U.S. ELECTION 

ASSISTANCE 

COMMISSION 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AGENCY FINANCIAL 

REPORT 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

November 15, 2011
Election Assistance Commission 

 

ABOUT THIS REPORT

For FY 2011 reporting purposes, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) has 

again elected to submit an Agency Financial Report, with an Annual Performance 

Report and Citizens’ Report along with the Congressional Budget Justification. The 

reports are targeted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Public, and 

Congress, respectively. The AFR allows EAC to focus on and lay out its financial 

position at this time, while providing summary performance data. A Citizen’s Report 

and a combined Annual Performance Report/Congressional Budget Justification will 

follow on February 15, 2012 per guidance in OMB Circular A-136 Financial Reporting 

Requirements. 

Information about EAC’s programs is available at www.eac.gov. 
Election Assistance Commission 

 November 15, 2011 

 

 

MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

We are pleased to present the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) FY 2011 

Annual Financial Report. The report describes EAC’s financial results over the past 

year as it pursued its mission to assist the effective administration of Federal elections. 

The report highlights efforts to strengthen internal controls and financial management 

activities. This is the fourth year EAC has undergone a financial statement audit per the 

Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002, and the third year EAC is participating in the 

pilot performance reporting project as described in OMB Circular A-136 on Financial 

Reporting Requirements in place of the Performance and Accountability Report. EAC 

presents summarized performance data in this report, and will provide detailed data in 

February in conjunction with the FY 2013 Congressional Justification. 

During FY 2011, to address issues in the FY 2010 financial statement audit, EAC 

finalized policies and procedures in the areas of general administration, travel, and 

information technology. In FY 2012, EAC plans on finalizing human capital and 

records management handbooks. Further, once a quorum of the Commissioners is 

present, EAC will examine remaining policies and procedures related to clearinghouse 

and communications and public comments regarding the National Mail Voter Registration 

Form. 

During FY 2011, EAC made a great deal of progress in achieving the program area 

goals described in its Strategic Plan, which is based on the mandates of the Help 

America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002: 

Communications & Clearinghouse

In Fiscal Year 2011, EAC focused efforts on providing information and best practices to 

election officials and voters in preparation for the 2012 federal election cycle with the 

goal of building a community of knowledge and expertise that would save election 

officials time and money: 

 Established The Election Official Exchange to help local election officials 

connect and leverage their collective knowledge by sharing best practices and 

information; 

 Revamped the eac.gov search tool based on usability studies and user feedback; 

 Added Events finder to the website for a more comprehensive presentation of all 

EAC public events; 
Election Assistance Commission 

 Made On-Demand webcasts of public meetings and roundtables available within 

24 hours; 

 Provided Customized program updates so the public can customize the kind of 

information and the frequency that it is delivered via EAC’s newsletter and 

automatic program updates; 

 Initiated The EAC Blog to provide periodic election updates and highlight 

program activities; @EACgov on Twitter to rapidly deliver information and 

updates about the voting system certification program, communicate with 

election officials, and build a community of expertise; #BReady2012, the Twitter 

hashtag where election officials and the public can gather and discuss 

preparation for the next Federal election;

 Delivered communications presentations to election officials and the public, 

including the Electronic Verification Network, the Ohio Association of Election 

Officials and the National Conference of State Legislatures; and

 Offered a series of public roundtable discussions with election officials and 

subject experts in preparation for 2012 federal election cycle, webcast live and 

featuring a live Twitterfall on Design Counts in Elections, and Voting Goes 

Viral: Using New Media to Manage an Election and Communicate with Voters. 

Questions and comments were taken from the public throughout the webcasts. 

Grants Management

In FY 2011, EAC: 

 Paid $30,032,324 from the FY 2008 appropriation, $38,299,071 from the FY 

2009 appropriation and $26,888,473 from the FY 2010 appropriation to the 

States for Section 251 Requirements Payments which are used for meeting Title 

III voting system and other requirements, and to improve the administration of 

Federal elections; 

 Reported to Congress on how the States have spent HAVA funds; 

 Coordinated a series of teleconferences for the College Poll Worker and Mock 

Election Programs focused on Teacher and School Administration Involvement, 

Sustainability Post Grant and Outreach Efforts for Community Involvement;

 Awarded two grants totaling $7 million for the Accessible Voting Technology 

Initiative to support research and development activities to increase the 

accessibility of new, existing, and emerging technological solutions; and 

 Awarded $1,463,074 to 12 grantees for the Voting System Pre-Election Logic 

and Accuracy (L&A) Testing and Post-Election Audit Initiative for development, 

documentation and best practices in L&A and post-election audits. 

Research, Policy and Programs

Work completed in FY 2011 includes: 

 

 Administered the 2010 Election Administration and Voting Survey to 50 States, 

the District of Columbia, and four territories; 
Election Assistance Commission 

 Reported to Congress on the findings of the 2009-2010 Impact of the National 

Voter Registration Act of 1993 (released in June 2011); 

 The 2010 Statutory Overview report, which is a recitation of States’ election 

laws and procedures (released in May 2011); 

 Drafted the initial Recounts and Contests study; 

 Selected a contractor to collect and analyze data for the Election Administration 

in Urban and Rural Settings study; 

 Completed the final public hearing on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM) to revise the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) 

regulations and collected input from 34 public commenters; 

 Received and processed State requests for modifications to the state-specific 

instructions on the National Mail Voter Registration Form; 

 Revised A Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections in anticipation of the 2012 election 

and translated it into nine languages: Chinese, Cherokee, Dakota, Japanese, 

Korean, Spanish, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Yu’Pik; 

 Developed a searchable online version of the Glossaries of Election Terminology 

at www.eac.gov/glossary/default.aspx; and 

 Solicited feedback from EAC College Poll Worker and Mock Election grantees 

via teleconferences for updating the Guidebook for Recruiting College Poll 

Workers. 

Research and development work begun during FY 2011 continues on: 

 Voluntary guidance for provisional voting in FY 2011; 

 The HAVA-mandated study on Use of Social Security Numbers for the Purpose 

of Voter Registration; and 

 The 2010 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act Report. 

Voting Systems Testing and Certification

In FY 2011, EAC: 

 Certified one full system, ES&S Unity 3.2.1.0, and one modification, Unisyn 

1.01; 

 Performed testing during FY 2011 for eleven voting systems or system 

modifications; 

 Completed the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act 

(UOCAVA) Registration and Voting Process white paper; 

 Published A Survey of Internet Voting; 

 Performed ongoing work with the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) to complete revision to VVSG 1.1 Draft; 

 Participated in the SLI Global NVLAP audit January 31-February 2, 2011;

 Held roundtable discussions regarding the 2010 elections and preparations for 

2012; Commercially available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software; and Life Cycle of 

a Voting System; and 

 Participated in meetings on State voting system certification, options for an 

FVAP-run competition to solicit system architecture for a UOCAVA internet 
Election Assistance Commission 

voting demonstration project, VVSG requirements, test suites, Internet Voting 

and USENIX/EVoting, current testing for the State of Oklahoma, and voting 

system sustainability. 

EAC continues to improve its programs and operations, and information technology 

across the agency. Additional information on actions for continued improvement can be 

found in Section I.E. of the Management Discussion and Analysis which follows. 

The financial and performance data in this report is reliable and complete with one 

material weakness related to the finalization of policies and procedures and one new 

material weakness dealing with internal controls over financial reporting. Except for the 

material weakness, the Commission provides a qualified statement of assurance that the 

internal control and financial management systems meet the objectives of the Federal 

Managers’ Financial Integrity Act. EAC will work in FY 2012 to finalize these policies 

and procedures. 

In FY 2013, we look forward to continuing to provide technical assistance to recipients 

of Help America Vote Act funds, and materials to election officials to assist with the 

administration of Federal elections. 

 

 Thomas R. Wilkey 

 Executive Director 

 

 
Election Assistance Commission 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

SECTION I - Management Discussion and Analysis ................................................... 1

I.A. Background, Vision, Mission and Organization Structure ........................................ 1 

 Funding ............................................................................................................................ 3 

 Organization by Program ................................................................................................. 4 

 Organization Chart ........................................................................................................... 7 

I.B. Performance Goals, Objectives, and Results ............................................................. 7 

 How EAC Assesses Performance .................................................................................... 7 

 Performance Data Collection and Validation ................................................................ 16 

 Summary Performance Information .............................................................................. 17 

 Program Performance Indicators ................................................................................... 17 

 Portfolio Analysis .......................................................................................................... 18 

 

I.C. Financial Results ...................................................................................................... 19 

 Budgetary Resources ..................................................................................................... 19 

 Financial Position........................................................................................................... 20 

 Results of Operations ..................................................................................................... 21 

 Limitations of the Financial Statements ........................................................................ 22 

I.D. Analysis of Controls, Management Systems, and Legal Compliance ..................... 22 

 Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act .................................................................... 22 

 Audit Follow-Up ............................................................................................................ 25 

 Federal Financial Management Improvement Act ........................................................ 25 

 Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 ................................................................... 25 

 Federal Information Security Management Act ............................................................ 26 

 Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988 ................................................................. 26 

 Annual Assurance Statement on Internal Control ......................................................... 27 

 

SECTION II – Financial Section .................................................................................. 28 

II.A. Message from the Chief Financial Officer .............................................................. 28 

II.B. Inspector General’s Assessment .............................................................................. 29 

II.C. Independent Auditor’s Report ................................................................................. 31 

II.D. Financial Statements ................................................................................................ 49 

II.E. Notes to the Financial Statements ............................................................................ 53 

II.F. Required Supplementary Stewardship Information ................................................. 66 

SECTION III - Other Accompanying Information .................................................... 69 

III.A. IG Assessment of Most Serious Management Challenges Facing EAC ............... 70 

III.B. EAC Response to the Most Serious Management Challenges ............................... 79 

III.C. Improper Payments ................................................................................................ 81 

III.D. Summary of Financial Statement Audit and Management Assurances ................. 81 
Election Assistance Commission 

SECTION I

Management Discussion and Analysis 

Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) is presented in accordance with Statement of 

Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) 15. The MD&A is intended to provide a clear 

and concise description of the agency’s mission and organizational structure; high-level 

discussion of key performance goals, results and measures; analysis of financial statements; 

systems, controls, and legal compliance (i.e., Management Assurance signed by the Agency 

Head); compliance with laws and regulations; and actions taken or planned to address problems. 

It provides a balanced analytical assessment, with both positive and negative information, of key 

program and financial performance. The MD&A is a vehicle for communicating insights about 

the agency, its operations, programs, successes, challenges and future outlook. Contents of this 

report and the MD&A are in conformance with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circular A-136 Financial Reporting Requirements. 

I.A BACKGROUND, VISION, MISSION AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 

In October 2002, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002. The law 

recognized the need for States to invest in their election infrastructure and set out comprehensive 

programs of funding, voluntary guidance, and research. To foster those programs and to 

promote and enhance voting for United States citizens, HAVA established the Election 

Assistance Commission (EAC). The vision for EAC, according to the Strategic Plan 2009-2014, 

adopted March 2009, is to lead election reform that reaffirms the right to vote and to have all 

eligible votes counted accurately. 

EAC is an independent, bipartisan agency. Four full-time Commissioners, appointed by the 

President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and three Federal advisory committees, the 

Standards Board, Board of Advisors, and Technical Guidelines Development Committee, guide 

the EAC. Its mission is to provide assistance to State and local election officials in the effective 

administration of Federal elections. EAC is statutorily required to: 

 Create a clearinghouse of information for election officials and the public; 

 Distribute and monitor HAVA funds to States for election administration improvements; 

 Issue, periodically review and modify, as necessary, Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 

(VVSG); 

 Accredit voting system test laboratories and certify voting equipment; 

 Conduct periodic studies of election administration issues as determined by the 

Commission; 
Election Assistance Commission 

2

 Establish best practices and guidelines on election administration for State and local 

election officials; 

 Maintain the national voter registration form developed in accordance with the National 

Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993; 

 Provide Congress with a bi-annual report to assess the impact of the NVRA. 

The Standards Board and the Board of Advisors provide advice and guidance to EAC on 

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) and other election administration issues. In 

addition, the Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) assists EAC in the 

preparation of the VVSG. The VVSG sets the standards against which voting systems are tested. 

The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the U.S. 

Department of Commerce serves as the Chair of the TGDC and provides technical support to the 

Committee. Additionally, HAVA specifies that NIST provide recommendations to EAC 

regarding voting system test laboratories. Since Fiscal Year 2004, EAC’s annual appropriations 

have included funds for NIST support. 

In Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004, Congress appropriated nearly $3 billion in Federal financial 

assistance for payments to States under Titles I and II of HAVA. States received the funds to 

upgrade their voting systems, establish a statewide voter registration database, train election 

officials, and educate voters. In Fiscal Year 2003, General Services Administration (GSA) 

distributed $649,500,000 in HAVA funds to the fifty States, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin 

Islands, American Samoa and the District of Columbia on EAC’s behalf. The funds were 

distributed for activities to improve the administration of elections (Section 101) and to replace 

punch card and lever voting machines (Section 102). 

