A Shifting Landscape for Broadband Investment
We’re now in the uncertain middle of the federal broadband infrastructure rollout. The massive new funding authorized by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)—most notably through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program—has been promised, but the timeline for actual distribution remains unclear. Meanwhile, pandemic-era funding from the CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) has largely been awarded and spent.
Despite this uncertainty, public officials and stakeholders in many communities are still actively planning broadband expansion projects. In many cases, these projects will require collaboration between local government, nonprofits, and private internet service providers (ISPs). These types of collaborations—whether they’re formally called public-private partnerships (P3s) or not —are becoming much more common as an approach to delivering high-speed internet to underserved communities where population density makes it impossible for private capital to profitably deliver service.
P3s aren’t new. They’ve been used to build roads, stadiums, water systems, and even broadband networks. But they aren’t a magic bullet. Over the past several decades, I’ve helped communities negotiate and implement dozens of P3s. Some have been exceptional successes, while others fell short or had to be completely restructured.
From this experience, I’ve identified seven key characteristics that show up again and again in the successful ones. Whether you’re building a toll bridge or a fiber network, these principles for success seem to apply.
1. Long-Term Thinking Drives Every Decision
In strong P3s, all partners—public and private—take the long view. The goal isn’t just to complete a project. It’s to create and asset that works over the long term.
For example, imagine a contractor helping build a toll road. If that contractor only cares about staying on time and under budget, the road technically may meet the project specs, but if it hasn’t been properly engineered, it will fail to hold up under long-term wear and tear.
If the contractor thinks like a partner in a long-term enterprise, she’ll raise concerns about traffic forecasts or subpar materials—issues that fall outside her narrow contractual scope but could impact the road’s future.
The same mindset applies to broadband. A community focused on long-term success won’t just choose the cheapest infrastructure option. Instead, partners will ask:
– How much will this network cost to maintain?
– Will it support future technologies and higher speeds?
– Can it be upgraded affordably in the future?
Paying more upfront may be the smarter choice if it means lower operating costs and avoiding costly replacements five years down the road.
2. Good Partners Make All the Difference
Strong public-private partnerships require strong partners. That may sound obvious, but it’s worth unpacking. In my experience, a good partner has three key traits:
– A proven track record
– Financial stability
– A cooperative spirit
For public partners, that means looking for private ISPs or network operators who’ve delivered on similar projects before—and who have the financial strength to weather cost overruns or unexpected delays. For private partners, it means working with governments that have demonstrated an ability to follow through on commitments.
Finding the right partners isn’t easy. Communities facing broadband gaps usually have challenges that have scared off other providers—low density, difficult terrain, limited financial resources (or all of the above). That makes it even more important to vet partner candidates thoroughly. A formal Request for Qualifications (RFQ) or Request for Proposals (RFP) process, backed by strong financial and engineering review, is essential.
One red flag: companies offering unproven technologies. These firms often can’t survive the real-world setbacks that come with deploying new systems. Along with technical specifications, look for partners who are willing to be flexible and work collaboratively over the long term. That mindset is what gets a P3 through tough stretches.
3. Each Partner Has the Backing of Its Constituents
P3s don’t exist in a vacuum. Public officials have to answer to voters, community leaders, and local institutions. Private partners answer to boards, investors, or donors. If any of those constituencies aren’t on board, the P3 is vulnerable.
This is especially true for public entities. Even if a city council or county commission approves a project, backlash from residents can lead to a reversal when new leaders are elected. The most successful P3s are those where the project has broad-based community support—not just temporary political momentum.
That takes work. Before signing any agreements, public partners need to lead public education efforts that clearly explain the project’s goals, risks, and benefits. And that communication can’t stop after the contract is signed. Ongoing transparency and community updates during construction and early operations are essential to maintaining trust.
4. Everyone Brings Realistic Expectations
In successful P3s, no one assumes the partnership will magically solve every problem. Public leaders understand that being in a P3 doesn’t eliminate financial risk. Private partners understand that public-sector decisions take time—and that consensus matters.
When expectations are grounded in reality, it’s easier for both sides to make adjustments and navigate challenges without feeling blindsided or betrayed. It also prevents costly delays or breakdowns due to misunderstanding or unrealistic timelines.
5. Everyone Knows—and Shares—the Big Goals
Strong P3s begin with strong communication. Each partner needs to clearly define their own goals—and understand those of their counterparts.
This isn’t like haggling over a house price – it’s more like a marriage . P3s are long-term relationships. If the parties hide their true motives to gain an edge, that short-term strategy often leads to long-term failure.
Say a private ISP wants to expand into an underserved area to boost market share. Meanwhile, a local government wants to use broadband to deliver public services. Those motives are different—but the shared goal is the same: universal, reliable internet access.
When goals are clearly stated, both parties can negotiate practical solutions—like subsidies for low-income customers, or lower-cost infrastructure options in harder-to-reach areas. But that only works if everyone is transparent from the start.
6. The Partnership Speaks with One Voice
Nothing derails negotiations faster than mixed messages—especially from the public side.
In successful P3s, public entities appoint a clear spokesperson and stick to a unified message. That person handles negotiations and communication, not just internally but with third parties like lenders, regulators, and the media.
Without that coordination, private partners get frustrated, delays multiply, and trust erodes. A single, consistent point of contact is essential.
7. The Best P3s Are Built on Win-Win Thinking
This principle, borrowed from Stephen Covey’s ‘Seven Habits,’ captures the essence of why public-private partnerships exist in the first place.
No one enters a P3 just to help the other side. The goal is mutual benefit—solving a problem that neither party could fix alone.
Successful partnerships create value for both sides:
– Communities get vital infrastructure.
– Private partners get a fair return on investment.
– Risks and rewards are shared based on each partner’s contributions.
Not every P3 works out. Some fail to get off the ground. Others stall midway. But when done with an eye on these seven principles, they can offer a powerful model for turning shared challenges into shared success.