Call: 1-877-697-2926

Why Fiber Still Dominates Most BEAD Locations in 2025

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program, created under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, channels $42.45 billion into expanding high-speed internet access across the United States. It targets unserved and underserved areas, with the aim of closing the digital divide by funding reliable, scalable broadband infrastructure.

Broadband access has become non-negotiable in daily life—powering education, remote work, telemedicine, economic development, and civic connection. Without it, communities fall behind. Recognizing this, BEAD funding is steering the nation's broadband future. And in most locations, the direction is clear: toward fiber-optic technology.

Throughout BEAD-funded deployments, fiber continues to be the primary choice. This article breaks down why. You'll discover how funding guidelines favor fiber, what makes the technology technically superior, what obstacles complicate rollout in certain geographies, and how the government's preference for fiber could shape broadband policy and access for decades to come.

Decoding the BEAD Program: Foundations of America's Broadband Strategy

Background of the BEAD Program

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program operates as the centerpiece of the federal government's strategy to bridge long-standing gaps in high-speed internet access. Authorized in 2021, BEAD represents the single largest broadband investment in U.S. history, targeting both infrastructure expansion and equitable access initiatives.

Origin from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)

BEAD emerged directly from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Signed into law in November 2021, the IIJA allocated $65 billion to broadband development. Out of this total, $42.45 billion was assigned specifically to the BEAD Program.

This funding package aims to stimulate large-scale infrastructure builds across all 50 states, territories, and the District of Columbia, with a clear emphasis on long-term, high-impact technologies. The program provides capital for deployment, planning, mapping, technical assistance, and workforce development—all under one mandate: eliminate internet disparities.

Oversight by NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration)

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) leads the BEAD Program’s administration. As part of the U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIA ensures that funds reach eligible recipients—primarily state governments—and guides them through the five-stage process: planning funds distribution, initial proposal, challenge process, final proposal, and implementation.

Through its oversight, NTIA maintains alignment between federal priorities and state-level execution strategies. It also sets technical requirements and strongly encourages scalable, future-ready infrastructure, resulting in a technology preference that has defined BEAD’s rollout trajectory.

Key Goals: Access, Inclusion, and Infrastructure

BEAD’s objectives are direct and measurable:

NTIA’s guidance explicitly ranks project applications based on their technological robustness. Projects proposing fiber-based deployments score highest, aligning with the federal view that fiber provides the most future-proof infrastructure. This preference has shaped state-level strategies and is directly influencing construction decisions in nearly every BEAD-funded area.

Fiber’s Dominance: A Nationwide Trend in BEAD Projects

Technology Options Eligible for BEAD Funding

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program supports a range of last-mile connectivity technologies. Eligible network types include fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP), hybrid fiber-coaxial (DOCSIS), fixed wireless access, and low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite systems. However, not all technologies are treated equally in scoring frameworks or long-term network viability assessments.

Among proposed projects, fiber remains the most prominently favored. While BEAD does not mandate fiber, its emphasis on scalable infrastructure naturally elevates fiber-based proposals over others that face capacity or latency constraints.

Fiber vs. Fixed Wireless, Satellite, and DOCSIS

Nationwide Data: Fiber Tops BEAD Applications

Fiber clearly leads among proposed BEAD projects nationwide. According to a January 2024 analysis by the NTIA and the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, over 75% of state-drafted Initial Proposals under BEAD identify fiber as the preferred deployment technology. In many cases, it constitutes over 90% of planned project miles.

The data correlates with scoring guidance: networks must meet 100/20 Mbps baseline speeds, but BEAD rewards future-proof infrastructure—typically defined by symmetric speeds of 1 Gbps or greater, which fiber delivers consistently.

State-Level Fiber Commitments in BEAD Plans

More than a dozen states have made explicit fiber-first commitments in their five-year BEAD strategy documents. Consider these examples:

Fiber: The Long-Term Investment with Scalable Benefits

Fiber’s consistent performance isn’t speculative; it reflects decades of field-tested reliability and unparalleled bandwidth headroom. Network operators can upgrade optical line terminals without disturbing buried lines. Communities benefit from decades of returns with limited reinvestment, a key consideration as states target affordability and durability.

Over time, fiber’s unit cost per megabit decreases faster than any other residential broadband medium. By 2026, fiber broadband is projected to deliver cost efficiency within $9 per Mbps annually, compared to $21 for fixed wireless and $33 for LEO satellite, based on analysis from BroadbandNow and CostQuest data modeling.