The Senate confirmed four Commissioners in December 2003 and EAC began operations in 

January 2004, within ten months of the date mandated by HAVA. The Agency’s Fiscal Year 

2004 operating budget was $1.7 million. At the close of the fiscal year, EAC had a staff of 18. 

EAC’s focus in 2004 was to assemble staff, obtain office space, arrange for administrative 

support from the GSA, establish a website, start election administration clearinghouse 

operations, and distribute Federal financial assistance to the States. In FY 2004, EAC also 

appointed a statutorily-required General Counsel. 

During Fiscal Year 2005, EAC appointed its other statutorily-required position, the Executive 

Director, and an interim Inspector General. EAC’s focus in subsequent years was on upgrading 

the VVSG, completing required research to promote effective Federal elections and present key 

data on election practices and voting, instituting a voting system testing and certification 

program, auditing State use of HAVA funds, and providing information on improving elections 

to its stakeholders. 

In FY 2007, Congress recognized the expanding Agency responsibilities and lifted the full-time 

equivalent staffing ceiling of 24. As of the end of FY 2011, EAC had a full-time staff of 38 

employees, including two Commissioners and special assistants. Since its inception, EAC has 

received $2,606,150,000 in requirements payments, $24,350,000 in discretionary grant funds for 

Poll Workers, Mock Elections, Election Data Collection, Voting Technology Improvement 

Research and Equipment and Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing and Post-Election 
Election Assistance Commission 

3

Verification and transferred $24,493,000 to NIST. EAC also tracks and provides technical 

assistance on the Section 101 funds. The time period for using the Section 102 funds has 

expired, and EAC is in the process of collecting any unused funds. 

 Funding 

 

Enacted Appropriations by Fiscal Year 

(dollars in thousands) 

 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total 

EAC (FY 2003–2011) 

EAC Salaries & Expenses 

Operations $2,000 $1,674 1 $11,110 $10,986 $11,313 $12,330 $12,909 $13,409 $13,024 $88,755 

 

 Mock Election Grants 200 300 300 800 

 

 Poll Worker Grants 300 750 750 750 2,550 

 

 Transfer to NIST 2,778 2,772 4,950 3,250 4,000 3,500 3,243 24,493 

 

 Election Reform Grants 

 

 

 

 Requirements Payments 

 

830,000 1,491,150 

 

115,000 100,000 70,000 2,606,150 

 

 Poll Worker Grants 1,500 

 

 1,500 

 

 Foundation 1,500 

 

 1,500 

 

 Voting Tech. Research 

 

 5,000 3,000 8,000 

 

 Testing & Verification 

 

 1,000 2,000 3,000 

 

 Election Data Collection 

 

10,000 10,000 

 TOTAL EAC 835,000 1,492,824 13,888 14,058 16,263 141,530 123,959 92,959 16,267 2,746,748 

 GSA (FY 2003) 

 

 Section 101 and 102 649,500 

 

 649,500 

 

 Administrative Expenses 500 

 

 500 

 TOTAL GSA 650,000 650,000 

TOTAL EAC & GSA $3,396,748 

 1/ Includes $481,092 transferred from the Federal Election Commission 

 
Election Assistance Commission 

4

Status of Help America Vote Act Authorization versus Appropriations 

(in whole dollars) 

 Authorized 

Appropriated 

FYs 2003-2011 Remaining 

GSA (FY 2003) 

Election Administration Improvement (Section 101) $324,750,000 $324,750,000 

Punch Card/Lever Machine Replacement (Section 102) 324,750,000 324,750,000 

Administrative Expenses for 101 and 102 500,000 500,000 

EAC (FY 2003 – 2011) 

Requirements Payments (Section 251) 3,000,000,000 ** 2,606,150,000 393,850,000

Voting Technology Improvement Research Grants 

(Section 271) 20,000,000 8,000,000 12,000,000

Equipment and Technology Testing Pilot Program 

(Section 281) 10,000,000 10,000,000

Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing & PostElection Verification 3,000,000 1,4 3,000,000 - 

Operations (Section 210) 116,598,508 2 116,598,508 - 

Election Data Collection Grants 10,000,000 3 10,000,000 - 

National Student and Parent Mock Election Organization 

(Section 295) 200,000 ** 200,000

Poll Worker Grants (Section 501) 5,000,000 ** 1,500,000 3,500,000

Help America Vote Foundation (Section 601) 5,000,000 ** 1,500,000 3,500,000

Total $3,819,798,508 $3,396,748,508 $423,050,000 

1/ Authorized by P.L. 111-8 

2/ $30 million per HAVA, balance per appropriations. Includes $2.55 million Poll Worker grants and $800,000 Mock Election 

Grants 

3/ Authorized by P.L. 110-161 

4/ Authorized by appropriations 

**Plus such sums as may be necessary in succeeding years 

EAC Organization by Program 

EAC has organized its offices around the goals in the Strategic Plan. Below are brief 

descriptions of the four offices responsible for implementing the Strategic Plan programmatic 

goals. Following the descriptions is EAC’s organization chart. 

Communications and Clearinghouse

The Communications and Clearinghouse division is responsible for external communications and 

the tools and platforms used to provide information to election officials and the general public. 

Areas of responsibility include: 

 EAC Website and Clearinghouse 
Election Assistance Commission 

5

 Social media 

 Media inquires 

 External communications 

 Congressional relations 

 The Freedom of Information Act 

 National Archives and Records Act 

 Editorial support: press releases, speeches, and Congressional testimony 

The agency’s website, www.eac.gov, is the primary communications tool. EAC.gov contains 

thousands of documents and information about voting systems, press releases, informational 

videos, research, data and program-related information. It also features on-demand webcasts and 

related information from public meetings, hearings and roundtables. 

EAC’s award-winning website features a user-driven notification system, allowing visitors to 

customize how they receive information. Users can customize their online experience by signing 

up for automatic e-mail alerts on a variety of election topics and events, including public 

meetings, advisory board meetings, reports, policies and agency news. These alerts can be 

received in real time on a daily or weekly basis. 

Grants Management

The Grants Management Division: 

 Conducts trainings on the administration and use of HAVA funds; 

 Provides technical assistance to States on administering Federal funds; 

 Awards and monitors discretionary grant programs including: Help America Vote 

College Program, Help America Vote Mock Election Program, Military Heroes Initiative, 

Voting System Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing and Post-Election Audit 

Initiative and Accessible Voting Technology Initiative; 

 Processes and disburses payments to States and discretionary grant recipients; 

 Tracks the submission of and reviews the content of financial and performance reports 

submitted by States and discretionary grant recipients; 

 Reviews audit reports and works with fund recipients on recommendations to resolve 

audit findings; 

 Reviews and publishes in the Federal Register amended State Plan submissions; and 

 Drafts advisory opinions for Commission approval and issuance. 

Research, Policy and Programs

The Research, Policy and Programs division: 

 Conducts research on election administration topics as mandated by Congress and at the 

discretion of the Commission. 

 Administers the biennial Election Administration and Voting Survey. 
Election Assistance Commission 

6

 Administers the National Mail Voter Registration Form as prescribed by the National 

Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), also known as “Motor Voter”. 

 Administers the Election Management Guidelines Program to help election officials 

promote secure, accurate, and accessible elections by providing information on topics 

such as Ballot Design, Contingency Planning, Managing Change in an Election Office, 

Media and Public Relations, and Developing an Audit Trail for the verification of votes; 

 Manages the Language Accessibility Program to provide informational materials on the 

Federal election process and election terminology in languages other than English, 

translates the National Mail Voter Registration Form, and gathers information from 

working groups to address the election needs of voters with limited or no English 

proficiency; and 

 Provides materials to voters and election administration officials. 

HAVA mandates that EAC issue studies on topics such as the feasibility and advisability of 

establishing free absentee ballot return postage, electronic voting, recounts and contests, military 

and overseas voters, the feasibility of alternative voting methods, the voting experiences of firsttime voters who register to vote by mail, and the feasibility and advisability of identifying voters 

by Social Security Numbers. Mandated research includes topics such as the impact of the 

National Voter Registration Act of 1993. 

Voting System Testing and Certification

Under the Help America Vote Act, EAC accredits voting system test laboratories and certifies 

voting equipment, marking the first time the Federal government has offered these services to the 

States. Participation by States in the program is voluntary. Staff works with NIST to evaluate 

and accredit voting system test laboratories and the management of the voting system 

certification process. 

The Testing and Certification (T&C) division: 

 Assists States with voluntary certification of their systems; 

 Supports local elections officials in the areas of acceptance testing and pre-election 

system verification; 

 Promotes quality control in voting system manufacturing through the EAC quality 

monitoring program; 

 Provides procedures to the voting system manufacturers for the testing and certification 

of voting systems to specified Federal standards consistent with the requirements of 

HAVA Section 231. 

EAC’s voting system certification program establishes accountability through its Quality 

Monitoring Program which ensures, through various check points, that the voting systems used 

in the field are the same systems EAC has certified. For instance, under the program, EAC has 

the ability to conduct site visits to production facilities to determine whether systems produced 

are consistent with those that have received EAC certification. In addition, EAC collects reports 

from election officials regarding voting system anomalies. After reviewing the reports, EAC 

disseminates the information to election officials. Furthermore, upon invitation or with 
Election Assistance Commission 

7

permission from election officials, the EAC conducts reviews of systems that are in use in the 

field. 

More information about EAC’s Voting System Certification and Testing Program is available in 

EAC’s Frequently Asked Questions on eac.gov. 

Executive Director

- Tom Wilkey

- Bert Benevides

Chief Financial Officer/

Budget

- Annette Lafferty

Chief Operating Officer

- Alice Miller

General Counsel

- Mark Robbins

- Bianca Gomez*

- Shirley Hines

Communications & 

Clearinghouse

- Jeannie Layson

- Bryan Whitener

Accounting/

Procurement

- MOUs 

Grants Management

- Monica Evans

- Pat Leahy

- Allison Hood

Voting Systems and 

Certifications 

- Brian Hancock

- Jessica Myers

- James Long

- Josh Franklin

- Robin Sargent

Research, Policy & 

Programs

- Karen Lynn-Dyson

- William Boehm

- Shelly Anderson

- Matt Weil

- Marcy Reedy

Administrative Services

- Diana Scott

- Che’re Pennington

Human 

Resources

- Sheila Banks

- DeAnna Smith

- Beverly Russell 

COMMISSIONERS

- Gineen Bresso

- Donetta Davidson 

- Vacant

- Vacant

Advisory Board (37 members), 

Standards Board (110 members) & 

Technical Guidelines 

Development Committee (15 

members)

Special Assistants

- Sharmili Edwards – Commissioner Bresso

- Mary Ann Bradfield – Commissioner 

Davidson 

- Vacant – Commissioner Vacant

- Vacant – Commissioner Vacant

Meeting Coordinator

- Emily Jones

Inspector General

- Curtis Crider

- Arnie Garza

Information Technology 

Services

- Mohammed Maeruf

- Henry Botchway

- LaVeeda Monroe

- Stacie Fabre

*Other than full time permanent staff

I.B. PERFORMANCE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND RESULTS 

EAC formalized its planning, reporting and execution activities with its first five year Strategic 

Plan 2009-2014. The plan was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget, and 

presented to EAC’s Board of Advisors and Standards Board for comment, as required by HAVA. 

EAC adopted the Plan in March 2009. 

How EAC Assesses Performance 

EAC has five strategic goals: 
Election Assistance Commission 

8

1. Communicate timely and accurate information on the effective administration of 

elections for Federal office and on the operations and services offered by EAC. 

2. Deliver and manage Federal funds effectively. 

3. Identify and develop information on areas of pressing concern regarding the 

administration of elections for Federal office, issue recommended improvements, 

guidance, translations, and best practices as required by HAVA, and carry out 

responsibilities under the National Voter Registration Act. 

4. Build public confidence in elections by testing and certifying voting systems to 

improve system security, operation, and accessibility. 

5. Achieve organizational and management excellence. 

The EAC Strategic Plan objectives listed below describe in general terms the results needed to 

accomplish its Strategic Goals. Outcomes measure the effect program outputs have on their 

stakeholders. Outputs are quantifiable targets that directly measure the results of a program. A 

program may have multiple outputs but each output is associated with one program. 

Performance measures are quantifiable, documentable, representations of a capacity, process or 

outcome that is relevant to the assessment of performance. 

Strategic Plan Goal 1: Communicate timely and accurate information on the effective 

administration of elections for Federal office and on the operations and services offered by 

EAC. 

 

Outcome: The Congress, Federal agencies, State and local election officials and 

the public receive reliable, accurate, and non-partisan information about 

administering, conducting and participating in Federal elections and how, 

where, and when Americans vote. 

Goal 1’s aim of communication of timely and accurate information is the responsibility of the 

Communications and Clearinghouse division. 

Goal 1 FY 2011 Accomplishments

In Fiscal Year 2011, the Communications and Clearinghouse division focused its efforts on 

providing information and best practices to election officials and voters in preparation for the 

2012 federal election cycle. The goal was to build a community of knowledge and expertise that 

would save election officials time and money as they faced the challenge of providing more 

services to voters with fewer resources and more budget constraints. EAC embraced the tenets 

of government 2.0 and established a robust network of information sharing for election officials 

and professionals. 

