While too early to fully gauge the impact of the Emergency Connectivity Fund (ECF) on some of the state’s highest-need students, a June 20 brief from the Public Policy Institute of California found that there was an “impressive response from districts serving high-needs students” in securing funds at a time when children needed to be connected more than ever.

“School districts serving high percentages of English learners (ELs), Black and Latino students, and low-income students promptly responded to the funding opportunity that emerged in 2021 as the Emergency Connectivity Fund. They were able to secure higher levels of per-student funding than their counterparts, and they focused on services and equipment dedicated to expanding internet access more than purchasing devices,” the brief states. “Now that ECF is winding down, it is time to look ahead. How will districts fill the gaps left by ECF, and how can California make headway in improving digital literacy for high-needs communities?”

While it may be another year before student outcomes reflect efforts to close the digital divide using ECF money, researchers noted several other federal and state programs that continue to provide funding for improving internet connectivity for students and their families.

For example, the Federal Communications Commission’s Digital Opportunity Fund, Department of the Treasury’s Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund, and the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program together will provide more than $60 billion over the next several years. Meanwhile, California’s Senate Bill 156 emphasizes connecting historically high-needs communities throughout the state, researchers wrote.

“These ongoing programs could learn from ECF’s outreach efforts, which successfully garnered the interest of school districts that could benefit the most. In contrast to other federal programs whose low take-up rates have left resources unused, ECF applicants eventually exhausted the fund,” according to the brief. “In retrospect, however, ECF’s process of approving and disbursing the funds could have been considerably streamlined. Its application and approval process followed the E-Rate program model, which has been criticized for being overly cumbersome.”

In addition to findings that more districts with higher shares of ELs, low-income youth and Black and Latino students applied for, secured and made use of ECF funding than those without, other key findings show that districts serving vulnerable student populations estimate that between 9 and 15 percent of their students’ connectivity and device needs would go unmet, even after the ECF funding and the districts’ own efforts.

Regardless of the makeup of their student population, districts applied in much greater numbers for assistance with internet connectivity than for funding to purchase connected devices, suggesting a widespread need likely remains.

“It is laudable that the Emergency Connectivity Fund was able to provide resources to school districts, counties, library systems, and regional consortia to help their constituents gain access to the internet. But the digital divide has plagued California — and the nation — at least since personal computing began to be affordable at the household level,” the brief concludes. “With a wealth of federal and state resources dedicated to increasing access to what is now an essential element of daily life for students and their families, the focus now properly belongs on targeting them towards the people who need them the most.”