$614K per Unserved Address in DC, $4.3K in Texas: BEAD Allocations Versus the FCC Fabric
NTIA’s $42.45B BEAD program splits each state’s check across a $100M floor, a high-cost unserved pool, and remaining unserved shares on the FCC National Broadband Map. Dividing those allocations by Version 2 fabric unserved counts shows a 140× spread — from District of Columbia floor effects above $600K per location to roughly $4,263 in Texas.
Loading interactive charts…
When NTIA announced $42.45 billion in Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) allocations on June 26, 2023, the headline numbers were state totals: $3.31 billion for Texas, $1.86 billion for California, $1.74 billion for Missouri. Those figures answer “how much money?” They do not, by themselves, answer “how much money per remaining gap location on the FCC’s location fabric?” That second question is what state broadband offices, ISPs, and fiscal watchdogs actually trade when they stress-test whether BEAD can close the digital divide or merely subsidize expensive geographies.
This brief divides each jurisdiction’s disclosed BEAD allocation by unserved Broadband Serviceable Locations (BSLs) on the FCC National Broadband Map Version 2 (May 2023 release) — the map vintage NTIA used for the statutory formula. The result is a ranking of BEAD dollars per unserved location. At the top sits the District of Columbia at roughly $614,000 per unserved BSL; among large states, Texas sits near the bottom at about $4,263 per unserved location despite receiving the largest single allocation. The spread is not a coding error. It is the mechanical output of a three-part formula written into the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
The interactive dashboard above lets you rank jurisdictions, scatter unserved counts against allocation size, decompose the statutory $100 million baseline from variable shares, compare census regions, and inspect the distribution of $/unserved bands.
What BEAD is buying — and what “unserved” means
BEAD is the largest single federal broadband infrastructure program in U.S. history. Congress gave NTIA $42.45 billion to pass through to states, the District of Columbia, and five territories, which then run competitive subgrantee selection processes. Eligible project locations are unserved (no 25/3 Mbps reliable service) and underserved (below 100/20 Mbps) BSLs on the FCC fabric, minus locations with enforceable federal deployment commitments.
For allocation, however, the IIJA tells NTIA to use only unserved counts — plus a separate high-cost unserved component — not underserved locations. That distinction matters: a state can have millions of underserved suburban locations that will eventually be eligible for subgrants but did not drive its initial BEAD check. NTIA’s public materials describe roughly eight million unserved locations nationally on the Version 2 map, against 113 million total fabric locations — on the order of 7% unserved at the snapshot used for allocation.
Underserved locations enter later, when states run challenge processes and publish final eligible lists. GAO’s BEAD implementation work emphasizes that those lists will diverge from the allocation vintage as providers file corrections, states adjudicate challenges, and other federal programs (RDOF, ARPA, ReConnect) remove overlapping locations.
The three-bucket allocation formula
Congress did not allocate BEAD as a flat per-location grant. NTIA’s published methodology describes three components:
| Component | Statutory pool | What it rewards |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | $100M per state, DC, and Puerto Rico; $25M per smaller territory | Presence in the program — every eligible entity gets a floor |
| High-cost unserved | $4.245B (10% of program) | Share of unserved locations in NTIA-defined high-cost areas (80%+ unserved block groups with above-average build costs) |
| Remaining unserved | ~$32.9B | Share of all unserved locations nationally |
The baseline alone consumes about $5.3 billion of the $42.45 billion envelope. That is why small unserved counts produce extreme $/unserved ratios: Delaware, Rhode Island, and North Dakota show six-figure dollars per unserved location not because NTIA overshot rural fiber costs, but because $100 million divided by a few thousand (or fewer) unserved BSLs is arithmetic.
High-cost unserved is the second wrinkle. NTIA published a list of qualifying census block groups — only 702 block groups nationwide met the statutory filters in the methodology file — and directed 10% of BEAD through that lens. States with sparse populations and expensive terrain (think Alaska, Montana, Missouri’s high-cost geographies) can receive variable dollars disproportionate to a simple unserved headcount. Industry analysts noted early that the high-cost definition favors block groups that are almost entirely unserved, which can under-weight states whose unserved locations are scattered in lower-density patterns.
Everything left flows through the remaining unserved pool, proportional to each state’s share of national unserved locations on the map. That is why Texas can lead in total dollars yet look “cheap” on a per-unserved basis: 777,115 disclosed unserved BSLs on the June 2023 map vintage spread the $3.31 billion allocation thin.
Reading the ranking: floor states versus volume states
Our jurisdiction table merges disclosed NTIA allocation dollars with unserved counts. Alabama (191,164 unserved; $1.40 billion allocation) and Texas (777,115 unserved; $3.31 billion) use unserved totals documented in state and industry filings tied to the same map generation. Other states use unserved counts estimated by apportioning the national ~8.35 million unserved total according to each jurisdiction’s variable allocation share, calibrated to those anchors — transparently an modeling step, not a second FCC bulk download.