 

EAC.gov Initiatives 

 The Election Official Exchange: an online resource built by EAC to help local election 

officials connect and leverage their collective knowledge by sharing best practices and 

knowledge. By participating in the Exchange, any U.S. election official can call on a 

colleague for advice about virtually any administrative task they face, from testing voting 

equipment and training poll workers to creating an audit trail and conducting a recount. 
Election Assistance Commission 

9

 Enhanced and improved search tool: based on usability studies and user feedback, EAC 

revamped its search tool enabling a more intuitive and user friendly way for the public to 

find information. 

 Events finder: more comprehensive presentation of all EAC public events, including 

meetings, hearings and roundtable discussions. 

 Improved webcasts: public events are offered live. On demand webcasts are now 

available within 24 hours. The meeting agenda accompanies the webcast, and the viewer 

can select topics of interest. All meeting materials are also available to the public. 

 Customized program updates: The public can customize the kind of information and the 

frequency that it is delivered by signing up for EAC’s newsletter or automatic program 

updates. Users are notified daily or weekly when new documents are posted—they set the 

delivery preferences. 

Social Media Initiatives 

 The EAC Blog: a tool allowing EAC to provide periodic election updates and highlight 

program activities. The comment feature provides the public another tool to provide 

feedback to EAC. 

 @EACgov on Twitter: This is another tool to communicate with election officials and 

build a community of expertise. EAC has already established a public list of election 

officials and has used the platform to inform thousands of people about program 

activities. Primarily it has been most useful as a tool to rapidly deliver information and 

updates about the voting system certification program. 

 #BReady2012: The Twitter hashtag hosted and created by EAC. A place for election 

officials and the public to gather and discuss preparation for the next federal election. 

 Outreach & Training: EAC Communications and Clearinghouse staff delivers 

communications presentations to election officials and the public, including the 

Electronic Verification Network, the Ohio Association of Election Officials and the 

National Conference of State Legislatures. 

Preparing for the 2012 Elections: The Roundtable Series of Public Discussions 

In Fiscal Year 2011, EAC hosted a series of public roundtable discussions about topics and 

initiatives in preparation for 2012 federal election cycle. The roundtable discussions were 

webcast live and featured a live Twitterfall. Questions and comments were taken from the public 

through the webcasts. Participants included election officials and subject experts who provided 

real world solutions to the issues facing election officials and voters as we prepare for next year’s 

elections. 

 Contingency Planning in Elections (Sept. 20, 2011): In conjunction with National 

Preparedness Month, EAC hosted a discussion about contingency planning solutions and 

strategies to prevent or minimize interruptions in voting during an emergency. 

Participants included the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the American Red 

Cross and election officials. 

 Design Counts in Elections (August 11, 2011): To take the guess work out of designing 

ballots and polling place signs. Incorporating simple design principles come with few 
Election Assistance Commission 

10

costs yet yield huge benefits for the American electorate. Participants discussed best 

practices in ballot and polling place design, which contributes to a voter’s positive 

experience and ensures that the process is accessible and convenient to the widest 

possible audience. 

 Voting Goes Viral: Using New Media to Manage an Election and Communicate with 

Voters (June 17, 2011): Participants discussed the basic premise of social media outlets, 

including an overview about demographics, trends and the overall culture. Journalists 

offered their perspective about how they use social media as a reporting tool, and election 

officials will discuss their experiences. Participants included journalists, election officials 

and social media experts. 

 The Life Cycle of Voting Machines (May 5, 2011): In the years 2002-2005, there was an 

unprecedented surge in the acquisition and deployment of voting systems. States are 

facing the challenge of managing aging systems, and the discussion focused on the 

sustainability of the nation’s voting systems. Participants included election officials and 

voting system manufacturers. 

Strategic Plan Goal 2: Deliver and manage Federal funds effectively. 

Outcome: States and other recipients promptly and accurately receive Federal 

funds administered by EAC and use the funds appropriately to improve the 

administration of elections for Federal office. 

Goal 2 is administered by the Grants Management division and the Office of the Inspector 

General. 

Goal 2 FY 2011 Accomplishments

Section 251 funds were included in the Election Reform Programs no-year appropriation. 

Congress appropriated $115 million in FY 2008, $100 million in FY 2009 and $70 million in FY 

2010. In FY 2011, EAC paid $30,032,325 from the FY 2008 appropriation, $38,299,071 from 

the FY 2009 appropriation and $26,888,473 from the FY 2010 appropriation. These funds were 

requested by the States by September 30, 2011. The funds are distributed according to a formula 

based on the voting age population of the State per the last Census and the total voting age 

population of all States. In order to draw the funds, the States certify that they are in compliance 

with applicable laws and requirements per HAVA Section 253(b). 

A State may use requirements payments to carry out activities to improve the administration of 

elections for Federal office outside of the activities listed under HAVA Title III if the State 

certifies that the State has implemented the requirements of Title III, or the amount it will spend 

on other activities will not exceed an amount equal to the minimum payment amount applicable 

to the State under section 252. Title III includes voting system standards, voting information 

requirements, provisional voting, statewide voter registration lists, and identification 

requirements for voters who register by mail. States may also use requirements payments to 

improve the administration of Federal elections. Each year, EAC reports to Congress on how the 

States have spent HAVA funds. 
Election Assistance Commission 

11

The College Poll Worker grants are authorized under HAVA Section 501. To date, EAC has 

awarded 89 grants totaling $3.1 million to recruit and train college poll workers since the College 

Program was established in 2004. 

 

EAC awarded no new College Poll Worker grants in FY 2011, but continued to monitor and 

work with the 2009 and 2010 grantees to help them carry out successful programs. The 2009 

College Poll Worker grants are two-year awards and the 2010 College Poll Worker grants are 

three-year awards. Part of EAC’s efforts included coordinated a series of teleconferences based 

on areas of interest found during the review of narrative reports. The series recognized that 

developing a College Poll Worker Program that meets its objectives can be a challenge without 

the support of many different factions including; schools, administrators, students and the 

community. The three teleconferences focused on Teacher and School Administration 

Involvement, Sustainability Post Grant and Outreach Efforts for Community Involvement. 

The Mock Election Program grants are authorized under HAVA Section 295. To date, EAC has 

awarded over 25 grants totaling $998,820 to organizations under this program since the Mock 

Election program was established in 2004. The grants allow students to become familiar with 

voting processes and technologies so that when they become eligible to vote they will be more 

comfortable with their civic duties. 

EAC awarded no new Mock Election Program grants in FY 2011, but continued to monitor and 

work with the 2009 and 2010 grantees to help them carry out successful programs. The 2009 

Mock Election Program grants are two-year awards and the 2010 Mock Election Program grants 

are three-year awards. EAC also conducted a series of teleconferences based on areas of interest 

found during the review of narrative reports for Mock Election Program grantees. Developing a 

Mock Election Program that meets its objectives can be a challenge without the support of 

schools, administrators, students and the community. The three teleconferences focused on 

Teacher and School Administrative Involvement, Sustainability Post Grant and Outreach Efforts 

for Community Involvement. 

The purpose of the Voting System Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing (L&A) and PostElection Audit Initiative is to develop and document processes and best practices for 

coordinating quality and cost-effective A) voting system pre-election L&A testing and B) postelection audits. Outcomes will include tool kits, guides, best practices, research findings and 

recommendations that could be disseminated widely within the election community. In FY 

2011, EAC awarded $1,463,074 to 12 award recipients. 
Election Assistance Commission 

12

FY 2011 Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing & Post-Election Audit Initiative 

Grant Recipients 

California Secretary of State, Sacramento, CA (Audit) 

Orange County Registrar of Voters; Santa Ana, CA (Audit) 

County of Humboldt; Eureka, CA (Audit) 

County of Santa Cruz, CA; Santa Cruz, CA (Blended L&A and Audit) 

Colorado Department of State; Denver, CO (Audit) 

State of Connecticut, Secretary of the State; Hartford, CT (Blended L&A and Audit) 

Office of Cook County Clerk; Chicago, IL (Blended L&A and Audit) 

State of Indiana, Secretary of State; Indianapolis, IN (Blended L&A and Audit) 

City of Takoma Park; Takoma Park, MD (Audit) 

County of Boone; Columbia, MO (L&A) 

New York State Board of Elections; Albany, NY (Blended L&A and Audit) 

Cuyahoga County Board of Elections; Cleveland, OH (Blended L&A and Audit)

The purpose of the Accessible Voting Technology Initiative is to support research and 

development activities to increase the accessibility of new, existing, and emerging technological 

solutions in areas such as assistive technologies, interoperability, and the design of voting 

systems. Funding supports research for: 1) promising technologies and practices; 2) technology 

testing and adoption; and 3) development of administrative processes and training improvements 

to increase accessibility of existing voting procedures and election systems. 

The funding notice announced the availability of $7 million for this initiative. Although the 

notice indicated that one award would be made, the Staff Review Team, comprised of members 

from EAC, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the United States 

Access Board, recommended splitting the funding to issue two awards at reduced levels. EAC 

awarded $4,500,000 to Clemson University in Clemson, SC and $2,500,000 to the Information 

Technology and Innovation Foundation in Washington, DC. 

Strategic Plan Goal 3: Identify and develop information on areas of pressing concern 

regarding the administration of elections for Federal office and issue recommended 

improvements, guidance, translations, and best practices as required by HAVA, and carry 

out responsibilities under the National Voter Registration Act. 

Outcome: As a result of this goal: 1) the election community and other key 

stakeholders improve the administration of elections for Federal office on the 

bases of pertinent, impartial, timely, and high-quality information, 

recommendations, guides and other tools on election and voting issues and 2) 

eligible citizens use the mail voter registration application to register to vote, 

register with a political party, or report a change of name, address, or other 

information. 

Goal 3 is administered by the Research, Policy and Programs division. 
Election Assistance Commission 

13

Goal 3 FY 2011 Accomplishments

Research: 

In FY 2010, the Research, Policy and Programs (RPP) division developed a listing of potential 

research projects, policy and program initiatives including timelines, to guide staff work through 

2012. Progress was made in FY 2011 toward completing several projects noted in the research 

schedule, many of which are mandated by HAVA and/or authorized by Congress. The list will 

continue to be revised in accordance with EAC and/or Congressional priorities. 

Research efforts continued on the HAVA-mandated studies Recounts and Contests, and Use of 

Social Security Numbers for the Purpose of Voter Registration. A contractor was selected to 

begin work on another mandated study, Election Administration in Urban and Rural Settings. 

Work also continued on the 2010 Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act Report 

and the 2010 Election Administration and Voting Survey Report (release scheduled for FY 

2012). 

Research work completed in FY 2011 includes: 

 

 Administering the 2010 Election Administration and Voting Survey to 50 States, the 

District of Columbia, and 4 territories. 

 Reporting to Congress on the findings of the 2009-2010 Impact of the National Voter 

Registration Act of 1993 (released in June 2011). 

 The 2010 Statutory Overview report, which is a recitation of States’ election laws and 

procedures (released in May 2011). 

 A first draft of the Recounts and Contests study. 

 Selecting a contractor to collect and analyze data for the Election Administration in 

Urban and Rural Settings study. 

Policy: 

EAC, in accordance with HAVA, has responsibility to issue regulations to implement portions of 

the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) regarding the form and content of the 

national mail voter registration form and to submit a biennial report to Congress on the impact of 

the NVRA. EAC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the NVRA 

regulations on August 9, 2010 and, in effort to reach out to as many stakeholders as possible, 

provided a public comment period of over 100 days ending on November 23, 2010. EAC held 

three public hearings on the NPRM from August through October, 2010. 

During FY 2011 RPP Policy staff also received and processed State requests for modifications to 

the state-specific instructions on the National Mail Voter Registration Form. 

EAC commenced work on voluntary guidance for provisional voting in FY 2011. EAC will 

conduct a survey of election officials in FY 2012 and consult with state election directors before 

issuing new guidance. EAC requires a quorum to move forward on policy decisions such as this. 
Election Assistance Commission 

14

Programs: 

EAC program staff has begun the process of selecting Election Management Guidelines and 

Quick Start Guides to update. It is anticipated that three Election Management Guideline 

chapters and three Quick Start Guides will be updated and released in FY 2012 including one on 

military voters and citizens living overseas. Staff also has begun to prepare material for a new 

Quick Start Guide on “Military Heroes” based on the early findings of an FY 2011 grant 

administered by the EAC. 

EAC program staff conducted three teleconferences with EAC College Poll Worker and Mock 

Election grantees to solicit feedback for updating the Guidebook for Recruiting College Poll 

Workers. An update to EAC’s poll worker guidebooks will be completed before the 2012 

presidential election. 

The RPP Division also completed a revision of A Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections in 

anticipation of the 2012 election. The updated Voter’s Guide was translated into nine languages 

in addition to English: Chinese, Cherokee, Dakota, Japanese, Korean, Spanish, Tagalog, 

Vietnamese, and Yu’Pik. The Office of Citizenship of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 

Services complemented EAC’s distribution of A Voter’s Guide by providing over 700,000 copies 

to new citizens. 

