Navajo Nation Tribal Consortium
Overview
| Indicator | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total E-Rate subsidies | $1.5M | $1.7M | $1.4M | $3.2M | $2.0M | $26.1M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Average discount rate | 92% | 91% | 91% | 90% | 91% | 92% | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Schools & libraries (in this area) | 3 | 3 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Service providers | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Avg download speed (Mbps) | 100 | 3,668 | 3,542 | 3,693 | 100 | 104 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Avg upload speed (Mbps) | 100 | 3,668 | 3,542 | 3,693 | 100 | 104 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Subsidies by E-Rate service type
| Service type | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Voice | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Telecomm Services | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Internal Connections | — | — | — | $1.9M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Data Transmission and/or Internet Access | $1.5M | $1.7M | $1.4M | $1.3M | $2.0M | $26.1M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Basic Maintenance of Internal Connections | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Managed Internal Broadband Services | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Back of Envelope Estimate of Equal Distribution
| Recipient | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aneth | $23K | $461K | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Oljato | $1.1M | $23K | $23K | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Red Mesa | $23K | $461K | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Recipient demographics
| Recipient | City | Discount Rate | Students | NSLP | Down Mbps | Up Mbps | Urban/Rural |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aneth | Montezuma Creek | 90% | — | — | 100 | 100 | Rural |
| Oljato | Monument Valley | 90% | — | — | 100 | 100 | Rural |
| Red Mesa | Montezuma Creek | 90% | — | — | 100 | 100 | Rural |
Subsidies by service provider (top 10)
| Service provider | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWC Telesolutions, Inc. | $128K | $150K | $150K | $142K | $426K | $17.6M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| NTUA Wireless, LLC | $1.4M | $1.5M | $1.2M | $1.1M | $1.4M | $6.5M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Oso Internet Solutions, LLC | — | $50K | $60K | $29K | $27K | $2.1M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Navajo Technology Services, Incoporated | — | — | — | $1.9M | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Smith Bagley, Inc. | — | — | — | — | $240K | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Overview and provider figures are the entity’s total authorized disbursements (entity-wide, FCC Form 471 FRN Status). Per-recipient figures are a back-of-envelope estimate: each funding request line item’s post-discount cost divided equally among the line’s recipients. FY2010–2015 figures are from USAC legacy data (BEN level). FY2026 omitted (funding year in progress). Note: the last year or two in any disbursement series always looks artificially low (FY2025 invoices are still being paid), which is why figures dip at the end — that’s the real state of USAC’s data, not an error. Source: USAC Open Data, retrieved 2026-06-10.