Oh, I forgot to mention... there is a mechanism for providers to challenge coverage to get CAF funding because all sorts of providers overestimate coverage--there was a Ars article a few months ago about a Cable provider telling someone they served a area but it turned out to only be one side of a street or something.<p>Map of CAF2 areas: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fcc.gov&#x2F;reports-research&#x2F;maps&#x2F;caf-2-accepted-map" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fcc.gov&#x2F;reports-research&#x2F;maps&#x2F;caf-2-accepted-map</a><p>I&#x27;ve seen some interesting back and forth on grant applications that depend on a area being unserved. The bigger companies have regulatory and GIS staff to say &quot;hey, we totally serve this area. Don&#x27;t fund competitor X&quot; while they smaller companies bring letters from town administrators and residents saying &quot;hey, we tried to buy from company Y but they said they couldn&#x27;t serve us &#x2F; could only could provide 768k DSL because degraded copper plant&quot;.