 27, 2012); Second Supplement to Hopi Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed October 2, 2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
16
Telecommunications notified such subscribers of a 2 day sign-up event in which each household would 
be randomly assigned into one of the groups/offers.  Table 8b shows the unsubsidized price of each plan 
and the number of customers who chose each plan.
Table 8b: Hopi Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
1.5Mbps speed $59.95 $211.00 52
3Mbps Speed $69.95 $211.00 59
C. Fixed – Quasi-Experimental
1. Partnership for Connected Illinois (PCI) (IL)
31. Overview and Description of Offerings.   The Partnership for a Connected Illinois Project 
(PCI)
48
, in partnership with Connected Living, Inc., Citizens Utility Board, studied the effects of access to 
digital literacy and consumers’ choice among plans offering varying speeds using fixed broadband among 
the member ETCs within their study areas.  All participating subscribers were able to receive a one-time 
$60 credit toward installation fees, a free modem, or necessary connection device (subsidized by the 
ETC), and a $30 monthly discount on broadband services and the option to purchase a refurbished 
desktop computer from Computer Banc at discount.
49
That is, there was no variation in subsidy amounts 
across subscribers.  Rather, the PCI project focused solely on the effect of offering digital literacy
training.
32. Within each ETC study area, PCI identified a treatment group area and a control group area 
for this project.  The treatment groups tended to be an area around the main town in the ETC’s territory 
while the control group was the rest of the area in the ETC’s territory.  Subscribers in the treatment group 
had the option to participate in no-cost digital literacy training, whereas subscribers in the control group 
were not offered digital literacy training.  PCI tracked usage and retention of service during the pilot 
project to determine if such training helped subscribers overcome adoption hurdles.
50
  Table 9 shows the 
offers for each treatment and control group.
Table 9: PCI Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total Subscribers
Treatment Group $30.00 Varies by ETC Yes 89
Control Group $30.00 Varies by ETC No 61
33. Implementation and Results.  PCI developed marketing materials advertising the program 
benefits, with pricing tailored to each ETC’s rates.
51
  Flyers were placed in community areas and 
                                                     
48
The Partnership for a Connected Illinois Project is comprised of Adams Telephone Cooperative, Cass Telephone 
Company, Harrisonville Telephone Company, Madison Telephone Company, Mid-Century Telephone Cooperative, 
Shawnee Telephone Company, and Wabash Telephone Cooperative.
49
The following ETCs participating in the PCI project:  Adams Telephone Cooperative; Cass Telephone Company; 
Harrisonville Telephone Company; Madison Telephone Company; Mid-Century Telephone Cooperative; Shawnee 
Telephone Company; and Wabash Telephone Cooperative.  See Partnership for a Connected Illinois Project 
Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (Partnership for a Connected 
Illinois Project); see also Supplement to Partnership for a Connected Illinois Project, WC Docket 11-42 (filed 
August 28, 2012); Second Supplement, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 26, 2012). 
50
See generally PCI Final Report.
51
For specific pricing options and ETC-specific equipment discounts offered by pilot ETCs, refer to the data set 
released for the PCI project.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
17
postcards were mailed to every household in ETC area Zip Codes.  Throughout the project, each ETC 
marketed via newspaper advertisements, editorials, billing inserts, school district competitions and via 
television, depending on the marketing budget for each ETC. Because multiple ILECs participated in the 
PCI pilot, each applied the same $30 discount to different menus of broadband offerings.
34. Based on survey data provided by the PCI pilot, 73 percent of the subscribers had never had 
broadband access in their home prior to enrolling in the pilot and noted that the main reason for not 
having broadband was due to cost.  This project also studied the choices subscribers made in determining 
speeds because they were permitted to choose from speed packages offered by each participating ETC.  
Of the subscribers able to choose multiple speed tiers, 79 percent chose the slowest speed package, which 
also came with the smallest monthly fee.  In regards to retention, 66 percent of the participants remained 
connected to broadband service once the subsidy ended.
52
2. Troy Cablevision (Troy Cable) (AL)
35. Overview and Description of Offerings.  Troy Cablevision, in partnership with the Alabama 
Department of Economic and Community Affairs, tested the effects of subsidy amounts on adoption by 
offering a $14 subsidy off a wireline broadband plan within two counties and offered a $24 discount off 
the same wireline broadband plan in two separate counties.
53
Table 10a shows these two test groups.
