Approved by Congress in 1996, overseen by the Federal Communications Commission and administered by the nonprofit Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), E-rate remained largely unchanged during its first 15 years, according to Sales Director Tom Halberda of Connection, a technology and services provider for K-12 schools. In 2014, however, the FCC formally modernized E-rate, introducing new eligibility rules and structuring the program around five-year funding cycles. 2026 marks the first year of a new cycle, Halberda said.
The main challenge of the program, according to Dave LeNard, E-rate manager at the IT services company CDW, is that it can be difficult to navigate, and many districts make mistakes that jeopardize their opportunity to receive this federal tech funding.
“E-rate is the largest source of technology dollars for schools in the country,” LeNard said. “USAC and the FCC have a responsibility also to protect federal dollars, and so they’ve made kind of a confusing, complicated program. But it’s a great program."
Both LeNard and Halberda emphasized, though, that the program can be complex to navigate, particularly for districts unfamiliar with its requirements. At FETC, they outlined the application process, highlighted changes taking effect in 2026 and shared guidance on how districts can better position themselves to secure and retain funding.
UNDERSTANDING THE E-RATE APPLICATION PROCESS
Halberda said the competitive bidding process must be completed before a service provider is selected.
“E-rate’s all about a fair and competitive bidding process,” he said. “That’s the cornerstone of the program, and everybody needs to adhere to that, both on the applicant’s side as well as the service provider’s side. It’s critical.”
Applicants must then sign a contract with the selected provider before submitting a Form 471, which formally requests E-rate funding. Failure to do so, Halberda cautioned, is one of the most common reasons districts are denied.
“The reason most districts are denied is lack of contracts,” Halberda said. “But it’s mandatory that a contract be in place before the applicant files their 471. When a 471 comes in and does not have a contract, it’s automatically denied.”
Halberda noted that contracts do not need to be lengthy or complex legal documents.
“When I used to hear the term ‘contract,’ I’m envisioning a multipage document. It doesn’t need to be that," he said. "Have the customer be the applicant, the provider signs a quote, and voilà, that’s a contract.”
The E-rate application window for the 2026 funding year opens Jan. 21, 2026, and closes April 1, 2026, according to filing dates published by USAC. Once the window closes and applications are approved, districts may begin receiving services, with reimbursement handled through the invoicing process, speakers explained.
2026 CHANGES TO E-RATE
Both Halberda and LeNard distinguished between E-rate's two eligible funding categories, which shape how districts allocate their requests. Category 1 supports connectivity for schools and libraries, including Internet access and telecommunications services, while Category 2 covers internal connections, such as cabling, routers, switches, wireless access points and basic maintenance.
Speakers also noted that Category 1 funding is more commonly used by districts because it covers Internet access itself, while Category 2 funding is subject to five-year budget cycles and requires more strategic planning. They also said districts should closely review 2026 eligibility updates and budget changes to the E-rate program as the new funding cycle begins.
Eligible network infrastructure — including switches, routers, cabling and racks — remains unchanged, Halberda said, but there are updates affecting transportation connectivity, cybersecurity and internal connections that could influence district funding strategies.
According to the speakers, Wi-Fi on school buses was removed from eligibility under Category 1, reinforcing limits on where E-rate funding can be applied, since the program was designed to support educational connectivity within physical school and library buildings.
Cybersecurity remains outside the core eligible services list, but speakers pointed to a $200 million FCC cybersecurity pilot announced last year, with the first funding commitments recently issued. The pilot is expected to run for three years, though both Halberda and LeNard cautioned that participation does not signal a permanent expansion of E-rate eligibility.
Some of the biggest changes in 2026 affect Category 2 funding, the speakers noted, especially regarding how districts are reimbursed for basic maintenance of internal connections. Under the updated rules, multiyear licenses and software that were previously reimbursed only for the first year can now be repaid for the remaining years, as long as those costs are filed correctly.
Lastly, speakers stated that districts now have more flexibility when seeking reimbursement for software, licenses and related support services tied to their internal networks. Activities such as installation, setup, monitoring, maintenance and on-site training may all qualify for E-rate funding, provided they directly support internal broadband connectivity and are clearly documented during the competitive bidding process.
EXTRA GUIDANCE, ACCORDING TO EXPERTS
Halberda and LeNard emphasized that E-rate should be treated as a long-term planning tool rather than a one-time funding opportunity.
“Plan ahead,” LeNard said. “What are your five-, 10- and 15-year tech needs? Does the underlying infrastructure need to be updated? Do you have unused funds from the second budget cycle? Use these dollars now.”
Enrollment trends also play a role, LeNard said. Districts with decreasing enrollment may want to lock in Category 2 budgets early, while those with increasing enrollment may benefit from delaying purchases and manually updating enrollment figures so funding adjusts accordingly.
The speakers — both of whom have either served as or worked with E-rate consultants — encouraged districts that have questions to seek support from a reputable consultant who is deeply familiar with the E-rate application process.
But while consultants can help manage deadlines and compliance, Halberda cautioned that district leadership remains ultimately responsible.
“Just because you have an E-rate consultant doesn’t take you off the hook,” Halberda said. “Ultimately, the officer of that district has to sign that 471 to certify it, by penalty of perjury.”
LeNard encouraged districts to rely on official resources and peer networks.
“Step one for navigating E-rate is going to USAC’s website," he said. "Talk to your neighboring schools. How are they doing E-rate? What are they doing? What are good things they found, bad things they found doing it? Do they have a consultant that they like? Do they have a consultant that they work with that they don’t like? Because there are so many opportunities out there, but you’ve got to learn about the program.”
Finally, both speakers underscored the importance of documentation as a safeguard against audits and staff turnover.
“Document, document, document,” LeNard said. “It helps you remember what you did, helps whoever replaces you, and saves the school money.”