The Language Accessibility Program worked to meet its strategic goal of assisting election 

officials in meeting the needs of language minority voters by providing a searchable online 

version of the Glossaries of Election Terminology on EAC’s website. The searchable database 

format can be accessed by the general public, including a voter or election official, at 

www.eac.gov/glossary/default.aspx. 

Strategic Plan Goal 4: Build public confidence in elections by testing and certifying 

voting systems to improve system security, operation and accessibility. 

Outcome: Voting equipment operates more reliably and securely and is more 

accessible to the disabled. States use the EAC testing and certification program 

to ensure voting systems meet standards. 

Goal 4 is administered by the Voting System Testing and Certification (T&C) division. 

Goal 4 FY 2011 Accomplishments 

In FY 2011 in the area of voting system certification, EAC: 

 Certified one full system, ES&S Unity 3.2.1.0, and one modification, Unisyn 1.01. 

 Ongoing testing during FY 2011 for eleven voting systems or system modifications. 

 Held a meeting with Dominion Voting Systems and Wyle Labs to familiarize all parties 

with the Dominion ICE system being tested at Wyle. 

 Developed timelines for ES&S Unity 5.0 and Dominion Test campaigns. 
Election Assistance Commission 

15

 Issued requests for information regarding the Unity 3.2.0.0 investigation to Wyle Labs, 

Cuyahoga County, iBeta Quality Assurance and ES&S. 

 Met with SLI and Hart InterCivic in Denver in May regarding current testing for the State 

of Oklahoma and the ability for this testing to be used in an upcoming Federal testing 

campaign for Hart. 

To promote the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), EAC: 

 Developed and forwarded the UOCAVA Pilot Program Testable Requirements document 

to NIST and TGDC. 

 Completed the UOCAVA Registration and Voting Process white paper. 

 Attended the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) meeting on Internet Voting and 

USENIX/EVoting in San Francisco in August. 

 Met with NIST and FVAP in September to discuss options for an FVAP- run competition 

to solicit system architecture for a UOCAVA internet voting demonstration project. 

 Published A Survey of Internet Voting. 

In the area of Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) and Test Suites, in FY 2011, EAC: 

 Performed ongoing work with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

to complete revision to VVSG 1.1 Draft. 

 Held a two-hour session immediately prior to opening of the National Association of 

State Election Directors (NASED) meeting on the subject, “Are All VVSG Requirements 

Created Equal?” 

 Held a test Suite meeting with Wyle, SLI and NIST’s National Voluntary Laboratory 

Accreditation Program (NVLAP) at Wyle Labs in Huntsville, AL in June. 

 Participated in the Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) meeting at 

NIST in July. 

Regarding laboratory accreditation in FY 2011, EAC participated in the SLI Global NVLAP 

audit January 31-Febuary 2, 2011. 

Further, in FY 2011, EAC: 

 Observed the use of the ES&S DS200s in New York City during the November 2nd 

General Election and the use of DS200s in Cuyahoga County, OH during the November 

2nd General Election. 

 Held roundtable discussions regarding 2010 election and preparations for 2012; 

Commercially available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software; and Life Cycle of a Voting 

System. 

 Presented an overview of the EAC Pre-Election Logic & Accuracy and Post Election 

Audit Grant and the 2010 Accessible Technology Initiative Grant at the Council on 

Governmental Ethics Laws (COGEL) meeting in December in Washington, DC. 

 Reviewed installation of Cuyahoga County, Ohio system fixes by ES&S in June. 

 Moderated a break-out session on voting system sustainability at the Election Center 

Conference in San Antonio in August. 
Election Assistance Commission 

16

 Participated in the State Certification meeting at the Center for Elections, Kennesaw, GA 

in September. 

Strategic Plan Goal 5 consists of one clear-cut objective: Implement a high performance 

organization. 

Goal 5 is administered by the Commissioners, the Standards Board, the Board of Advisors, the 

Technical Guidelines Development Committee, Executive Director, Chief Operating Officer and 

Chief Financial Officer with support from the Offices of the General Counsel and Administration. 

Each month, EAC reports to the Chair and Ranking Member of the House Subcommittee on 

Elections, Committee on House Administration on the status of 82 OIG audit recommendations 

made as of March 2008. To date, only two of the 82 recommendations remain open. The two 

open recommendations require a quorum of the Commission for final resolution. 

On the performance measure regarding meeting annual performance measures, management is 

working to foster a culture of accountability among staff. The agency was successful in 

improving staff satisfaction ratings on the 2010 annual employee survey. Agency directors 

responsible for implementation of the EAC Strategic Plan goals report on their division metrics 

in the Agency Financial Report in November, the Annual Performance Report along with the 

Congressional Budget Justification in February, and on planned metrics in the OMB Budget 

Justification each September. 

EAC financial staff complete assessable unit risk assessment questionnaires and individual 

letters of assurance. The directors’ letters of assurance are rolled into the CFO’s Annual 

Statement of Assurance. 

EAC will continue to focus on resolution of issues identified in audits, setting up sound systems 

and policies and procedures, working with managers on the relationship between budget and 

performance, maximizing use of staff and financial resources, and training EAC staff on 

financial management processes and their responsibilities. 

Performance Data Collection and Validation 

Managing for results and producing an Annual Performance Plan requires valid, reliable and 

high-quality performance measures and data. EAC is committed to the continuous improvement 

of its performance and financial management data. To this end, EAC verifies mandatory source 

documentation, and documentation of calculation methodology for performance indicators to 

provide reasonable assurance that the reported programmatic performance data is relevant and 

reliable. 

Key Performance Measures

o Implement 90 percent of the OIG audit 

recommendations within agreed upon timeframes.

o Meet annual performance measures.
Election Assistance Commission 

17

Summary Performance Information 

By program, summary performance information for FY 2011 is as follows: 

Communications & Clearinghouse ‐‐ built The Election Official Exchange; revamped the 

eac.gov search tool; added Events finder to the website for a more comprehensive 

presentation of all EAC public events; provided Customized program updates so the public 

can customize the kind of information and the frequency that it is delivered via EAC’s 

newsletter and automatic program updates; initiated The EAC Blog, @EACgov on Twitter, 

and #BReady2012; and offered a series of public roundtable discussions Design Counts in 

Elections, Voting Goes Viral: Using New Media to Manage an Election and Communicate 

with Voters, and Contingency Planning in Elections, and The Life Cycle of Voting 

Machines. 

Grants Management -- awarded two grants totaling $7 million for the Accessible Voting 

Technology Initiative; awarded $1,463,074 to 12 grantees for the Voting System PreElection Logic and Accuracy Testing & Post-Election Audit Initiative; paid $96,504,962 to 

the States for Section 251 Requirements Payments; reported to Congress on how the States 

have spent HAVA funds; and coordinated a series of teleconferences for the College Poll 

Worker and Mock Election Programs focused on Teacher and School Administration 

Involvement, Sustainability Post Grant and Outreach Efforts for Community Involvement.

Research, Policy and Programs -- administered the 2010 Election Administration and Voting 

Survey; reported to Congress on the findings of the 2009-2010 Impact of the National Voter 

Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993; released the 2010 Statutory Overview report on States’ 

election laws; completed the final public hearing on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to 

revise the NVRA regulations; received and processed State requests for modifications to the 

state-specific instructions on the National Mail Voter Registration Form; revised A Voter’s 

Guide to Federal Elections and translated it into nine languages; and produced a searchable 

online version of the Glossaries of Election Terminology. 

Voting Systems Testing and Certification -- Certified one full voting system and one system 

modification; initiated a formal voting system investigation; performed testing for eleven 

voting systems or system modifications; completed the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens 

Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) Registration and Voting Process white paper; published A 

Survey of Internet Voting; performed ongoing work with the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST) to complete revision to Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 1.1 

Draft; participated in a National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program audit; and held 

roundtable discussions regarding 2010 elections and preparations for 2012; Commercially 

available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software; and Life Cycle of a Voting System. 

Program Performance Indicators

The following table presents key EAC FY 2011 program performance data. As much detailed 

performance information as possible will be presented, and variances discussed, in the FY 2011 

Annual Performance Report due February 15, 2012 along with the FY 2013 Congressional 

Justification. 
Election Assistance Commission 

18

EAC FY 2011 Performance Summary 

Program Performance Indicator 

Type of 

Indicator Planned Actual 

Strategic Goal 1: Communicate 

 Issue Clearinghouse policy Output Final 

In Final Draft (quorum 

required for final approval) 

 

Issue Policies/Procedures to process requests from 

outside EAC Output Final In Final Draft 

Distribute at least one email update per month to 

stakeholders Output 12 50 

Identify technologies and other communication 

opportunities that will ensure rapid delivery of 

information. Output 

EAC 

Blog 

Launched EAC blog and 

Twitter account 

Strategic Goal 2: Fund and Oversee 

 Award grants within established timeframes. Output 100% 

100% of requirements 

payments and no year 

discretionary grants 

(Disability, 1st round L&A) 

 

Resolve 100 percent of audit findings within 

established time frames. Output 100% 

No overdue management 

decisions as of 9/30/11 

Negotiate indirect cost rates within 30 days of receipt 

of acceptable indirect cost proposals. Output 100% 

Submit requests for 

negotiation to HHS upon 

receipt 

Strategic Goal 3: Study, Guide, Assist 

 

Establish, in Fiscal Year 2010, a baseline for 

measuring stakeholder use of EAC research and 

educational products to improve the administration 

of elections for Federal office. In subsequent 

years, increase the percentage of stakeholder use 

of EAC research products. Output 

Baseline 

50% 65% 

 

Disseminate all completed research project reports to 

stakeholders. Output 100% 100% 

Strategic Goal 4: Test and Certify 

 

Complete accreditation reviews for all laboratories 

recommended to EAC by NIST and for all emergency 

actions within 90 days. Output 75% 75% 

 

Plan to conduct field reviews for at least 50 percent of 

jurisdictions that volunteer for reviews. Output 50% 100% 

Portfolio Analysis

 

Since 2004, EAC has received funds in three appropriations: Salaries and Expenses, Election 

Reform Programs, and for FY 2008 only, Election Data Collection Grants. The purpose of the 

Data Collection grants of $2.0 million each to five States was to measure the costs of improving 

the collection of election data at the precinct level during the 2008 Federal election. In FY 2011, 

the Salaries and Expenses appropriation of $16.3 million funded a $3.25 million transfer to 
Election Assistance Commission 

19

NIST, staff salaries and benefits, travel, rent and telecommunications, printing, contracts, 

supplies and equipment. 

I.C. FINANCIAL RESULTS 

This analysis is intended to help readers understand EAC’s financial results, position and 

condition as portrayed in the financial statements and notes to the statements. It explains 

changes in assets, liabilities, costs, revenues, obligations, and outlays; includes comparisons of 

FY 2011 to FY 2010; and discusses the relevance of balances and amounts in the financial 

statements and notes. The changes are discussed in the context of whether the year’s activities 

improved or deteriorated the agency’s financial position. 

Budgetary Resources 

Budgetary resources are the amounts available to enter into new obligations and to liquidate 

them. The majority of EAC’s available budgetary resources are for Requirements Payments in 

the Election Reform Program appropriation. Budgetary resources include new Budget Authority 

from appropriations and unobligated balances of Budget Authority provided in previous years in 

the no year Election Reform Program account. For FY 2011, the available budgetary resources 

were $32.3 million, a drop of 68.9% or $71.3 million from FY 2010. A decrease in 

appropriations received in FY 2011 resulted in this change. 

In FY 2011, EAC’s appropriations totaled $16.3 million, a reduction of $76.7 million from FY 

2010. Requirements Payments appropriations were reduced $70.0 million, other grant programs 

were reduced $5.0 million, and EAC’s operational appropriation was reduced by $1.7 million. 

In FY 2008, EAC recorded $50.7 million of unspent HAVA Section 102 payments paid to the 

States in FY 2003 and FY 2004. These funds were originally disbursed by the General Services 

Administration (GSA) acting as Administrator. Any funds remaining unspent as of November 1, 

2011, have returned or are in the process of being returned to EAC to be disbursed as HAVA 

Section 251 payments. 

The status of available budgetary resources as represented in the 2011 and 2010 Statement of 

Budgetary Resources is as follows: 

Budgetary Resources 2011 2010 Difference

% 

Change

Obligations Incurred $19,833,778 $ 86,303,814 -$66,470,036 -77.0% 

Unobligated Balance – Apportioned 5,636,700 12,046,897 -6,410,197 -53.2% 

Unobligated Balance – Not 

Available 6,788,338 5,246,828 1,541,560 29.4% 

Total $32,258,816 $103,597,539 $71,338,723 -68.9%

Obligations Incurred decreased $66.5 million from FY 2010 to FY 2011 primarily as a result of 

the disbursement of FYs 2008-2010 Requirements Payments and the reduction in the annual 

appropriation for Requirements Payments in FY 2011. Unobligated Balance – Apportioned 
Election Assistance Commission 

20

decreased $6.4 million due to award of disability research technology and pre-election logic and 

accuracy testing and post-election verification grants in FY 2011. 