Table 10a: Troy Cable Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total Subscribers
Test Group I $24.00 $0.00 Yes 102
Test Group II $14.00 $0.00 Yes 25
36. Implementation and Results.  During the summer of 2013, Troy Cable distributed signup 
packets to all local school systems within the four-county footprint covered by the pilot: Pike, Dale, 
Coffee, and Crenshaw counties.  Each packet contained a flyer describing the pilot, as well as application 
and survey forms to be completed.  With the approval of each school superintendent, Troy Cable 
delivered all copies to the Boards of Education for distribution.  The following is a list of packets sent 
within each county: Pike County: 5,260; Dale County: 3,780; Coffee County: 2,250; and Crenshaw 
County: 1,630.  Additionally, Troy Cable sent 825 mailers to non-profit organizations and 6,500 existing 
Troy Cable customers.
54
  Table 10b shows the price of the 4 Mbps/1 Mbps service to which a subscriber’s 
subsidy amount was applied.
Table 10b: Troy Cable Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
4Mb/1Mb $33.99 $5.00 127
3. Vermont Telephone (VT)
37. Overview and Description of Offerings.  Vermont Telephone, in partnership with Connected 
Nation, operated a pilot project that tested the effect of subsidy on wireline broadband adoption by 
offering different prices to customers in selected wire centers, while customers served by other wire 
centers were only offered service at un-discounted prices.  Vermont Telephone sought to randomize 
                                                     
52
See PCI Final Report at 7.
53
See Troy Cablevision, Inc. Application for Low Income Broadband Pilot Program, WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 
2, 2012) (Troy Cablevision Application); see also Supplement to Troy Cablevision Application, WC Docket 11-42 
(filed August 10, 2012); Second Supplement to Troy Cablevision Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed August 30, 
2012).
54
See Troy Cable Final Report.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
18
which wire centers were given each offer.
55
  The treatment group offer was either (a) to maintain a 
uniform $9.95 end-user charge for the full 12 months if the customer subscribed to a long-distance plan or
(b) to be charged a $9.95 end-user charge for the first three months, followed by a $14.95 end-user charge 
for the remaining 9 months.  To achieve this end-user charge structure in the treatment groups, the 
subsidy varied over the year.  The undiscounted wire centers paid $29.95/month with long-distance and 
$34.95/month without long distance.
56
  Table 11a shows the characteristics of each experimental group.
Table 11a: Vermont Telephone Company Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total Subscribers
Treatment Group
$5 months 1-6 & $20 
months 7-12 if 
bundled with long 
distance; $0 months 
1-3 & $20 months 4-
12 if no long distance
$350.00 Yes 73
Control Group $0.00 $350.00 Yes 4
38. Implementation and Results.  In implementing the pilot, Vermont Telephone sent mailers and 
bill inserts to existing voice and video subscribers that were not subscribing to the company’s Internet 
service and also to households that may qualify for Lifeline service but do not currently use it.  Table 11b
shows which plans pilot subscribers purchased.
Table 11b: Vermont PR Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
cost
Subscribers
BB w/LD (Long Distance)
$14.95 months 1-6; 
$29.95 months 7-12
$350.00 0
BB w/LD and TV
$14.95 months 1-6; 
$29.95 months 7-12
$350.00 0
BB w/LD – Device
$14.95 months 1-6; 
$29.95 months 7-12
$350.00 31
BB w/LD - TV & Device
$14.95 months 1-6; 
$29.95 months 7-12
$350.00 0
BB Only
$9.95 months 1-3; $34.95 
months 4-12
$350.00 4
BB w/ TV
$9.95 months 1-3; $34.95 
months 4-12
$350.00 0
BB w/ Device
$9.95 months 1-3; $34.95 
months 4-12
$350.00 42
BB w/TV and Device
$9.95 months 1-3; $34.95 
months 4-12
$350.00 0
4. XChange Telecom (XChange) (Brooklyn, NY)
39. Overview and Description of Offerings.    XChange, in partnership with City University of 
New York Computer Sciences Department and School of Public Affairs, Baruch College, and City 
University of New York, operated a pilot project that tested different subsidy amounts: $10, $15 and $20.  
By varying the subsidy offered to buildings and neighborhoods, XChange’s Pilot Project allowed for 
                                                     
55
Vermont Telephone sought to randomize the wire centers, though due to the limited number of wire centers it is 
debatable whether the experiment should be considered truly experimental or quasi-experimental.