Even with estimation noise, the rank order is stable:
- Floor-dominated jurisdictionsDC, Delaware, Rhode Island, North Dakota — cluster above $15,000–$600,000 per unserved location because unserved numerators are tiny relative to the $100M (or near-floor) checks.
- Large southern and midwestern statesTexas, California, North Carolina, Georgia — land near $4,000–$5,000 per unserved location because unserved numerators are six figures.
- Western rural statesMontana, Wyoming, Idaho — sit mid-pack ($5,000–$7,000) reflecting moderate unserved counts plus meaningful variable and high-cost shares.
The median among the 50 states and DC in this snapshot is about $5,271 per unserved location — a useful “typical intensity” line when comparing a given state’s plan to the national middle.
Why the FCC fabric denominator matters
BEAD is often discussed as if money follows people. It follows locations — specific latitude/longitude points in CostQuest’s Broadband Serviceable Location Fabric that the FCC treats as the unit of account for provider filings. A miscounted apartment building, a challenged fixed-wireless polygon, or a carrier correction can shift a state’s unserved count by tens of thousands without changing a single household’s lived experience overnight.
NTIA locked allocations to Version 2 of the National Broadband Map after months of challenge activity, but subgrantee eligibility continues to update as new map vintages publish and state challenge processes run. Alabama’s BEAD planning documents, for example, moved from May 2023 counts to later fabric releases when building challenge lists. That means $/unserved at allocation is a fiscal snapshot, not a guarantee of $/location at construction.
Map vintage also explains why two analysts can both claim to use “FCC data” yet produce different unserved totals: licensed versus unlicensed fixed wireless, low-latency thresholds, and treatment of satellite offerings all affect bucket assignment. NTIA’s NOFO defines “reliable broadband” narrowly; debates over technology codes materially moved states like Michigan and Missouri between map releases.
Regional patterns — not a simple rural/urban story
Grouping states into census regions shows Northeast and South averages near $5,000–$6,000 per unserved location, with West and Midwest close behind — the spread within regions is wider than the spread between regional means. Rural character alone does not predict intensity: Mississippi and West Virginia carry large unserved inventories relative to allocation and therefore look more like Texas than like Alaska on $/unserved.
Territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc.) receive $25M–$334M checks with small unserved denominators in public summaries, producing high implied $/unserved if naively divided — but territorial fabric licensing and deployment cost structures differ from the contiguous states. The dashboard defaults to excluding territories for rank charts precisely because the baseline $25M floor dominates.
Implementation reality: GAO and the moving target
GAO’s BEAD implementation reviews highlight delays between allocation, Initial Proposal approval, challenge processes, and subgrantee selection — a multi-year pipeline during which unserved counts fall as other programs build and as the map refreshes. NTIA’s Internet for All timeline envisioned Initial Proposals within 180 days of formal allocation notice; states moved at different speeds, and NTIA approval rolls on a case-by-case basis before entities may draw down the first 20% of funds.
For policymakers, the practical implication of our $/unserved metric is twofold:
- Affordability of universal serviceStates with low $/unserved and large unserved inventories must stretch BEAD across many locations; cost models (fiber preference, extremely high-cost thresholds, match requirements) dominate whether the formula dollars suffice.
- Equity of the formula itselfStates with high $/unserved because of the baseline may finish BEAD builds with substantial balances for adoption and equity programs; states with low $/unserved may face tighter capital accounts even with larger headline allocations.
Neither outcome was hidden in the IIJA text. It was visible the moment analysts divided June 2023 allocations by Version 2 unserved counts.
Caveats and data limits
Allocation dollars are disclosed; many state unserved counts are estimated here except where cited from Alabama and Texas primary filings. A full FCC location-level aggregation was not re-run for this brief; estimates apportion the national unserved total using variable allocation shares calibrated to those anchors.
Underserved locations are excluded from the denominator even though they are BEAD-eligible for projects. A state-heavy in underserved suburban fringe may look better on $/unserved than its true cost-to-100/20 challenge implies.
High-cost unserved locations are proxied in NTIA’s block-group list, not re-counted location-by-location in this analysis.
Post-allocation map updates (December 2023, 2024, and beyond vintages) reduced national unserved totals but did not change NTIA’s announced BEAD splits.
Territories and DC are included in NTIA’s 56-entity allocation table but behave differently in rank views because of baseline floors and small denominators.
What to watch next
Three indicators will stress-test whether this allocation snapshot aged well:
- State challenge-process outcomesfinal unserved lists versus Version 2 denominators used here.
- Subgrantee award per locationobligated dollars divided by locations actually built, which introduces technology choice and match waivers.
- FCC map vintage driftcontinued declines in unserved counts from incremental RDOF/BEAD-adjacent builds before shovel-ready projects start.
BEAD was always a formula-driven program tied to a map snapshot. Measuring dollars per unserved location makes that dependency visible — and shows why Texas and DC can share the same program yet inhabit different fiscal planets.