Lynne Holt’s research while affiliated with University of Florida and other places

Evolving utility business models characterized by different levels and modes of regulation may prompt changes in how credit rating agencies evaluate the creditworthiness of U.S. electric utilities and the importance of regulation for such evaluations.

Lynne Holt is a Policy Analyst with the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida, where she researches and writes papers on a variety of regulatory policy issues. Dr. Holt has over 35 years of experience in public policy formulation and research. Before joining the faculty of the University of Florida in 2001, Dr. Holt worked for almost 18 years in the Kansas Legislative Research Department as a principal analyst, research analyst, and fiscal analyst. She prepared a wide variety of utility-related and economic development reports for the state House of Representatives, Senate, and special legislative task forces. Prior to joining the legislative staff, she served as an energy research analyst at the Kansas Corporation Commission, where she completed written and oral presentations on energy conservation and utility regulation.

Lynne Holt is a Policy Analyst with the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida, where she researches and writes papers on a variety of regulatory policy issues. Dr. Holt has over 30 years of experience in public policy formulation and research. Before joining the faculty of the University of Florida in 2001, Dr. Holt worked for almost 18 years in the Kansas Legislative Research Department as a principal analyst, research analyst, and fiscal analyst. She prepared a wide variety of utility-related and economic development reports for the state House of Representatives, Senate, and special legislative task forces. Prior to joining the legislative staff, she served as an energy research analyst at the Kansas Corporation Commission, where she completed written and oral presentations on energy conservation and utility regulation.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act) established the framework for four federal universal service programs: the High-Cost program, the Low-Income program, the Schools and Libraries (E-rate) program, and the Rural Health Care program. During the past 15 years, these programs have been examined from a number of perspectives in an attempt to measure their efficiency and effectiveness, including the funding mechanisms that support them. The Federal Communications Commission is in the process of restructuring the universal service programs to move support to broadband-based technologies. This is an opportune time to examine what is known about whether these programs have met the universal service objectives of the 1996 Act and have efficiently and effectively used universal service funding. To that end, this article surveys both oversight reports by federal government agencies and academic research literature drawn from a variety of sources to identify areas of concern regarding the mission, implementation, and impact of the federal universal service programs and support mechanisms. The article also includes research findings on how the economic incentives created by the federal universal service programs affect corporate investment and deployment decisions and consumer service and technology adoption decisions.

Dr. Lynne Holt is a Policy Analyst with the Public Utility Research Center (PURC) at the University of Florida, where she researches and writes papers and reports on a variety of regulatory policy issues. Dr. Holt has over 30 years of experience in public policy formulation and research. Before joining the faculty of the University of Florida in 2001, Dr. Holt worked for almost 18 years in the Kansas Legislative Research Department as a principal analyst, research analyst, and fiscal analyst. She prepared a wide variety of utility-related and economic development reports for the state House of Representatives, Senate, and special legislative task forces. Prior to joining the legislative staff, she served as an energy research analyst at the Kansas Corporation Commission, where she completed written and oral presentations on energy conservation and utility regulation.