56
See Vermont Telephone Company, Inc. Application to Participate in Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, 
WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (Vermont Telephone Application) see also Supplement to Vermont 
Telephone Application (filed September 5, 2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
19
estimating the effect of the subsidy amount on adoption.
57
  For the group with the largest subsidy 
(Discount Group III), XChange also varied whether it offered digital literacy training. Table 12a sets forth 
the treatments XChange used.   
Table 12a: Xchange Telecom Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total Subscribers
Control Group, No Discount $0.00 $34.00 No 0
Discount Group I $10.00 $34.00 No 13
Discount Group II $15.00 $34.00 No 19
Discount Group III - without Digital Literacy $20.00 $34.00 No 182
Discount Group III – with Digital Literacy $20.00 $34.00 Yes 0
40. Implementation and Results.  In implementing the pilot, XChange sent nearly 9,000 mailers 
to their existing subscriber base.  XChange also expanded its marketing by sending direct mailings and 
postcards, and making phone calls to households in selected Zip Codes within King County (Brooklyn).  
Consumers could complete applications and surveys either online, via fax or over the phone.  Subscriber 
could choose from a menu of plans and apply their discount to this plan.  These plans varied by the type 
of voice service (if any) the broadband was bundled with.  XChange also offered a filtering service with 
each plan for an additional $10 per month.  Table 12b provides an overview of unsubsidized plan prices 
and enrollment data.
58
Table 12b: Xchange Telecom Plans
Plan Description
Unsubsidized Monthly Cost Unsubsidized Equipment cost Subscribers
Non-Bundled - Without Filtering $24.99 $34.00 0
Bundled Plan A (Local) - Without Filtering $24.99 $34.00 20
Bundled Plan B (Metro) - Without Filtering $24.99 $34.00 13
Bundled Plan C (USA) - Without Filtering $24.99 $34.00 181
Non-Bundled - With Filtering $34.99 $34.00 0
Bundled Plan A (Local) - With Filtering $34.99 $34.00 0
Bundled Plan B (Metro) - With Filtering $34.99 $34.00 0
Bundled Plan C (USA) - With Filtering $34.99 $34.00 0
D. Mobile - Non-Experimental
1. T-Mobile Puerto Rico LLC (T-Mobile) (Puerto Rico)  
41. Overview and Description of Offerings.  This project studied the effects of outreach methods 
and varying usage limits with mobile broadband service offerings.  T-Mobile offered a flat-rate subsidy of 
$20 off broadband plans with the choice of either 5 GB or 2 GB of data and free hotspot or smartphone 
device.
59
    
42. Implementation and Results.  Rather than varying the subsidy amount or digital literacy 
offering, T-Mobile’s project sought to test certain advertising and outreach methods to determine which 
                                                     
57
See XChange Telecom Corp. Application to Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC 
Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (XChange Application); see also Supplement to XChange Application, WC 
Docket 11-42 (filed August 17, 2012).
58
See XChange Final Report.
59
See T-Mobile Puerto Rico, LLC Application to Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, 
WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (T-Mobile Application); see also Supplement to T-Mobile Application, WC 
Docket 11-42 (filed August 15, 2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
20
type of outreach most effectively impacted enrollment.
60
  T-Mobile divided its marketing approach into 
three months (May 2014 – July 2014).  In the month of May, it implemented a direct mail strategy and 
advertising in retail store fronts.  In the month of June, it launched a television, print and “out of home 
campaign.”  Television advertising was the main driver for enrollment in this pilot, followed by the print 
strategies, which led to the highest enrollment of all of the pilot programs.  For the month of July, T-
Mobile implemented an SMS strategy along with advertising in retail store fronts.  T-Mobile notes that 
most of the July sales were customers that came to the stores in June but due to excess demand were 
given appointments for July.
61
Table 13a shows the various treatments, in this case advertising methods, 
T-Mobile used and the number of subscribers T-Mobile credits as being attracted by each method.