The economics scale with network growth, and once installed, fiber becomes the platform for future smart city, telemedicine, and digital learning applications—without needing continual overhauls.

Why Fiber Leads: Key Reasons Behind the Preference

Technology

Fiber-optic technology uses pulses of light to transmit data through strands of glass or plastic, enabling significantly higher throughput than copper or wireless alternatives. Unlike coaxial or DSL connections, fiber offers consistent signal strength over long distances without degradation. This makes it structurally superior on a technical level, especially for delivering Gigabit and multi-Gigabit speeds across underserved regions.

Superior Broadband Speed and Reliability

Fiber provides symmetrical speeds—users experience equal download and upload performance. In contrast, cable and fixed wireless often lag in upload capacity. For residents and businesses, this translates into seamless video conferencing, faster cloud syncing, and uninterrupted streaming. Fiber networks also exhibit lower signal interference and greater resilience under peak demand, which reduces buffering and service interruptions.

Low Latency and High Capacity

Internet applications requiring low latency—telemedicine, online gaming, real-time data analytics—perform better on fiber. Measured latencies on well-maintained fiber networks typically remain below 5 milliseconds, whereas satellite and fixed wireless alternatives often exceed 20 ms or more. And with data needs projected to grow from 79.4 zettabytes in 2021 to 181 zettabytes by 2025 (IDC), the vast throughput potential of fiber makes it well-suited to absorb this digital expansion.

Scalability for Future Internet Demands

Network operators can upgrade fiber capacity significantly using existing infrastructure, primarily by changing electronics rather than laying new lines. Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) allows multiple data streams over a single fiber—expanding bandwidth without added physical footprint. This modular scalability positions fiber as a long-term infrastructure solution capable of adapting to 20+ years of evolving internet usage.

Regulatory & Funding Priority

Cost Factors & Total Cost of Ownership

Initial deployment of fiber can cost more per mile than alternatives, particularly in rugged or remote terrains. Still, when operators assess long-term returns, fiber’s economics prevail. Compared to copper, fiber has a projected lifespan of up to 40 years with limited degradation.

Deployment Efficiency in Eligible Locations

Fiber deployment becomes substantially more cost-effective in rural and suburban regions where conduit or pole access is straightforward and roadway trenching is manageable. In these areas, network operators can lay foundational infrastructure that won’t need replacement in the near future.

Deployment Challenges for Fiber in BEAD Projects

Infrastructure Isn’t Always the Biggest Hurdle

Deploying fiber-optic infrastructure under the BEAD program often demands more than trenching cables and lighting up endpoints. While the physical buildout is capital-intensive and logistically complex, other factors routinely eclipse those efforts in terms of difficulty. Rural regions pose unique challenges, where fiber cabinets, splice enclosures, and backhaul links must often be constructed from scratch, extending over dozens or even hundreds of miles.

Terrain and Environmental Constraints

Physical geography significantly slows fiber deployments. Mountains, rocky soil, dense forests, and protected lands present barriers that require exponentially more labor and permitting. For example, projects in Appalachia or the Sierra Nevada often confront long boring distances versus aerial placement, increasing both timeline and cost. In coastal wetlands backed by environmental regulations, construction may halt completely during key seasons due to migratory nesting.

Workforce Shortages and Fiber Supply Chain Stress

Even in locations with cleared rights-of-way, crews remain unavailable. According to the Fiber Broadband Association, the U.S. needs over 205,000 fiber-related jobs filled by 2025 to meet deployment goals. Many BEAD-eligible rural areas lack access to qualified fiber technicians, and training new labor continues to lag behind demand. Meanwhile, demand surges for fiber cabling, enclosures, and optical gear stretch suppliers. Lead times for equipment like fusion splicers, fiber reels, and patch panels have stretched well past 12 weeks since 2023.

Permitting: Complexity Meets Delay

Federal, state, tribal, and local permitting layers lean heavily on already slow deployment timelines. Rights-of-way applications can sit for months awaiting review, especially in areas with overlapping jurisdiction. In some cases, such as tribal lands or near federal corridors, permits require cultural impact studies, further extending lead time. The average permitting delay during 2023 for large-scale fiber infrastructure stretched between 4 to 7 months, halting progress despite funding availability.

High Costs in Sparsely Populated Zones

Cost per location spikes dramatically in areas with low population density. Fiber builds in metropolitan areas average around $1,000 to $1,200 per household passed. In remote locations, that figure can exceed $8,000 per household, depending on terrain and distance from backhaul access points. When combined with limited or seasonal access, such as in Alaskan villages or mountain hamlets, deployment becomes a high-risk financial endeavor, even with BEAD subsidies.

