Community Technology Needs Ascertainment Report Part of An
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Philadelphia Office: 73 Chestnut Road, Suite 203, Paoli, PA 19301 P/610-889-7470 New York Office: 404-408 Main Street, Suite 501, Boonton, NJ 07005 P/973-794-3171 St. Paul Office: 1597 Race Street, St. Paul, MN 55102 P/651-340-5300 www.cbgcommunications.com Community Technology Needs Ascertainment Report Part of An initiative of the Mt. Hood Cable Regulatory Commission Prepared for the MHCRC by: CBG Communications, Inc. Tom Robinson, President & CEO Dick Nielsen, Sr. Engineer In Association with Riley Research Associates & Connie Book, Ph.D., Telecommunications Research Corporation & Carson Hamlin, Media Integration Specialist Prepared: August 21, 2020 MHCRC Community Technology Prepared: August 21, 2020 Needs Ascertainment Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1 STUDY PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 7 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................ 15 Key Question #1: What is the level of communications technology and services in our communities today? .................................................................................................................................................... 15 Key Question #2: What barriers are creating inequities for underserved communities? ..................... 37 Key Question #3: What are our communities’ communication technology future needs and interests (two-ten years)? .................................................................................................................................... 43 Key Question #4: What is the role of local government in meeting the communications technology- related needs of our communities? ....................................................................................................... 51 Key Question #5: What has been the impact within our communities of the existing public benefit requirements of the cable franchise agreement? ................................................................................... 56 Key Question #6: How have our communities’ access to communications technology changed in the past 10 years? ........................................................................................................................................ 63 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Workshop, Focus Groups, and Interview Notes Attachment 1.A – Summary of Community Technology Grantee Reports Review Attachment 1.B – Summary of Institutional Network (I-Net) Review Attachment 2 – Scientifically-valid Community Technology Residential Telephone Survey Report Attachment 2.A – Scientifically-valid Community Technology Residential Telephone Survey Results Attachment 2.B – Scientifically-valid Community Technology Residential Telephone Survey Underserved Community Results Attachment 3 – Qualitative Community Technology Public Online Survey Report Attachment 3.A – Qualitative Community Technology Public Online Survey Results Attachment 3.B – Qualitative Community Technology Public Online Survey Open Codes and Underserved Community Results Attachment 4 – Community Media Producers/Users Online Survey Report Attachment 4.A – Community Media Producers/Users Online Survey Results Attachment 4.B – Community Media Producers Online/Users Survey Open Codes Attachment 5 – Esper House Underserved Communities Engagement Report Attachment 6 – Project Planning Materials Attachment 7 – Data Resources Bibliography Table of Contents i CBG Communications, Inc. MHCRC Community Technology Prepared: August 21, 2020 Needs Ascertainment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Mt. Hood Cable Regulatory Commission (MHCRC or “Commission”), in conjunction with CBG Communications, Inc. (CBG) and its team partners, Riley Research Associates, Dr. Constance Book of Telecommunications Research Corporation and Carson Hamlin, Media Integration Specialist, has conducted an extensive Community Technology, including cable- related, Needs and Interests Ascertainment (“Needs Ascertainment” or “Study”) covering a wide variety of Sectors, Stakeholders and Demographic Populations within the jurisdictions that are members of the MHCRC (Cities of Fairview, Gresham, Portland, Troutdale and Wood Village and Multnomah County, Oregon). A primary focus of the Needs Ascertainment, was on community needs and interests regarding “Communications Technology”, which means the tools, methods, services, and support infrastructure that people and organizations use to communicate. An emphasis was also placed on cable communications-related needs and interests, since the MHCRC is currently engaged in the cable franchise renewal process, which requires an understanding of such needs and interests as part of the overall ascertainment. The MHCRC also recognized the need to understand barriers more deeply for known disparities in technology access and adoption for people of color, people living with disabilities and seniors. MHCRC hired a local consultant, Esper House, to design and implement in-person data collection activities to engage these target populations in the Needs Ascertainment. In this regard, the Needs Ascertainment reflected the MHCRC’s long-standing commitment to digital equity and inclusion. The Sectors and Stakeholders ascertained were broad-based and covered a variety of components of the overall community, such as residential, government, education, non-profits, community media, healthcare, business, and others. A variety of ascertainment methodologies were utilized, including a statistically-valid, scientific residential telephone survey, a qualitative public online survey, a community online media producers/users survey, focused discussions (from small groups to workshop), interviews and review of a wealth of related studies, technology plans, activity reports and other materials and research. At a high level, the MHCRC wanted to gather information that would help answer six key community technology-related questions, as they pertained to the Sectors, Stakeholders, and Demographic Populations in Multnomah County. These questions were: 1) What is the level of communications technology and services in our communities today? 2) What barriers are creating inequalities for underserved communities? 3) What are our communities' communication technology future needs and interests (two-ten years)? 4) What is the role of local government in meeting the communications technology- related needs of our communities? 1 MHCRC Community Technology Prepared: August 21, 2020 Needs Ascertainment 5) What has been the impact within our communities of the existing public benefit requirements of the cable franchise agreement? 6) How have our communities’ access to communications technology changed in the past 10 years? Sixty-six lead research questions were developed and then mapped to the ascertainment methodologies in order to best answer the key questions. Below is a listing of the Findings from the Needs Ascertainment. Key Question #1: What is the level of communications technology and services in our communities today? Finding 1.1: Approximately two in ten Multnomah County residents do not have wireline internet service in the home. Finding 1.2: Residents increasingly access the Internet at places outside the home and increasingly use their own portable devices to do so. Finding 1.3: Stakeholders and Sectors access content and information through multiple platforms and through multiple devices for every aspect of daily life. Finding 1.4: Hyperlocal community media programming is seen by residents as important and is significantly viewed. Finding 1.5: The most trusted sources for local news and neighborhood content vary, but non-commercial and culturally-connected entities appear to garner substantial trust. Finding 1.6: Communities are creating and sharing an increasing amount of local content through multiple platforms. Finding 1.7: The primary factors in the adoption of communications technology are necessity, comprehension, utility, and accessibility. Finding 1.8: The value and benefit of free WiFi outside of the home is high. Finding 1.9: People communicate with local government and civically engage in a variety of ways increasingly supported by communications technology. Finding 1.10: The technology level of the community has a tremendous influence on the local economy. Finding 1.11: Home Broadband Internet availability substantially affects the community’s economic prosperity and opportunity. 2 MHCRC Community Technology Prepared: August 21, 2020 Needs Ascertainment Finding 1.12: The majority of residents and businesses view the Internet as an essential utility. Finding 1.13: Cable companies have made some strides in the last ten years in developing better and more responsive customer service, but still are not well-regarded in this area. Finding 1.14: The ability to contact a cable company by phone to resolve an issue remains important to customers. Finding 1.15: The users of community media facilities, at MetroEast and Open Signal are well satisfied with the centers’ operations and use centers’ resources to produce and distribute diverse content. Finding 1.16: The single biggest driver of network bandwidth growth and higher speeds, as was emerging 10 years ago, is video and graphic communications. Finding 1.17: The current level of communications network infrastructure in Multnomah County communities