Table 13a: T-Mobile Puerto Rico Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total Subscribers
Mass Media (TV, Print, OOH) $20.00
Hotspot - $70.50 / 
Tablet $265.01
Yes 2830
Targeted Outreach (DM Letter, SMS) $20.00
Hotspot - $70.50 / 
Tablet $265.01
Yes 179
Retail and Lifeline Location Outreach $20.00
Hotspot - $70.50 / 
Tablet $265.01
Yes 2
Educational Institutions $20.00
Hotspot - $70.50 / 
Tablet $265.01
Yes 22
43. T-Mobile’s pilot conducted in Puerto Rico also allowed customers to choose from a variety 
of options and apply the $20 monthly discount.  Customers could choose from data-only plans to be used 
with a MiFi device, bundled smartphone plans with some amount of voice, text, and/or data, and data 
plans that the customer could choose to add-on to an existing voice-only account, which T-Mobile 
referred to as “SOC.”  For each of the plans, T-Mobile offered the device at no cost to the customer.  For 
T-Mobile’s pilot customers, as shown in Table 13b the overwhelming majority chose the $11.49 per 
month (after the discount) plan which offered 2GB and 300 minutes of voice (local + unlimited incoming) 
with no text.
62
                                                     
60
Since T-Mobile did not vary the subsidy, this project was non-experimental.  However, since the pilot varied 
advertising over time the pilot may be considered quasi-experimental, having compared across time periods.
61
See T-Mobile Final Report.
62
This explains the low percentage choosing the smartphone option with voice, text, and data since most subscribers 
already have voice service.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
21
Table 13b: T-Mobile PR Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
Cost
Subscribers
Broadband Only, 2GB $39.99
Hotspot $70.50 / Tablet 
$365.00
51
Broadband Only, 5GB $49.99
Hotspot $70.50 / Tablet 
$365.01
11
Smartphone Bundle, Unlimited Voice/Text 2GB $64.99
option 1 - $130.90 / option 
2 - $327.99 / option 3 -
$518.99
3
Smart Phone, Unlimited Voice/Text, 5GB $74.99
option 1 - $130.90 / option 
2 - $327.99 / option 3 -
$518.100
0
Smartphone Bundle, 300 Minutes, no Text, 2GB $44.99
option 1 - $130.90 / option 
2 - $327.99 / option 3 -
$518.101
2928
2GB Smartphone Data SOC $25.00
option 1 - $130.90 / option 
2 - $327.99 / option 3 -
$518.102
5
5GB Smartphone Data SOC $35.00
option 1 - $130.90 / option 
2 - $327.99 / option 3 -
$518.103
35
2. PR Wireless (Puerto Rico)  
44. Overview and Description of Offerings.  PR Wireless, in partnership with Connected Nation, 
operated a pilot project that offered service at a discounted rate.  PR Wireless offered eligible consumers a 
flat subsidy of $25 off two different wireless broadband plans, each with the same end-user charge and 
usage limits, but with access to different equipment (hotspot modem (mi-fi) and smartphone) that the 
subscriber paid for at a discount.  PR Wireless referred to this as the treatment group.  All plans sold to 
customers included up to 5 GB of monthly data.
63
PR Wireless also reports a small number of 
subscribers in a control group, though it is unclear where this offering was made.  PR Wireless’s final 
report says nothing of control or treatment groups it had originally proposed.  For this reason, and based 
on PR Wireless’s description of its pilot activities, it appears this was a non-experimental design.
Table 14a: Puerto Rico Wireless Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
Control Group - Current Lifeline Subscribers $0.00 $113.00 No 7
Treatment Group - Current Lifeline Subscribers $25.00 $113.00 Yes 2468
45. Implementation and Results.  During the pilot, PR Wireless had an average of 2,002 
subscribers, 75 percent of which subscribed to the smartphone plan consisting of voice and data services, 
and 25 percent subscribed to its MiFi hotspot plan.
64
  Table 14b sets forth enrollment by plans offered in 
the pilot.
                                                     
63
See PR Wireless Application to Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot Program, WC Docket 11-42 
(filed July 2, 2012) (PR Wireless Application); see also Supplement to PR Wireless Application, WC Docket 11-42 
(filed August 3, 2012); Second Supplement to PR Wireless Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 25, 
2012); see also PR Wireless Final Report.