Skilled Fiber Technicians: An Uneven Distribution

While urban centers retain a pool of experienced fiber splicers, testers, and project managers, rural communities—where BEAD funding is most concentrated—see a mismatch between deployment ambition and human capital. Many ISPs report difficulties locating local teams capable of managing GPON/XGS-PON infrastructure, adhering to engineering standards, and ensuring compliance with NTIA requirements. This slows not only deployment but quality assurance processes, compounding the challenge.

Missteps in Mapping and Approval Delays

Fiber deployment eligibility under BEAD hinges on broadband availability maps maintained by the FCC. However, persistent mapping inaccuracies—from overstated coverage to failure in capturing multi-dwelling units—undermine project planning. Locations falsely marked as served receive no BEAD support, even if actual speeds fall well below the federal threshold. Compounding the issue, state broadband offices and the NTIA have slowed approvals due to mapping disputes, complaints, and data challenges. As of Q1 2024, fewer than 15% of states had fully approved BEAD deployment plans.

Fiber still dominates most BEAD locations not because deployment is simple—but because few alternatives match fiber's performance once in place. The real question becomes: how can deployment match intention without eliminating feasibility in the face of these mounting challenges?

When Fiber Isn’t Feasible: Exploring Viable Broadband Alternatives

Broadband Beyond Fiber: An Overview

Although fiber continues to secure the majority of Build America, Buy America (BEAD) allocations, certain geographic and economic conditions call for different approaches. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) recognizes this, which is why the BEAD guidelines consciously allow non-fiber technologies under specific, high-cost scenarios—without reducing expectations for service quality or reliability.

Let’s explore which alternative broadband technologies are in play and where they’re being deployed.

Fixed Wireless Access (FWA)

Fixed wireless serves as a cost-effective solution in terrains where digging and trenching for fiber becomes prohibitively expensive. By transmitting broadband signals from towers to fixed receivers on homes and businesses, FWA bypasses much of the physical infrastructure fiber demands.

Modern FWA networks—especially those leveraging licensed mid-band spectrum like the 3.5 GHz Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS)—can now provide download speeds up to 100 Mbps or more, with latency sometimes as low as 20 milliseconds, suitable for most household and business applications. Companies like Tarana Wireless and Ericsson have introduced new hardware that dramatically extends range and signal resilience, enabling deployments even in forested or hilly regions.

Satellite Broadband Including Starlink

Satellite delivery, spearheaded by low Earth orbit (LEO) providers like Starlink, presents a compelling option in regions without fiber trunk lines or where mountainous or tundra landscapes make physical groundwork impossible. Unlike geostationary satellites, which orbit 35,786 kilometers above Earth and suffer high latency (upward of 600 ms), Starlink’s LEO constellation sits around 550 kilometers up, achieving latencies under 50 milliseconds—roughly in line with terrestrial broadband.

As of Q1 2024, Starlink reports average download speeds in the U.S. of 67.4 Mbps and uploads at 9.8 Mbps, according to Ookla’s Speedtest Intelligence. While that still trails fiber in performance, these speeds satisfy most NTIA definitions for “reliable broadband,” especially in extremely high-cost locations.

Airband Initiatives and Hybrid Fiber-Wireless Models

Programs like Microsoft’s Airband Initiative focus on extending rural broadband through a hybrid of TV White Space (TVWS) technology, fixed wireless, and strategic fiber interconnection points. These networks often use underutilized low-band spectrum originally designated for television broadcasts, which has longer range and better building penetration than higher-frequency networks.

This model works especially well in large but sparsely populated counties, such as in parts of Mississippi, where tower deployment combined with existing fiber backhaul creates scalable footprints without heavily disruptive infrastructure work.

Where Alternatives Enter the BEAD Equation

These alternatives don’t just fill a coverage gap—they help maintain continuity. States and ISPs use them strategically to reach underserved populations faster while long-term, fiber-centered infrastructure investment continues to scale up. Has your region adopted one of these hybrid broadband solutions? Their growing presence tells a broader story within the evolving BEAD landscape.

The Role of ISPs in BEAD and Fiber Deployment

Strategic Alignment with Fiber Prioritization

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have recalibrated deployment strategies to match the fiber-first emphasis of the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program. Since the NTIA explicitly listed fiber as the default technology preference in its Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), ISPs competing for BEAD grants have pivoted heavily toward fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) models.

