itpp-infrastructure/projects/forefront-broadband-map.md

Forefront Broadband Map — ZIP 75154 Broadband Availability

Status: Future Project | Saved: 2026-07-21

Concept

Build an interactive, searchable broadband availability map for Forefront Wireless focused on ZIP code 75154 / Red Oak, Texas.

The app should let a user enter an address and see exactly which qualifying internet services are offered there. Qualifying means broadband plans over 300 Mbps only.

Temporary hosting, if needed: Ops — likely ops.itpropartner.com/forefront-broadband-map/ or similar internal path.

Providers to include

• AT&T
• Spectrum
• Rise Broadband
• Brightspeed
• Frontier

Forefront Wireless should also be added as a target/reference layer if service-area GIS, tower/AP sector data, or customer install data can be obtained.

Required user experience

1. Open an interactive map of ZIP 75154.
2. Search by street address.
3. See which providers offer 300+ Mbps service at that address.
4. View provider details: speed, technology, source, confidence, freshness date, and ordering/contact URL if available.
5. Toggle/filter providers on the map.
6. Distinguish authoritative address-level results from broad coverage polygons or third-party/inferred data.

Candidate data sources

Source	Purpose	Quality
FCC National Broadband Map	Address-level broadband availability lookup and government baseline	High
FCC Broadband Data Collection datasets	Bulk GIS/provider coverage and reproducible imports	High
Provider websites: AT&T, Spectrum, Rise, Brightspeed, Frontier	Address-specific qualification	Highest if accessible and allowed
Provider coverage pages/maps	Footprint validation	Medium
OpenStreetMap / Nominatim	Geocoding, base map, address fallback	Medium for geocoding only
City/county GIS	ZIP boundary, parcels, address normalization	High if available
Third-party comparison sites	Context only	Low

Source confidence policy

• High confidence: official provider address qualification or address-level FCC/BDC record.
• Medium confidence: provider coverage maps/pages or GIS polygons.
• Low confidence: affiliate/comparison/directory sites. Use only for context.

Address-level availability must not be treated as certain unless the source actually supports address-level qualification.

Proposed architecture

User browser
  -> Ops-hosted web app
      -> address search / autocomplete
      -> interactive provider layers
      -> result panel
  -> Backend API
      -> geocode address
      -> resolve to FCC BSL / parcel / coordinate
      -> query normalized availability store
  -> Data store
      -> ZIP 75154 GIS boundary
      -> FCC/BDC availability records
      -> provider lookup cache
      -> source metadata and confidence

MVP roadmap

1. Validate FCC/BDC data access for ZIP 75154.
2. Pull ZIP boundary and base GIS layer.
3. Filter FCC/BDC data to the five requested providers and speeds over 300 Mbps.
4. Build address search and map prototype.
5. Add provider/source/confidence result cards.
6. Deploy temporary internal prototype under Ops.
7. Validate against provider websites using known Red Oak addresses.
8. Add refresh workflow and reporting/export if useful.

Questions for Germaine

1. Is this for internal competitive planning, Forefront sales, customer-facing public use, or all three?
2. Should Forefront Wireless be included as a visible layer alongside competitors?
3. Residential only, or residential and business service?
4. Do you have Forefront service-area GIS, tower coordinates, AP sectors, customer locations, or install database exports?
5. Do we have permission/API credentials for any provider qualification tools, or are we limited to public webpages?
6. Should FCC data be the baseline with provider websites used for validation, or should provider websites be treated as source of truth?
7. Should address search be strictly limited to 75154, or allow nearby addresses and warn when outside scope?
8. What output fields matter: provider, download/upload, technology, price, install fee, contract, order URL, phone number?
9. Should lower-speed providers be hidden entirely or shown as excluded/grayed out?
10. Should the Ops-hosted prototype be password-protected/internal only?