64
See PR Wireless Final Report.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
22
Table 14b: PR Wireless Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
cost
Subscribers
USB Modem Plan $45.00 $163.00 18
HotSpot Plan $45.00 $168.00 293
Tablet Plan $45.00 $401.00 0
Laptop Bundle $45.00 $401.00 0
Smartphone 4G LTE $60.00 $196.00 2164
3. Puerto Rico Telephone Company (PRT) (Puerto Rico)  
46. Overview and Description of Offerings.  This project examined consumers’ choice of wireline 
or wireless broadband, speeds for wireline broadband, and usage limits for wireless broadband.  PRT 
offered subscribers the option to choose among four different project offerings with differing end-user 
prices.  One option gave consumers the choice of wireline broadband bundled with wireline voice service 
at speeds of either 2 Mbps download, 1 Mbps upload or 4 Mbps download, 1 Mbps upload.  PRT offered 
consumers a $5 subsidy off the wireline broadband plans.  The other three offerings gave consumers the 
option of purchasing a wireless broadband plan with different usage limits of either 2 GB or 3 GB, which 
were either stand-alone broadband or bundled with wireline voice service.  PRT also offered consumers 
the option of a $5 subsidy off the bundled wireless plan, or $18.50 off the stand-alone broadband plans.
65
Table 15a shows the subsidy provided and the number of subscribers.
Table 15a: Puerto Rico Telephone Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
No Treatment Variation
$5.00 (fixed)/$5 if 
bundled or $18.50 
if standalone 
(wireless)
$0.00 Yes 354
47. Implementation and Results.  For marketing and outreach, PRT utilized a broad range of 
mediums, including television, newspaper advertisements, advertisements within retail stores, bill inserts 
to existing subscribers who do not subscribe to Internet service, and SMS.  
48. The PRT pilot project provided the only opportunity of all the projects to observe consumers’ 
direct choice between fixed and mobile connections.  Table 15b shows the percentage of new adopters 
choosing each mode of service from PRT.  Since pilot households did not have broadband prior to 
enrolling in the pilot, this comparison suggests many newly adopting households value a fixed connection 
(in this case DSL) over a mobile connection.  Over 70 percent of households in the PRT pilot project paid 
at least $37.49 per month for a DSL connection and voice instead of choosing 2G or 3G mobile options 
(without voice) at lower end-user charges.
                                                     
65
See Puerto Rico Telephone Company, Inc. Application to Participate in the Broadband Adoption Lifeline Pilot 
Program, WC Docket 11-42 (filed July 2, 2012) (PRT Application); see also Supplement to PRT Application, WC 
Docket 11-42 (filed August 16, 2012); Second Supplement to PRT Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed August 30, 
2012).
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
23
Table 15b: Puerto Rico Telephone Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
cost
Subscribers
DSL w/Voice, Tablet (WiFi), 2Mb/1Mb $42.49 $180.00 170
DSL w/Voice, Tablet (WiFi), 4Mb/1Mb $49.50 $180.00 95
Mobile Broadband w/voice, Tablet (SIM), 2GB Data 
Limit
$34.99 $200.00 0
Mobile Broadband w/voice, Tablet (SIM), 3GB Data 
Limit
$42.00 $200.00 0
Mobile BB,  Tablet (SIM) - Postpaid, 2G Data Limit $31.24 $150.00 70
Mobile BB,  Tablet (SIM) - Postpaid, 3G Data Limit $41.24 $150.00 9
Mobile BB,  Tablet (SIM) - Prepaid, 2G Data Limit $24.99 $150.00 9
Mobile BB, Tablet (SIM) - Prepaid, 3GB Data Limit $34.99 $150.00 1
E. Fixed - Non-Experimental
1. National Telecommunications Cooperative Association (NTCA) (IA, NM)
49. Overview and Description of Offerings.  The NTCA Pilot Project studied customer choices in 
adopting broadband, in some cases when providing a decreasing subsidy amount.  The NTCA project
included Alpine Communications (IA) and Leaco Rural Telephone (NM), in partnership with Connected 
Nation.
66
The pilot offered a range of wireline broadband plans in one state with a flat subsidy amount of 
$25 per month for all 12 months.  In the other state, the pilot offered a range of wireline broadband plans 
with a sliding scale subsidy that was initially $40 per month for the first quarter and was reduced each 
quarter thereafter in increments of $10 (leaving a subsidy of $10 per month for the final quarter).  In each 
case, customers were able to choose from several speed plans, subject to what technologies the provider 
had available at the customer’s location.
67
  Table 16a describes each treatment.