Large national providers like Frontier, Windstream, AT&T, and Brightspeed have announced multi-gigabit FTTP plans in rural markets—localities they once served with older DSL or copper infrastructure. Smaller ISPs and local telecoms, particularly Tier 2 and Tier 3 operators, are also upgrading last-mile infrastructure to fiber to remain competitive in BEAD funding rounds.

Example BEAD-Funded ISP Fiber Initiatives

Partnering with Local and State Agencies

State broadband offices serve as gatekeepers for BEAD applications, and ISPs have scaled up their collaboration accordingly. In states like Maine, North Carolina, and California, providers have worked directly with broadband offices to map priority zones and tailor applications that align with Five-Year Action Plans and Digital Equity Strategies.

For instance, Consolidated Communications worked with the Maine Connectivity Authority to build a shared cost model that aligned with the state's goal for universal gigabit coverage. Through this partnership-first approach, ISPs are shaping proposals that match not only technical specifications but also community-driven priorities such as affordability, workforce development, and service for anchor institutions.

Private Capital Augmenting BEAD Investments

Many ISPs are not relying solely on public grants. In fact, the BEAD program encourages applicants to demonstrate financial skin in the game. This has spurred new patterns of capital deployment from private equity firms, infrastructure investors, and public-private partnerships.

Take Ziply Fiber as an example. The company has attracted over $500 million in private investment to lay fiber in underserved pockets of the Pacific Northwest—regions where BEAD allocations are expected to play a complementary role rather than being the sole funding source. This co-investment model increases the competitiveness of grant proposals and accelerates fiber construction timelines.

In several states, providers have also joined consortia with electric cooperatives and tribal governments to distribute build-out responsibilities and minimize overlap, creating a modular approach to fiber expansion that aligns with BEAD’s scoring framework.

Key Projects Demonstrating Fiber’s BEAD Dominance

North Carolina: A Fiber-First Strategy with Over 90% BEAD Allocation to Fiber

North Carolina’s broadband expansion strategy under the BEAD program reveals an overwhelming preference for fiber. According to the latest publicly available proposals submitted by the state to NTIA, over 94% of awarded locations are slated for fiber-optic deployment. The North Carolina Department of Information Technology (NCDIT) determined that only fiber could meet the state’s long-term scalability goals aligned with BEAD’s minimum performance requirements—specifically the 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload baseline, with preference toward symmetrical gigabit speeds.

The state's analysis included terrain modeling, population density, long-term operational costs, and open access infrastructure goals. Ultimately, fiber’s capacity for symmetrical gigabit performance, durability, and lower 10-year maintenance cost tilted the scales. Municipalities such as Wilson and counties like Guilford have already launched early deployments using blended BEAD and state funds—targeting underserved census blocks with less than 25/3 Mbps speeds.

Texas: Fiber Wins the Cost-Benefit Battle Over Fixed Wireless

In Texas, the Broadband Development Office conducted a detailed cost-benefit analysis comparing fiber and fixed wireless access (FWA) using BEAD-eligible funds across mixed topology service areas. The study centered on a 14-county region covering nearly 50,000 unserved locations.

Despite higher upfront costs, fiber returned better projected ROI when amortized over 15+ years. The lower rate of service calls, higher customer satisfaction benchmarks, and elimination of upstream bottlenecks made fiber the clearly preferred solution. High-value counties like Williamson and Travis have already signed arrangements with ISPs committed to fiber-first builds.

Appalachian Ohio: Remote Fiber Deployment Leveraging BEAD and USDA Funds

In Appalachian Ohio, a collaborative broadband effort across Meigs, Vinton, and Jackson counties showcased how strategic coordination of BEAD allocations with USDA ReConnect grants enables fiber deployment in deeply rural terrain. More than 4,800 households previously dependent on sub-10 Mbps DSL received access to symmetrical 1 Gbps fiber service through a regional initiative led by a local electric cooperative.

The project used aerial fiber runs mounted on existing rural electric infrastructure, slashing ground trenching costs by over 60%. A combination of $23 million in BEAD funding and $9 million in USDA financing resulted in a cost per premise of $5,300—well within BEAD’s state cost thresholds.

Community feedback reported a 40% increase in successful remote education connections during pilot phases. Moreover, the area saw a 17% increase in local business creation tied directly to improved connectivity. No alternative technology submitted during the proposal phase met the area’s latency and reliability benchmarks without exceeding capital expenditure caps.