Over the years, the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued numerous reports criticizing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for its shortcomings in exacting accountability from beneficiaries of federal universal service support. These shortcomings manifested themselves in the FCC’s failure to identify performance goals and define measures of progress toward those goals for three federal universal service programs, High Cost, Lifeline, and Schools and Libraries (E-Rate). Recent FCC orders to adapt these programs to stimulate universal broadband service give the Commission an opportunity to re-evaluate both universal service goals and performance measures, thereby strengthening its accountability tools. Specifically, the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (February 2011) and subsequent order (November 2011) revamping the High Cost Support program identified accountability as one of its overarching principles: accountability should be required “from companies receiving support to ensure that public investments are used wisely to deliver intended results. Government must also be accountable for the administration of USF, including through clear goals and performance metrics for the program.” Likewise, in the FCC’s order reforming the Lifeline program (February 2012), “the reforms adopted *in the order improve administration and accountability.”The overriding question posed in the paper is: what are the most effective means of measuring progress toward the policy goals of the 1996 Act as articulated in these recent FCC orders? The paper would discuss the policy implications of FCC metric selections and provide a perspective of how other countries have developed measures of progress toward ubiquitous communication service availability. The paper would synthesize existing research findings to propose a set of performance measures and a potential research agenda for identifying additional performance measures and assessing their ability to quantify progress toward universal service objectives.Policy objectives are different for each of the universal service programs, so different performance measures will be appropriate. For example, in the FCC’s November 2011 order to adapt high-cost support to broadband technology, the objective is to ensure comparable service in rural and urban areas. The FCC’s metrics to measure progress toward that goal are speed, latency, and capacity. Other measures may be needed to supplement those measurements of network characteristics.In its recent order on Lifeline (January 2012), the FCC identified three policy objectives: (1) ensure the availability of voice service for low-income Americans; (2) ensure the availability of broadband service for low-income Americans; and (3) minimize the contribution burden on consumers and businesses. The FCC proposed using penetration rates to measure progress toward the first two goals. The selection of metrics for measuring progress toward reducing the contribution burden involves both procedural programmatic changes and analysis of expenditures. As with the high-cost program, other qualitative measures may strengthen the assessment of the degree to which the articulated policy goals are being met.Finally, the E-rate program’s objective is expanded access for eligible schools and libraries to telecommunications and broadband services. The FCC’s Sixth Report and Order (September 2010) did not enumerate metrics with which to measure progress toward achieving those objectives. The paper would propose measures that would inform an assessment of the program’s progress toward meeting the objectives of the 1996 Act and subsequent FCC Orders defining the program.BIOGRAPHYDr. Lynne Holt is a Policy Analyst, and Ms. Mary Galligan is a Senior Fellow, the Public Utility Research Center, Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida. Dr. Holt and Ms. Galligan have co-authored the following papers related to the federal universal service fund programs and broadband:2008. “State and Federal Policies to Accelerate Broadband Deployment: a Policy Checklist,” CommLaw Conspectus, 17(1): 141-185.2012. “Is it Time to Recreate the E-rate Program? Federal Communications Law Journal,64(2): 275- 317.2012. “Mapping the Field: Retrospective of the Federal Universal Service Programs,” Telecommunications Policy, forthcoming.In addition, Dr. Holt co-authored with Dr. Mark Jamison the following papers:2009. “Broadband and Contributions to Economic Growth: Lessons from the U.S. Experience.” Telecommunications Policy, 33(10-11): 575-581.2007. “Re-Evaluating FCC Policies Concerning the Lifeline and Link-Up Programs.” Journal on Telecommunications and High Technology Law, 5(2):393-412.

Lynne Holt, Ph.D., is a Policy Analyst for the Public Utility Research Center (PURC) at the University of Florida. For PURC, she has helped organize meetings and has written on energy, telecommunications, and water policy issues. She is also affiliated with the Bureau of Economic and Business Research and the Askew Institute on Politics and Society, the University of Florida. Earlier in her career she served as a legislative policy analyst for the Kansas House and Senate Utilities Committees and the Kansas Taskforce on Retail Wheeling.

The connection between broadband deployment and economic prosperity in the United States has garnered public attention due to stimulus plan funding authorized in February 2009 for broadband planning and deployment initiatives. The importance of innovation for a nation's economic well-being is fairly well understood. Through a literature survey, this article analyzes the connection between information and communications technologies and economic growth, as well as the connection between broadband and economic growth. There appears to be a positive economic impact from expanded broadband deployment and adoption. However, various research challenges including methodological problems and access to sufficiently granular data have prevented the authors from drawing more definitive conclusions from the US broadband experience. Another finding is the time lag for businesses to effectively exploit innovative broadband applications.