Financial Position 

Assets 

EAC had $47.9 million in total assets as of September 30, 2011. This is a decrease of $96.6 

million from FY 2010 largely as a result of disbursements of Requirements Payments from FYs 

2008-2010. EAC did not receive additional appropriations in FY 2011 for Requirements 

Payments. As of September 30, 2011, $28.2 million in FY 2010 Requirements Payments, $38.3 

million in FY 2009 Requirements Payments, and $30.0 million in FY 2008 Requirements 

Payments were disbursed in FY 2011. 

Advances and Prepayments decreased approximately $2.0 million in FY 2011 resulting in a 

balance of $1.4 million as of September 30, 2011. In FY 2008, EAC recorded $50.7 million in 

HAVA Section 102 Advances to the States still unspent as of September 30, 2008, and an 

unspent balance of $34.7 million as of September 30, 2009. In FY 2010, that number was 

reduced to $3.4 million. In FY 2011, $96.5 million was disbursed to the States. Summary asset 

data is presented below: 

Assets

 FY 2011 FY 2010 Difference

% 

Change

Fund Balance with Treasury $45,153,024 $139,669,928 -$94,516,904 -67.7% 

Advances and Prepayments 1,406,389 3,375,688 -1,969,299 -58.3% 

Other Assets 1,343,517 1,401,329 -57,812 -4.1% 

 Total $47,902,930 $144,476,945 -$96,574,015 -66.8% 

Liabilities 

EAC had total liabilities of $2.2 million as of September 30, 2011. This is a $0.4 million increase 

from FY 2010. Accounts Payables increased $0.7 million in FY 2011. As of September 30, 

2011, EAC had received 22 completed certifications from the States for Requirements Payments 

totaling $96.5 million. As of September 30, 2011, all Requirements Payments due had been 

disbursed and no accrual was recorded. 

Liabilities

 FY 2011 FY 2010 Difference

% 

Change

Accounts Payables $1,783,211 $1,087,876 $695,335 63.9% 

Accrued Payroll and Benefits 127,046 380,928 -253,882 -66.6% 

Unfunded Leave 293,961 327,803 -33,842 -10.3% 

 Total $2,204,218 $1,796,607 $407,611 22.7%
Election Assistance Commission 

21

Net Position 

Net position, which is the sum of Unexpended Appropriations and Cumulative Results of 

Operations, decreased in FY 2011 by $97.0 million. Unexpended Appropriations decreased 

$97.2 million from FY 2010 to FY 2011, primarily due to expenditure of $96.5 million in 

Requirements Payments. Cumulative Results of Operations is the accumulated difference 

between expenditures and financing sources since the inception of the agency. 

Net Position

 FY 2011 FY 2010 Difference

% 

Change

Unexpended Appropriations $44,650,213 $141,834,143 -$97,183,930 68.5%

Cumulative Results of Operations 1,048,499 846,195 202,304 -23.9%

Total $45,698,712 $142,680,338 -$96,981,626 68.0%

Results of Operations 

The EAC, as presented in its Statement of Net Costs, reports its results of operations within four 

programs: Communications and Clearinghouse, Fund and Oversee, Research, Policy and 

Programs, and Testing and Certification. Costs specifically identified with each of these 

programs such as assigned personnel costs and specific program contract costs are allocated to 

the program directly. The Fund and Oversee program reports the expenditures for the 

Requirements Payments and the other EAC grants. In years in which EAC receives significant 

appropriation for these HAVA funds, this program, Fund and Oversee, typically exceeds the 

other programs in overall costs. Other general agency overhead costs such as rent, human 

resource costs and financial management costs are allocated on either a per employee basis or a 

percent of overall costs method. This methodology is outlined in EAC’s Cost Allocation Model 

and is reviewed each year to ensure the accurate allocation of expenses to each program. 

Total Net Cost of Operations for the EAC was $108.6 million for Fiscal Year 2011. This was an 

overall decrease from FY 2010 of $22.4 million. Net Cost of Operations in FY 2011 consists of 

general salaries and other expenses totaling $12.8 million and grant and Requirements Payments 

of $95.8 million. Net Cost of Operations for FY 2010 consisted of $12.8 million in general 

salaries and expenses and $118.2 million in grant and Requirements Payments. 

Results of Operations by Program

 FY 2011 FY 2010 Difference

% 

Change

Communications and 

Clearinghouse $ 2,011,063 $ 1,797,916 $ 213,147 11.9%

Fund and Oversee 100,376,323 122,834,439 -22,458,116 -18.3%

Research, Policy and Programs 2,971,090 2,845,652 125,438 4.4%

Testing and Certification 3,255,161 3,531,576 -276,415 -7.83%

 Total $108,613,637 $131,009,583 -$22,395,946 -17.1%
Election Assistance Commission 

22

Limitations of the Financial Statements 

The principal financial statements have been prepared to report the financial position and results 

of operations of the entity, pursuant to the requirements of 31 U.S.C. 3515(b). While the 

statements have been prepared from the books and records of the entity in accordance with 

Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for Federal entities and the formats 

prescribed by the Office of Management and Budget, the statements are in addition to the 

financial reports that are used to monitor and control budgetary resources, which are prepared 

from the same books and records. 

The statements should be read with the realization that they are for a component of the U.S. 

Government, a sovereign entity. 

I.D. ANALYSIS OF CONTROLS, MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, AND LEGAL 

COMPLIANCE 

Internal Control Environment

EAC is subject to numerous legislative and regulatory requirements that promote and support 

effective internal controls. EAC believes that maintaining integrity and accountability in its 

programs and operations is critical for good government, demonstrates responsible stewardship 

over assets and resources, helps ensure high-quality and responsible leadership, allows for 

effective delivery of services to customers, and maximizes desired program outcomes. 

EAC has developed and implemented management, administrative and financial system controls 

that reasonably ensure: 1) programs and operations achieve intended results efficiently and 

effectively; 2) resources are used in accordance with the mission of the agency; 3) programs and 

resources are protected from waste, fraud and abuse; 4) program and operations activities are in 

compliance with laws and regulations; and 5) reliable, complete and timely data are maintained 

and used for decision-making. 

The agency used controls that ensure that transactions are executed in accordance with budgetary 

and financial laws and other requirements, consistent with the purposes authorized, and are 

recorded in accordance with Federal accounting standards. EAC ensures that assets are properly 

acquired and used, safeguarded to deter theft, accidental loss or unauthorized disposition, and 

fraud. 

Laws that help EAC improve the management of its financial operations and programs are as 

follows: 

Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act

 

The Federal Manager’s Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) of 1982 requires Executive Branch 

agencies to establish, maintain, and assess internal controls to ensure that agency program and 

financial operations are performed effectively and efficiently. To help ensure that controls have 

been identified and implemented, the heads of agencies must annually evaluate and report on the 
Election Assistance Commission 

23

effectiveness of the internal control (FMFIA Section 2) and financial management systems 

(FMFIA Section 4) that protect the integrity of Federal programs. 

During FY 2008, the EAC evaluation was limited to identifying weaknesses disclosed in reports 

issued by the General Accountability Office and by the EAC Office of the Inspector General, 

including the weaknesses identified through the year’s financial statement audit. Since FY 2009, 

EAC has incorporated the results of self-assessments of financial management internal controls 

to further demonstrate evaluation of internal controls. 

A material weakness was identified by management in FYs 2008 and 2009 concerning EAC’s 

lack of effective written policies and procedures in the areas of property, personnel, records 

management, mail management, physical security, travel, information technology, research, and 

communications and clearinghouse. Travel, information technology, and research handbooks 

were finalized in FY 2010. The remaining handbooks are in draft, one is undergoing legal 

review and two are planned to be finalized once EAC has a quorum of Commissioners. The 

following chart shows FYs 2010 and 2011 planned corrective actions compared to actual 

completion dates. 

Corrective Actions 

Target 

Completion 

Date 

Actual 

Completion 

Date 

Develop a detailed HR Manual containing all necessary 

procedures. 

11/30/11 10/24/11 

Finalize Communications and Clearinghouse Policy and National 

Voter Registration Act revised rules 

Once a quorum 

is in place 

Pending 

The auditors identified one new material weakness dealing with internal controls over financial 

reporting in FY 2011. EAC will work with the current or an alternative service provider to 

ensure internal controls over financial reporting are strong. 

Table 1 presents the material weaknesses identified by management for FY 2011 as beginning 

balances. Ending balances reflect status after resolution of findings as of September 30, 2011. 

TABLE 1 

 EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERNAL CONTROL OVER OPERATIONS (FMFIA § 2) 

Statement of Assurance Unqualified 

No. Material Weaknesses 

Beginning 

Balance New Resolved Consolidated 

Ending 

Balance 

1 Lack of Policies & Procedures 1 0 0 0 1 

2 Internal Control over Financial 

Reporting 0 1 1 

 TOTAL WEAKNESSES 1 1 0 0 2 
Election Assistance Commission 

24

During FY 2009, EAC began the process of designing, implementing, and assessing internal 

controls in full compliance with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-123, 

Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control, and FFMIA. A-123 requires the managers of 

Federal agencies to take responsibility for assessing internal controls over financial reporting. 

EAC contracted for independent review of the key business processes impacting financial 

operations and the financial statements, and business processes with no material impact on the 

financial statements but which have some potential for risk or exposure for the agency. 

In December 2009 and April 2010, EAC conducted agency-wide internal control training, 

emphasizing identification of risks to accomplishment of the agency’s mission and program 

results. 

Entity-Wide Security Program 

EAC recognizes that effective security management is critical to EAC’s mission. The ability to 

ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its information assets is essential to 

minimizing risks of inadvertent or deliberate misuse, fraud or destruction. There were no 

deficiencies for a beginning balance, and no deficiencies were identified in FY 2011. 

During FY 2011, EAC initiated work on an information technology (IT) modernization project to 

enhance the agency’s network infrastructure. As part of the agency’s effort to improve IT 

services, EAC refreshed aging laptop workstations with high-performance desktop workstations 

as well as upgrading to Microsoft Office 2007 from Office 2003. The agency migrated from 

LOTUS Notes email messaging to Microsoft Exchange server 2010 with Outlook 2007 as email 

client. 

EAC implemented its own self-contained system recovery backup solution to protect missioncritical data against system downtime and for disaster recovery purposes. To ensure internal 

security, EAC applied additional access controls including an intrusion detection appliance. 

Further, EAC began work on an upgrade of the telephone system to a menu-driven interactive 

voice response (IVR) system. The main switch number uses a telephone menu to direct callers 

to Commissioners, program offices, internal departments as well as voter contact information for 

State voter information lines during elections. To improve internal and external communication, 

EAC began work on a unified messaging for Voice over IP (VOIP) phone system that allows 

users to access voicemail electronic messaging via email, custom auto-attendant, call forwarding 

and audio conferencing at anytime from any location. Moreover, EAC improved its continuous 

monitoring capability by using Asset management and IT service desk utilities. 

The FY 2011 Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) evaluation report found 

that EAC has taken actions to address the majority of the serious problems noted in the FY 2010 

FISMA evaluation report. Table 2 below summarizes EAC’s level of compliance in each 

FISMA control area in the FY 2011 FISMA evaluation. There were no findings of “not in 

substantial compliance.” 

 

 

 
Election Assistance Commission 

25

TABLE 2

CONTROL REQUIREMENT Compliance Determination 

Contingency planning for EAC was not in full compliance with 

FISMA because the recently-completed plan had not yet 

undergone testing. 

EAC officials took action to correct this 

problem. 

Develop and publish a “routine use” policy dealing with breach 

of security relating to PII data, including actions taken for 

individuals affected by the breach. 

EAC officials took action to correct this 

problem. 

Conduct privacy impact assessments for electronic information 

systems and collections and, in general, make them publicly 

available. 

EAC analyzed its Personal Identification 

Information systems and published System of 

Record Notices in 2011, and determined that 

none of the agency’s systems required PIA to 

be issued. We concurred in this termination. 

The FY 2011 FISMA audit found that EAC was in substantial compliance with FISMA 

requirements. Specifically, it was noted that EAC had established sufficient policies and 

procedures relating to its IT security program to address identified risks; implemented actions to 

address prior concerns relating to meeting Privacy Act requirements; established a continuous 

monitoring program that substantially addressed all NIST requirements; provided annual security 

awareness training and specialized training to its IT specialists; developed and tested a 

contingency plan; and had established required access controls sufficient to meet identified risks.

Audit Follow-Up

EAC’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducts audits and reviews of the agency’s 

operations. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) works closely with EAC 

management and the OIG to complete actions necessary to respond to audit findings. OCFO 

tracks the completion of the audit recommendations in a Monthly Audit Recommendation 

Tracking Report. The report is carefully reviewed by EAC and is submitted each month to 

Congressional Oversight staff. As of September 30, 2011, EAC has three open findings to 

resolve. EAC made improvements in all Agency management challenges. EAC also considers 

and responds to recommendations from audits and reviews conducted by the Government 

Accountability Office. 

Federal Financial Management Improvement Act

Per OMB Bulletin No. 07-04 “Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements,” EAC as an 

Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002-covered agency, is not subject to the requirements of 

the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act. 

Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 

 

The Fiscal Year 2011 financial statement audit report identified one material weakness in internal 

control over financial reporting and one significant deficiency. It did not identify areas of 

noncompliance. 
Election Assistance Commission 

26

Federal Information Security Management Act

EAC was in compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act at the end of FY 

2011. 

 

Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988

 

The EAC Office of the IG audits HAVA funds administered by recipients of HAVA grants and 

transmits to EAC single audit reports that present findings on HAVA funds. The principal 

recipients of HAVA grant funds are State governments. In FY 2011, EAC resolved audit reports 

issued by the IG for Iowa, Florida, Rhode Island, California, Arkansas, Montana, Connecticut, 

West Virginia, Louisiana, and New York. In FY 2011, EAC also resolved Single Audit Act 

findings for the States of New York, New Mexico, New Jersey and West Virginia. 

EAC requested the IG to audit the two grants issued in 2006 to Project Vote under the Help 

America Vote College Program. Even though Project Vote submitted final progress reports and 

maintained that the worked outlined in the grants was successfully completed, they were unable 

to locate any cost or accounting to support expenditures made under the grant awards. 

Accordingly, EAC disallowed $33,750 and determined that this amount was to be repaid to 

EAC. EAC collected $33,750 and resolved this audit in FY 2011.
Election Assistance Commission 

27

U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

1201 New York Ave. NW – Suite 300 

Washington, DC 20005 

November 15, 2011 

Annual Assurance Statement on Internal Control 

The management of the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is responsible for establishing 

and maintaining effective internal control and financial management systems that meet the 

objectives of the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) and Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Circular A-123 Management’s Responsibility for Internal Control. Internal 

control is an integral component of EAC’s management that provides reasonable assurance the 

following objectives are being achieved: effectiveness and efficiency of operations, reliability of 

financial reporting, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. 

 

EAC’s assessment of internal controls for ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of operations 

focused on assessing controls for ensuring the reliability of information associated with the 

performance measures presented in its strategic plan, and on self-assessments in the Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer (OCFO). With respect to assessing internal control designed to ensure 

the reliability of financial reporting, EAC is not required by OMB Circular A-123 to perform a 

separate assessment. EAC relied upon the evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting 

conducted by its independent auditors, on reports issued by the Inspector General, and on OCFO 

departmental risk assessments and letters of assurance over the accounting, budget, grants, 

procurement and overall OCFO functions. With respect to internal controls to ensure 

compliance with laws and regulations, the EAC relied upon the evaluation conducted by its 

independent auditors and the Inspector General. 

In FY 2011, EAC worked to resolve one material weakness in the effectiveness of its internal 

control over operations: lack of effective written policies and procedures in the areas of Human 

Resources, Communications and Clearinghouse, and National Voter Registration Act 

regulations. EAC finalized Human Resources procedures as of this writing, and will work in FY 

2012 to finalize the remaining policies and procedures once there is a quorum of Commissioners. 

The auditors found a material weakness and a significant deficiency in internal controls over 

financial management reporting. They found that the financial statements and supporting 

documentation were not provided in a timely manner. EAC will work with its financial 

management service provider to resolve the weakness. 

Except for the material weakness described above, the Commission provides a qualified 

statement of assurance that the internal control and financial management systems meet the 

objectives of the Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act. 

 Thomas R. Wilkey 
Election Assistance Commission 

28

SECTION II

Financial Section 

II.A. MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

I am pleased to present EAC’s financial statements for FY 2011. Our financial statements are an 

integral component of the Agency Financial Report (AFR). This is the fourth year in its eight 

year operational existence that EAC has prepared financial statements and submitted them for 

audit. EAC has worked diligently toward unqualified opinions on the last three financial 

statements. 

This is the third year EAC is participating in the pilot performance reporting project as described 

in OMB Circular A-136 Financial Reporting Requirements, presenting an Agency Financial 

Report in place of the Performance and Accountability Report. EAC presents summarized 

performance data in this report, and will provide detailed data in February 2012 in conjunction 

with the Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 Congressional Justification. 

During FY 2011, EAC worked on written policies and procedures in the areas of general 

administration, travel, and information technology to resolve one material weakness in the 

effectiveness of its internal control over operations. 

Annette Lafferty 

Chief Financial Officer 

November 15, 2011 
Election Assistance Commission 

29

II.B. INSPECTOR GENERAL’S ASSESSMENT 
Election Assistance Commission 

30
Election Assistance Commission 

31

II.C. INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT 
Election Assistance Commission 

32
Election Assistance Commission 

33
Election Assistance Commission 

34
Election Assistance Commission 

35
Election Assistance Commission 

36
Election Assistance Commission 

37
Election Assistance Commission 

38
Election Assistance Commission 

39
Election Assistance Commission 

40
Election Assistance Commission 

41
Election Assistance Commission 

42
Election Assistance Commission 

43
Election Assistance Commission 

44
Election Assistance Commission 

45
Election Assistance Commission 

46
Election Assistance Commission 

47
Election Assistance Commission 

48
Election Assistance Commission 

49

II.D. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 

The Balance Sheet presents information as of September 30, 2011, amounts of future economic 

benefits owned or managed by EAC (i.e., assets), amounts owed by EAC (i.e., liabilities), and 

amounts that comprise the difference (i.e., net position). 

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

BALANCE SHEET 

As of September 30, 2011 and 2010 (In Dollars) 

Assets 2011 2010 

 Intragovernmental: 

 Fund balance with Treasury (Note 2) $ 45,153,024 $ 139,699,928 

 Advances and Prepayments (Note 4) 612,994 2,263,002 

 Total intragovernmental assets 45,766,018 141,962,930 

 With public: 

 Accounts receivable, net (Note 3) 326 228,374 

 Advances and prepayments (Note 4) 793,395 1,112,686 

 Total assets with public 793,721 1,341,060 

 General property and equipment, net (Note 5) 1,343,191 1,172,955 

 Total assets $ 47,902,930 $ 144,476,945 

 

Liabilities 

 Intragovernmental: 

 Accounts payable (Note 6) $ 135,960 $ 306,504 

 

Employer contribution and payroll 

taxes payable (Note 6) 19,911 73,289

 Total intragovernmental 155,871 379,793

 With the public: 

 Accounts payable (Note 6) 1,647,251 781,372

 Accrued payroll and benefits (Note 6) 107,135 307,639

 Unfunded leave (Note 6) 293,961 327,803

 Total liabilities 2,204,218 1,796,607

 

Net position 

 Unexpended appropriations 44,650,213 141,834,143 

 Cumulative results of operations 1,048,499 846,195 

 Total net position 45,698,712 142,680,338 

 

 Total liabilities and net position $ 47,902,930 $ 144,476,945 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 
Election Assistance Commission 

50

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

STATEMENT OF NET COST 

For The Years Ended September 30, 2011 and 2010 (In Dollars) 

 2011 2010 

Program Costs: 

Communications and Clearinghouse $ 2,011,063 $ 1,797,916 

Fund and Oversee 100,376,323 122,834,439 

Research, Policy and Programs 2,971,090 2,845,652 

 Testing and Certification 3,255,161 3,531,576 

Net cost of operations (Note 8) $ 108,613,637 $ 131,009,583

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 
Election Assistance Commission 

51

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION 

For The Years Ended September 30, 2011 and 2010 (In Dollars) 

 

 2011 2010 

Cumulative results of operations: 

 Beginning balance $ 846,195 $ 7,765 

 Beginning balance, as adjusted $ 846,195 $ 7,765 

 

Budgetary financing sources: 

 Appropriations used 108,463,104 131,610,830 

 

Other financing sources (non-exchange): 

 Imputed financing from costs absorbed from others 352,837 237,183

 

Total financing sources: $ 108,815,941 $ 131,848,013 

 Net cost of operations (108,613,637) (131,009,583)

 Net change 202,304 838,430

 $ 1,048,499 $ 846,195

Cumulative results of operations: 

Unexpended appropriations: 

 Beginning balance $ 141,834,143 $ 186,401,600 

 Beginning balance, as adjusted $ 141,834,143 $ 186,401,600 

 

Budgetary financing sources: 

 Appropriations received $ 16,300,000 $ 92,959,000 

 Appropriations transferred in/out (+/-) (3,243,500) (3,500,000)

 Other adjustments (1,777,326) (2,415,627)

 Appropriations used (108,463,104) (131,610,830)

Total budgetary financing sources $ (97,183,930) $ (44,567,457)

Total unexpended appropriations 44,650,213 141,834,143

 

Net position $ 45,698,712 $ 142,680,338 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 
Election Assistance Commission 

52

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

STATEMENT OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES 

For The Years Ended September 30, 2011 and 2010 (In Dollars) 

 2011 2010 

Budgetary resources: 

 Unobligated balance, brought forward $17,293,724 $13,998,900 

 Recoveries of prior year obligations 2,549,790 1,181,062

 Budget authority: 

Appropriations received 16,300,000 92,959,000

Spending authority from offsetting 

collections: 

 Collected 1,136,128 1,374,204 

 Nonexpenditure transfers, net, anticipated and actual (3,243,500) (3,500,000)

 Permanently not available (1,777,326) (2,415,627)

Total budgetary resources (Note 9) $32,258,816 $103,597,539 

 

Status of budgetary resources: 

 Obligations incurred: $19,833,778 $86,303,814 

 

 Unobligated balance - apportioned 5,636,700 12,046,897

 Unobligated balance not available 6,788,338 5,246,828

Total status of budgetary resources (Note 9) $32,258,816 $103,597,539 

 

Change in obligated balance: 

 Obligated balance, net 

 Unpaid obligations, brought forward (Note 11) $122,406,204 $143,885,983

 Obligations incurred, net 19,833,778 86,303,814

 Less: gross outlays 106,962,206 (106,602,531)

Less: recoveries of prior year unpaid obligations, 

actual (2,549,790) (1,181,062)

Total, unpaid obligated balance, end of period forward 

(Note 11) $32,727,986 $122,406,204

 

Net outlays: 

 Gross outlays $106,960,528 $106,602,531 

 Less: offsetting collections (1,134,450) (1,374,204)

Net outlays (Note 9) $ 105,826,078 $105,228,327 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 
Election Assistance Commission 

53

II.E NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 

GENERAL FUND

Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies 

Reporting Entity 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is an independent, bipartisan commission charged 

with developing guidance to meet the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requirements, adopting 

voluntary voting system guidelines, and serving as a national clearinghouse of information about 

election administration. EAC also accredits testing laboratories and certifies voting systems, as 

well as audits the use of HAVA funds. 

Other responsibilities include distributing and monitoring HAVA funds provided to States and 

other grantees; and maintaining the national mail voter registration form developed in 

accordance with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. 

HAVA established the Standards Board and the Board of Advisors to advise EAC. The law also 

established the Technical Guidelines Development Committee to assist EAC in the development 

of voluntary voting system guidelines. 

The four EAC commissioners are appointed by the President and confirmed by the United States 

Senate. EAC is required to submit an annual report to Congress as well as testify periodically 

about HAVA progress and related issues. The commission also holds public meetings and 

hearings to inform the public about its progress and activities. 

Basis of Accounting and Presentation 

As required by the Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 (ATDA), the accompanying 

financial statements present the financial position, net cost of operations, changes in net position, 

and budgetary resources of the EAC. While these financial statements have been prepared from 

the books and records of the EAC in accordance with United States generally accepted 

accounting principles (GAAP) and in accordance with the form and content for entity financial 

statements specified by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in Circular A-136, as 

revised, Financial Reporting Requirements, as well as the accounting policies of the EAC, the 

statements may differ from other financial reports submitted pursuant to OMB directives for the 

purpose of monitoring and controlling the use of the EAC’s budgetary resources. GAAP for 

federal entities are the standards prescribed by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory 

Board (FASAB), which is the official body for setting the accounting standards of the federal 

government. 

These financial statements reflect both accrual and budgetary accounting transactions. Under the 

accrual method of accounting, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are 

recognized when a liability is incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary 
Election Assistance Commission 

54

Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) 

accounting is designed to recognize the obligation of funds according to legal requirements. 

Budgetary accounting is essential for compliance with legal constraints and controls over the use 

of Federal funds. 

Throughout these financial statements, assets, liabilities, revenues, and costs have been classified 

according to the type of entity with which the transactions are associated. Intragovernmental 

assets and liabilities are those from or to other federal entities. Intragovernmental earned 

revenues are collections or accruals of revenue from other federal entities and intragovernmental 

costs are payments or accruals to other federal entities. These statements should be read with the 

understanding that they are for a component of the U.S. Government, a sovereign entity. 

Assets

Assets that an entity is authorized to use in its operations are termed entity assets, while assets 

that are held by an entity and are not available for the entity’s use are termed non-entity assets. 

All of the EAC’s assets are entity assets and are available to carry out the mission of the EAC, as 

appropriated by Congress. 

Fund Balance with Treasury 

EAC does not maintain cash in commercial bank accounts. The U.S. Treasury processes cash 

receipts and disbursements. Funds with the U.S. Treasury consist of appropriated funds. These 

funds are available to pay current liabilities and finance authorized purchase commitments. 