Looking Ahead: The Future of Fiber in Broadband Expansion

Fiber still dominates most BEAD locations, and the momentum isn't slowing. As state and federal strategies crystallize, fiber infrastructure continues to be at the center of long-term broadband planning. Several trends are set to reinforce this position even further in the coming years.

Ongoing Support in Government Broadband Funding

Federal programs maintain a strong preference for technologies capable of delivering symmetrical gigabit speeds. The NTIA’s BEAD guidelines rank fiber highest in scoring metrics, and states are following that lead. In many finalized volume one and two submissions, fiber remains the default technology for deployment in unserved and underserved areas. The reason is clear—fiber offers the highest return on investment when measured over a multi-decade lifecycle.

Expect fiber’s prioritization to persist across subsequent broadband grant rounds, including programs like the Capital Projects Fund and potential additions to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Funding authorities continue to match investment with future-proofing goals, which only fiber currently meets at the required scale.

Breakthroughs in Deployment Technology

Innovation in fiber installation methods is reducing costs and timelines. Microtrenching, for instance, has shifted from pilot to production in many municipalities. Contractors can now lay fiber in shallow cuts as narrow as 1 inch wide, drastically lowering restoration costs and avoiding full street closure permits.

Advancements in fusion splicing automation and pre-terminated fiber assemblies are accelerating node activation. Where projects once spanned many months, new methods are shrinking deployments to weeks. As crews cover more ground with fewer interruptions, network reach expands at a pace that previously favored wireless alternatives.

Emerging Models: FTTH vs. Fiber-to-the-Curb

Fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) still garners the most attention, but hybrid models are gaining interest. Fiber-to-the-curb or node (FTTC/FTTN) reduces last-mile costs by leveraging existing copper or coaxial for in-home delivery—particularly attractive to providers modernizing legacy systems without full overbuilds.

Nevertheless, the long-view economics favor FTTH: lower maintenance, easier upgrades, and fewer capacity constraints. Providers already operating FTTC networks are developing phased plans to convert infrastructure fully; BEAD funding is accelerating those timelines across multiple states.

Coordinating Federal and State Fiber Strategies

Alignment between federal guidance and state implementation will determine how far fiber can scale. States setting clear standards for pole attachment, rights-of-way, and environmental permitting are the ones seeing faster execution. States like Maine and North Carolina, for example, have synchronized state broadband offices with utility regulators, reducing bottlenecks in fiber deployment.

Uniform mapping practices and cross-agency coordination also enable more accurate identification of unserved areas—ensuring fiber gets to the right locations and that funding doesn’t fragment across underperforming technologies. When strategy drives policy at every layer of government, fiber networks expand more efficiently and equitably.

The stage is already set. Fiber’s dominance isn’t just a current pattern—it’s shaping the entire architecture of digital infrastructure nationwide.

Why Fiber Keeps Leading the Way in BEAD-Funded Broadband Expansion

Across BEAD-funded broadband projects, fiber consistently holds its lead. The reasons have remained clear and consistent. With unmatched bandwidth capacity, symmetrical upload and download speeds, and low latency, fiber aligns with the BEAD program’s performance benchmarks set by the NTIA. This alignment puts fiber at the center of state-level broadband strategies, especially when the objective is universal, future-proof internet access in unserved and underserved areas.

Funding mechanisms further reinforce this dominance. BEAD guidance prioritizes technology capable of delivering at least 100/20 Mbps, but heavily favors solutions with potential for gigabit speeds — a standard fiber meets without modification. Meanwhile, long-term cost efficiency plays a pivotal role: even with higher upfront capital expenditures, fiber reduces operational costs and maintenance over time. In remote areas, that long-term benefit alters infrastructure ROI calculations decisively in fiber's favor.

As states finalize subgrantee selection and kick off construction phases, expect fiber to remain the default option wherever engineering constraints don’t preclude it. Scalability matters too. A fiber build installed today can meet infrastructure demands for decades, handling exponential growth in household device usage, video streaming, telemedicine, and cloud services.

What’s next? State-level decision makers, local governments, and ISPs are shaping the buildout narrative in real time. BEAD allocations are moving from planning to execution — and that’s when the real competition among technology types gets tested. Will local conditions, terrain, or costs redirect demand toward fixed wireless or satellite in some geographies? Possibly. But fiber, with its technical edge and favorable cost-benefit structure over 20-plus years, maintains its lead in most locations assigned BEAD funding.

Want to see how your state is implementing BEAD and where fiber projects are being prioritized?

The infrastructure era defined by the BEAD program isn’t just about access — it’s about building systems that last. Fiber fits that mandate better than any alternative deployed at scale today.