Table 16a: NTCA Treatments
Treatment Description
Monthly Subsidy 
Amount
Equipment 
Discount
Digital Literacy 
Offered
Total 
Subscribers
Flat Discount $25.00 $49.99 Yes 47
Sliding Discount $40/$30/$20/$10 $49.95 Yes 2
50. Implementation and Results. Each of the ETCs within the NTCA pilot project utilized a 
number of different strategies and venues for publicizing the pilot program within their service territories.  
These included: direct mailings, flyers delivered to sites such as libraries, banks, elderly meal provider 
sites, letters sent to existing Lifeline subscribers, school districts, etc.
68
  The results are detailed in Table 
16b.  Since availability of technology varies within each provider’s region, customers’ choices of service 
were sometimes restricted.
                                                     
66
While ostensibly the NTCA project compared two different subsidy schemes in two different areas, it would be 
difficult to classify this pilot as quasi-experimental given the vastly different geographic areas involved.
67
See Amendment to Application of Rural Carriers, WC Docket 11-42 (filed August 21, 2012) (NTCA 
Application); see also Supplement to NTCA Application, WC Docket 11-42 (filed September 24, 2012).  While 
ostensibly the NTCA project compared two different subsidy schemes in two different areas, it would be difficult to 
classify this pilot as quasi-experimental given the vastly different geographic areas involved, thus it is best treated as 
non-experimental.  
68
NTCA Application at 17.
Federal Communications Commission DA 15-624
24
V. CONCLUSION
51. The Commission, in launching the Pilot Program, recognized that the major barriers to 
adoption—cost, relevance and digital literacy—are intertwined.  There is widespread consensus that an 
individual’s willingness to pay for broadband is directly related to the perceived relevance of the 
broadband and how “digitally literate” the individual is in using the service.  In selecting the pilot
projects, Commission staff struck a balance between allowing ETCs enough flexibility in the design of 
the pilots and ensuring the structure of each project would result in data that would be statistically and 
economically relevant.  Moreover, given the condition that participation was limited to consumers that 
had not subscribed to broadband within the last 60 days, Commission staff also recognized that there was 
a substantial risk of depressed enrollment in each of the projects relative to the initial ETC projections.  
As a result of this limitation, ETCs had to market the limited-time project offerings to consumers that 
either could not afford broadband service or, until that time, did not understand the relevance of 
broadband.  
52.  As shown from the data summarized above, the Low-Income Broadband Pilots provide an 
important perspective on how various policy tools can impact broadband adoption by low-income 
consumers.  The Bureau anticipates this report and the underlying data will prove valuable to both the 
Commission and outside parties. 
Table 16b: NTCA Plans
Plan Description Unsubsidized Monthly 
Cost
Unsubsidized Equipment 
cost
Subscribers
Alpine: 3Mb/512Kb; DSL; Bundled $39.95 $49.95 2
Alpine: 3Mb/512Kb; DSL; Standalone $54.95 $49.95 0
Alpine: 6Mb/512Kb; DSL; Bundled $49.95 $49.95 0
Alpine: 6Mb/512Kb; DSL; Standalone $64.95 $49.95 0
Alpine: 6Mb/500Kb; FTTH; Bundled $39.95 $0.00 0
Alpine: 6Mb/500Kb; FTTH; Standalone $54.95 $0.00 0
Alpine: 12Mb/1MB; FTTH; Bundled $49.95 $0.00 0
Alpine: 12Mb/1MB; FTTH; Standalone $64.95 $0.00 0
Leaco: 768KBS/512KB; DSL $28.99 $49.99 14
Leaco: 1.5MB/768KB; DSL $39.99 $49.99 8
Leaco: 3MB/1MB; DSL $49.99 $49.99 18
Leaco: 5MB/1MB; DSL $59.99 $49.99 3
Leaco: 1.5MB/768KB; FTTH $29.99 $49.99 1
Leaco: 3MB/1MB; FTTH $49.99 $49.99 0
Leaco: 5MB/1.5MB; FTTH $59.99 $49.99 2
Leaco: 12MB/3MB; FTTH $119.99 $49.99 0
Leaco: 16MB/5MB; FTTH $129.99 $49.99 0
Leaco: 1.5 MB/256Kb; 3G Aircard $39.99 $129.99 0
Leaco: 768Kb/512Kb; Unlicensed Wireless $29.99 $49.99 1
Leaco: 1.5MB/768KB; Unlicensed Wireless $39.99 $49.99 0
Leaco: 3.0MB/1MB; Unlicensed Wireless $49.99 $49.99 0