Accounts Receivable 

EAC’s accounts receivable represents claims from associates and amounts due from the States 

and grant recipients. The amounts due from current and separated employees result from payroll 

adjustments and /or court ordered actions. The amounts from the States and grant recipients 

result from audits and examinations performed by the EAC on the proper use of funds under the 

Help America Vote Act of 2002, Section 101, 102 and 251 payments and Section 102 funds 

unspent by the States that did not file the extension waiver. 

Advances and Prepayments 

On occasion the EAC prepays amounts in anticipation of receiving future benefits. Although a 

payment has been made, an expense is not recorded until goods have been received or services 

have been performed. The EAC has prepayments and advances with non-governmental, as well 

as governmental, vendors. 

Total prepayments and advances to non-governmental entities as of September 30, 2011 were 

$793,395. These include primarily HAVA Section 102 advances unspent by the States as of 

September 30, 2011. The prepayments and advances to governmental entities were $612,994 as 
Election Assistance Commission 

55

Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) 

of September 30, 2011. These included deposited accounts with the Department of Interior, 

Acquisition Services Directorate to provide acquisition support services to the EAC. 

General Property and Equipment 

General property and equipment (PP&E) is reported at acquisition cost. 

The capitalization threshold is established at $10,000 for assets with a useful life of 2 or more 

years. The bulk purchase policy requires that all items will be capitalized when the individual 

useful lives are at least two years and have an aggregate value of $100,000 or more. 

Acquisitions of PP&E that do not meet the capitalization criteria are recorded as operating 

expenses. General PP&E consists of items that are used by EAC to support its mission. 

Maintenance, repairs and minor renovations are expensed as incurred. Expenditures that 

materially increase values, change capacities or extend the useful lives are capitalized. 

The headquarters building in which the EAC operates is leased through the General Services 

Administration (GSA) under an occupancy agreement, which manages the lease agreement 

between the Federal government and the commercial entity. EAC is billed on a monthly basis by 

GSA for the leased premises. The cost of the leasehold improvements to the headquarters 

building has been capitalized. Any costs of leasehold improvements financed with EAC 

appropriated funds are capitalized if the total cost exceeds $25,000. Any construction costs will 

be accumulated as “construction in-progress” until completion and then transferred and 

capitalized as a “leasehold improvements” over 7 years or the remainder of the lease, whichever 

is less. 

Internal use software development and acquisition costs of $25,000 will be capitalized as 

software development in progress until the development stage is completed and the software is 

successfully tested. At acceptance, software development-in-progress costs will be reclassified 

as internal use software costs and amortized using the straight-line method over an estimated 

useful life of 5 years. Purchased commercial software that does not meet the capitalization 

criteria will be expensed. Enhancements which do not add significant new capability of 

functionality will be expensed. 

Liabilities 

Liabilities represent amounts that are likely to be paid by the EAC as the result of transactions or 

events that have already occurred; however, no liabilities are paid by EAC without an 

appropriation. Intragovernmental liabilities arise from transactions with other Federal entities. 

Liabilities classified as not covered by budgetary resources are liabilities for which 

appropriations have not been enacted (e.g., annual leave benefits and actuarial liability under the 

Federal Employees Compensation Act). 
Election Assistance Commission 

56

Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) 

Accounts Payable 

Accounts payable consist of liabilities to commercial vendors and contractors and other federal 

agencies for amounts owed for goods, services, and other expenses received but not yet paid at 

the end of the fiscal year. Accounts payable also consists of disbursements in transit recorded by 

EAC but not yet paid by the U.S. Treasury. 

Accrued Payroll and Benefits 

Accrued payroll and benefits represents salaries, wages and benefits earned by employees, but 

not disbursed as of September 30, 2011. Accrued payroll and benefits are payable to employees 

and are therefore not classified as Intragovernmental. 

Annual, Sick and Other Leave 

Annual leave is recorded as a liability when it is earned; the liability is reduced as leave is taken. 

Each pay period the balance in the accrued leave account is adjusted to reflect the current leave 

balances and pay rates. Accrued annual leave is paid from future funding sources and 

accordingly is reflected as a liability not covered by budgetary resources. Sick leave and other 

types of non-vested leave are expensed as taken. 

Federal Employee Benefits 

A liability is recorded for estimated and actual future payments to be made for worker’s 

compensation pursuant to the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA). EAC had a FECA 

liability at the end of the reporting period for claims filed for the period July 1, 2010 through 

June 30, 2011. Accordingly, EAC recorded a liability for estimated payments to be made for 

workers’ compensation pursuant to the Act. 

Employee Retirement Plans 

EAC employees participate in either the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) or Federal 

Employees Retirement System (FERS), which became effective on January 1, 1987. Most EAC 

employees are covered by FERS and social security. 

For employees covered by CSRS, the EAC withheld 7.0 percent of base pay earnings. The EAC 

matches this withholding, and the sum of the withholding and the matching funds is transferred 

to the Civil Service Retirement System. 

For FERS covered employees, the EAC made contributions of 11.7 percent of basic pay. 

Employees participating in FERS are covered under the Federal Insurance Contribution Act 

(FICA) for which the EAC contributes a matching amount to the Social Security Administration. 

FERS contributions made by employer agencies and covered employees are comparable to the 
Election Assistance Commission 

57

Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) 

U.S. Government’s estimated services costs. 

Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) 

The Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) is a retirement savings and investment plan for employees 

covered either by CSRS or FERS. The TSP is administered by the Federal Retirement Thrift 

Investment Board on behalf of Federal agencies. For employees belonging to FERS, EAC 

automatically contributes one percent of base pay to their account and matches contributions up 

to an additional four percent. For employees belonging to CSRS, there is no governmental 

matching contribution. 

The EAC does not report on it financial statements CSRS and FERS assets, accumulated plan 

benefits, or unfunded liabilities, if any, which may be applicable to EAC employees. Reporting 

such amounts is the responsibility of the Office of Personnel Management. The portion of the 

current and estimated future outlays for CSRS not paid by EAC is, in accordance with Statement 

of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) No. 5, Accounting for Liabilities of the 

Federal Government, included in EAC’s financial statements as an imputed financing source. 

Commitments and Contingencies 

Commitments are contractual agreements involving financial obligations. EAC is committed for 

goods and services that have been ordered, but have not yet been received. 

A contingency is an existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as 

to possible gain or loss. The uncertainty will ultimately be resolved when one or more future 

events occur or fail to occur. A contingency liability is recognized when a past event or 

exchange transaction has occurred, and future outflow or other sacrifice of resources is 

measurable and probable. A contingency is not disclosed when any of the conditions for liability 

recognition are met but the chance of the future event or events occurring is remote. A 

contingency is disclosed when any of the conditions for liability recognition are not met and the 

chance of the future confirming event or events occurring is more than remote but less than 

probable. 

Revenues and Other Financing Sources 

Annual Appropriation 

EAC receives its funding through an annual appropriation as provided by Congress. 

Imputed Financing Sources 

In accordance with OMB Circular A-136, all expenses should be reported by agencies whether 

or not these expenses would be paid by the agency that incurs the expense. The amounts for 

certain expenses of EAC, which will be paid by other Federal agencies, are recorded in the 

Statement of Net Cost. A corresponding amount is recognized in the “Statement of Changes in 

Net Position” as an “Imputed Financing Source.” These imputed financing sources primarily 

represent unfunded pension costs of EAC employees, as described above. 
Election Assistance Commission 

58

Note 1 – Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) 

Statement of Net Cost 

Net cost of operations is the difference between the EAC’s expenses and its earned revenue. For 

Fiscal years 2010 and 2011, the EAC has four programs; Communication and Clearinghouse, 

Fund and Oversee, Research, Policy and Programs, and Testing & Certification. The cost for 

each program is a sum of the direct costs of the program and an allocation of the agency’s other 

overhead costs such as rent, telephone, administrative and financial support staff. All grants and 

requirement payments are included in the Fund and Oversee program. 

Grants 

The EAC administers and oversees the grant making process in connection with federal 

Requirement Payments and grants mad to recipient organizations und the HAVA. As 

Requirement Payments and grants are awarded, they are recorded as obligations and represent 

uses of budgetary resources. Payments made under the grant awards for expenditures already 

incurred by the recipients are fully expended and are included in the statement of net costs. 

Grant awards made to grantees in advance of expenditures are recorded as advances and are 

included in the balance sheet. 

Net Position 

Net position is the residual difference between asset and liabilities and is comprised of 

unexpended appropriations and cumulative result of operations. Unexpended appropriations 

represent appropriated spending authority that is unobligated and has not been withdrawn by the 

U.S. Treasury along with obligations that have not been paid. Unobligated balances associated 

with appropriations that expire at the end of the fiscal year remain available for obligation 

adjustments, but not for new obligations, until that account is closed, five years after the 

appropriations expire. Cumulative results of operations represent the excess of financing sources 

over expenses since inception. 

Use of Estimates 

The preparation of the accompanying financial statements in accordance with accounting 

principles generally accepted in the United States requires management where necessary, to 

make certain estimates and assumptions that directly affect the reported amounts of assets, 

liabilities, revenues, and expenses. Actual results could differ from these estimates. 

Note 2 – Fund Balance With Treasury 

Fund balances with Treasury are contained within seven annual funds (FY2006 through FY2011) 

and two no-year funds. The total of fund balances with treasury consisted of the following at 

September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010: 
Election Assistance Commission 

59

A. Fund Balance with Treasury 2011 2010

Appropriated Fund $45,153,024 $139,699,928 

B. Status of Fund Balance with Treasury

1) Unobligated Balance

a) Available 5,636,700 12,046,896 

b) Unavailable 6,788,338 5,246,828 

2) Obligated Balance not yet Disbursed 32,727,986 122,406,204 

 Total $45,153,024 $139,699,928 

Available unobligated balances represent amounts that are apportioned for obligation in the 

current fiscal year. Unavailable unobligated balances represent amounts that are not apportioned 

for obligation during the current fiscal year along with expired appropriations that are not longer 

available to incur new obligations. Obligated balances not yet disbursed include undelivered 

orders unpaid and expended authority-unpaid. 

Note 3 – Accounts Receivable, Net 

Accounts receivable, net comprised of claims from associates consists of the following as of 

September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010: 

Accounts Receivable, net 2011 2010

 Claims from Associates $326 $2,067

 Due from States 0 226,307

$326 $228,374

Note 4 – Advances and Prepayments 

Advances and prepayments with non-governmental and governmental entities consist of the 

following as of September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010: 

Advances and Prepayments 2011 2010

 With Governmental Entities $612,994 $2,263,002

 With Non-Governmental Entities 793,395 1,112,686

Total $1,406,389 $3,375,688

Note 5 - General Property, Plant and Equipment, Net 

The general components of capitalized property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation, 

consist of the following as of September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010: 
Election Assistance Commission 

60

2011

Asset Class

Service Life 

(years)

Acquisition

Value

Accumulated

Depreciation

Net Book

Value

Office Equipment 5 $551,867 $143,593 $408,274

Furniture 5 678,651 341,598 337,053

Internal Use

Software 5 172,721 17,261 155,460

Leasehold

Improvements 4 675,216 261,647 413,569

Total Depreciated Capital

Assets $2,078,455 $764,099 $1,314,356

Internal Use Software

Under Development $28,835 $0 $28,835

Total $2,107,290 $764,099 $1,343,191

2010

Asset Class

Service Life 

(years)

Acquisition

Value

Accumulated

Depreciation

Net Book

Value

Office Equipment 5 $128,264 $61,208 $67,056

Furniture 5 726,933 211,411 515,522

Leasehold

Improvements 7 681,915 91,538 590,377

Total $1,537,112 $364,157 $1,172,955

Depreciation expense was $399,514 for the period ending September 30, 2011 and $262,236 for 

the period ending September 30, 2010. 

Depreciation of these assets is calculated using the straight-line method with no salvage value. 

Depreciation begins the month after the asset is placed in service. Useful lives are 5 years for 

equipment and 5 years for furniture. 

The estimated useful lives and corresponding capitalization thresholds are as follows: 

Type Lives Threshold

Equipment 5 years 10,000 $ 

Furniture 5 years 10,000 

Vehicles 5 years 10,000 

Leasehold Improvements 7 years 25,000 

Software 5 years 25,000 
Election Assistance Commission 

61

Note 6 – Liabilities

Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources 

Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources result from the receipt of goods and services, or 

the occurrence of events, for which appropriations, revenues, or other financing sources 

necessary to pay the liabilities have not yet been made available through Congressional 

appropriation. 

Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources consisted of the following as of September 30, 

2011 and September 30, 2010: 

2011 2010

Intragovernmental

FECA Liability 1,057 1,023

With the Public

Unfunded Annual Leave 293,961 327,803

295,018 328,826

Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources 

Liabilities covered by budgetary resources consist of the following as of September 30, 2011 and 

September 30, 2010: 

2011 2010

Intragovernmental

Accounts Payable $135,960 $306,504

Employer Contributions and Payroll Taxes 18,854 72,266

Total Intragovernmental 154,814 378,770

With the Public

Accounts Payable 1,647,251 781,372

Employer Contributions and Payroll Taxes 1,739 - 

Unemployment 22,258 - 

Accured Payroll and Benefits 83,138 307,639

Total With the Public 1,754,386 1,089,011

Total Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources $1,909,200 $1,467,781

Note 7 – Leases

EAC has no capital leases. The EAC has a current operating lease for the headquarters office 

space located at 1201 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC which runs through 

March 31, 2014. EAC took occupancy of this space on March 19, 2010. 
Election Assistance Commission 

62

EAC also had an operating lease for additional space located at 1440 New York Ave, NW, 

Washington, DC, which commenced August 5, 2008 with an original completion date of 

December 5, 2008. The lease was extended through April 30, 2011 and then again until August 

2011. The space was occupied until new space leased on the 2nd floor of 1225 New York 

Avenue, NW, became available in August 2011. 

Future lease payments due under this lease through March 31, 2014 are: 

Future Operating Lease Payments

Fiscal Year

FY2011

Lease Payment

2011 $1,099,536

2012 $1,053,828

2013 1,062,981

2014 540,144

2015 - 

2016 and thereafter - 

Total future lease payments $3,756,489

Future Operating Lease Payments

Fiscal Year

FY2010

Lease Payment

2011 921,702

2012 929,627

2013 937,790

2014 477,588

2015 and thereafter - 

Total future lease payments $3,266,707

Note 8 – Statement of Net Cost 

For Fiscal year 2010 and 2011, the EAC has four programs; Communication, Fund and Oversee, 

Research , Policy and Programs, and Testing & Certification. The cost for each program is a 

sum of the direct costs of the program and an allocation of the agency’s other overhead costs 

such as rent, telephone, administrative and financial support staff. All grants and requirement 

payments are included in the Fund and Oversee program. The total cost of operations for the 

periods ended September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 is as follows: 
Election Assistance Commission 

63

Fiscal Year 2011

Programs Intragovernmental With the Public Total

 Communications $600,452 $1,410,611 $2,011,063

 Fund & Oversee 1,143,629 99,232,694 100,376,323

 Research, Policy & Program 887,091 2,083,998 2,971,090

 Testing and Certification 971,908 2,283,254 3,255,161

Total $3,603,080 $105,010,557 $108,613,637

Fiscal Year 2010

Programs Intragovernmental With the Public Total

 Communications $521,265 $1,276,651 $1,797,916

 Fund & Oversee 1,329,791 121,504,648 122,834,439

 Research, Policy & Program 825,032 2,020,620 2,845,652

 Testing and Certification 1,023,899 2,507,677 3,531,576

Total $3,699,987 $127,309,596 $131,009,583

In accordance with OMB Circular A-136, costs incurred for goods and services provided by 

other federal entities are reported in the full costs of EAC’s programs and for Fiscal Year 2010 

employer benefits for payroll, excluding TSP were included. They are identified as 

“Intragovernmental.” All other costs are identified as “with the public.” 

Note 9 – Statement of Budgetary Resources 

The Statement of Budgetary Resources (SBR) compares budgetary resources with the status of 

those resources. As of September 30, 2011, the budgetary resources were $32,258,816 and net 

outlays were $105,826,078. As of September 30, 2010, budgetary resources were $103,597,539 

and net outlays were $105,228,327. 

Apportionment Categories of Obligations Received 

EAC receives apportionments of its resources from OMB. These are “Category A” during 

Continuing Resolutions for exception apportionment, “Category B” apportionments once the 

appropriation is enacted which are for resources that can be obligated in compliance with 

legislation underlying programs for which the resources were made available. 

For the periods ended September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, direct obligations incurred 

amounted to $19,833,778 and $86,303,814, respectively. 

Note 10 – Comparison to the Budget of the United States Government 

SFFAS No. 7, Accounting for Revenue and Other Financing Sources and Concepts for 

Reconciling Budgetary and Financial Accounting, requires an explanation of material 

differences between budgetary resources available, the status of those resources and outlays as 

presented in the Statement of Budgetary Resources to the related actual balances published in the 

Budget of the United States Government (Budget). The Budget that will include FY 2011 actual 

budgetary execution information is scheduled for publication in February 2012, which will be 
Election Assistance Commission 

64

available through OMB’s website at http://www.whitehouse.gov//omb. Accordingly, 

information required for such disclosure for FY 2010 is not available at the time of publication of 

these financial statements. 

The Budget that includes the FY 2010 actual execution information was published February 1, 

2011. 

FY2010

Budgetary 

Resources

Obligations 

Incurred Net Outlays

Statement of Budgetary Resources $103,597,539 $86,303,814 $105,228,327

Spending Authority from

Offsetting Collections (1,374,204) - -

Unobligated Balance Not Available (5,246,828) - -

Total Adjusted Balance $96,976,507 $86,303,814 $105,228,327

Budget of the US Government 96,000,000 86,000,000 105,000,000 

Difference $976,507 $303,814 $228,327

The difference between the Statement of Budgetary Resources and the Budget of the US 

Government is largely related to offsetting collections, changes in the balances of funds that have 

permanently expired or are no longer available for obligations, and therefore not available for the 

President’s Budget. Remaining differences are due to rounding. 

Note 11 – Unpaid Obligated Balance, net 

Unpaid obligated balance, net consists of undelivered orders and accounts payable. Undelivered 

orders represent obligations for which goods and services have not yet been received. Accounts 

payable includes goods and services which have been received but not yet paid for. The total 

unpaid obligated balance, net as of September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 were as follows: 

FY 2011 FY 2010

Undelivered Orders $30,818,786 $120,938,416

Accounts Payable 1,909,200 1,467,788

Unpaid obligated balance, net 32,727,986 122,406,204

Note 12 – Reconciliation of Net Cost of Operations (Proprietary) to Budget (formerly the 

Statement of Financing) 

The purpose of this note is to detail the differences between budgetary and financial (proprietary) 

accounting. This is accomplished by means of a reconciliation of budgetary obligations and nonbudgetary resources available to the reporting entity with its net cost of operations. 
Election Assistance Commission 

65

2011 2010

Resources Used to Finance Activities:

Budgetary Resources Obligated

 Obligations Incurred 19,832,101 $ 86,303,814 $ 

 Less: Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections 

 and Recoveries 3,684,241 2,555,266 

 Net Obligations 16,147,860 83,748,548

Other Resources

 Imputed Financing from Costs Absorbed by Others 352,837 237,183 

Net Other Resources Used to Finance Activities 352,837 237,183

Total Resources Used to Finance Activities 16,500,697 83,985,731

Resources Used to Finance Items not Part of the Net Cost of Operations

Change in Budgetary Resources Obligated for Goods

 Services and Benefits Ordered But Not Yet Provided 92,088,937 47,740,411 

Resources that Finance the Acquisition of Assets

Other Resources or Adjustments to Net Obligated Resources That (342,130) (1,174,413) 

 Do Not Affect Net Cost of Operations

Total Resources Used to Finance Items Not Part of the Net Cost 91,746,807 46,565,998

108,247,504 130,551,729

Total Resources Used to Finance the Net Cost of Operations

Components of the Net Cost of Operations that will not Require or Generate

Resources in the Current Period:

Components Requiring or Generating Resources in Future Periods:

 Decrease in Annual Leave Liability (33,843) 66,505 

 Other (+/-) 34

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations that will Require or Generate 66,505 (33,809) 

Resources in Future Periods

Components Not Requiring or Generating Resources:

Depreciation and Amortization 399,942 262,236 

Other (+/-) 129,113

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations that will not Require or Generate

Resources 391,349 399,942 

Total Components of Net Cost of Operations that will not Require or Generate

Resources in the Current Period 457,854 366,133 

Net Cost of Operations $ 131,009,583 108,613,637 $ 

Note 13 – Requirement Payments and Grant Programs 

The EAC Requirements Payments and grant programs are funded through annual appropriations. 

The largest of the grant programs is the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Section 251 

Requirements Payments to the states to help them meet the Title III requirements of HAVA. The 

EAC periodically receives additional grant money to fund grant programs such as Research of 

Voting Technology Improvements, College Poll Worker and Mock Election grants. Reflected in 

the Statement of Net Costs for periods ending September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010, are 

the following requirements and grant program payments. For presentation purposes, EAC has 

separated Section 102 Advances Spent by States from Section 251 Requirement Payments for 

FY2009 and FY2010. 
Election Assistance Commission 

66

 

 FY 2011 FY 2010

FY 2008 Section 251 Requirement Payments $30,032,324 $21,978,026 

FY 2009 Section 251 Requirement Payments 38,299,071 30,457,959 

FY 2010 Section 251 Requirement Payments 26,888,473 29,671,329 

Military Heroes Grant 270,011 - 

Section 102 Advances Spent by States - 33,713,042 

FY 2008 Data Collection Grants 13,921 1,745,231 

College Poll Worker Grants 709,427 429,841 

Mock Election Grants 332,797 252,371 

 Total $96,546,024 $118,247,799

II.F REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY STEWARDSHIP 

INFORMATION (Unaudited) 

Non-Federal Physical Property

Stewardship investments are substantial investments made by the Federal Government for the 

benefit of the nation but are not physical assets owned by the Federal Government. When 

incurred, they are treated as expenses in determining the net cost of operations. However, these 

items merit special treatment so that users of Federal financial reports know the extent of 

investments that are made for long-term benefit. Such investments are measured in terms of 

expenses incurred for non-Federal physical property, human capital, and research and 

development. In October 2002, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The law 

recognized the need for States to invest in their election infrastructure. A major provision of 

HAVA, Title III Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Election Technology and Administration 

Requirements, sets forth requirements for each voting system used in an election for Federal 

office. 

Fiscal Year 

2007 

Fiscal Year 

2008 

Fiscal Year 

2009 

Fiscal Year 

2010 

Fiscal Year 

2011 

Section 102 

Funds $ 15,533,405 $ 2,103,632 $ 19,905,709 $36,853,333 -

Section 251 

Funds 181,694,563 358,536,246 262,018,224 105,865,616 78,575,556

Data Collection 

Grants - - 447,650 188 -

Total $197,227,968 $360,639,878 $282,371,583 $142,719,137 $78,575,556

Section 102 Funds. Section 102 funds were disbursed to States for the primary purpose of 

replacing punch card or lever voting machines. As such, Section 102 funds have been used to 

purchase physical property. These funds will be converted to Section 251 requirement payments 

and redistributed to the states. 
Election Assistance Commission 

67

Section 251 Funds. Section 251 requirements payments are to be used only to meet the 

requirements of Title III Uniform and Nondiscriminatory Election Technology and 

Administration Requirements. As such, Requirements Payments have been used in part to 

purchase physical property but also to provide funds to States to carry out other activities to 

improve administration of elections. 

Data Collection Grants. In Fiscal Year 2008, EAC awarded $10.0 million in Election Data 

Collection Grants to five States. These funds were to be used to improve the collection of 

precinct-level data relating to the November 2008 elections. Based on budgetary information 

supplied by each State, Federal physical property purchased with these funds is presented above. 

Research and Development

 

The EAC has three research and development initiatives. These initiatives provide funds to 

support the search for new or improved election voting technology that increases the 

accessibility and accuracy of voting for all citizens. Costs incurred on these initiatives are 

included in the calculation of net costs. 

Initiative Fiscal Year 2011

Military Heroes $270,011

Accessible Voting 

Disability Technology 0

Pre Election Logic 

and Accuracy 0

Total $270,011

Military Heroes Initiative

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has made available up to $500,000 in funds for a twoyear grant focused on research to improve voting technology and processes for recently injured 

military personnel. The purpose of this grant is to enable better understanding of the needs of 

injured military personnel in major hospital, recovery and rehabilitation facilities related to 

election processes, including; 1) documentation of current practices associated with voting 

activities at these facilities; 2) identification of barriers that may prevent this population from 

voting privately and independently; and 3) reviews and assessments of new and innovative 

technologies for assisting military personnel’s ability to participate in the electoral process. 

Accessible Voting Disability Technology Initiative

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has made available up to $7,000,000 in grant funds 

for a three-year grant to fund research to identify and develop technological and administrative 

solutions that help ensure all citizens can vote privately and independently, a requirement of the 

Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 (42 U.S.C. §15441). This initiative will support 

research and development activities to increase the accessibility of new, existing, and emerging 

technological solutions in such areas as assistive technologies, interoperability, and design of 

voting systems. 
Election Assistance Commission 

68

Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy and Post-Election Audit Initiative

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has made available up to $2,000,000 in grant funds to 

develop and document processes and best practices for coordinating quality and cost-effective A) 

voting system pre-election logic and accuracy testing (L&A) and B) post-election audits. Funds 

will support the research, development, documentation, and dissemination of a range of 

procedures and processes used in managing and conducting high-quality L&A testing and postelection audit activities by type of voting method, vendor-specific equipment, jurisdiction size, 

or other ways. An additional amount of up to $1,000,000 will be available to state and local 

entities that currently lack adequate funding or capacity for conducting pre-election logic and 

accuracy testing and post-election audits prior to the 2012 general elections to support the 

implementation of pilot programs funded under this funding notice. 
Election Assistance Commission 

69

SECTION III

Other Accompanying Information 
Election Assistance Commission 

70

III.A. MOST SERIOUS MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES FACING EAC ACCORDING 

TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL 

 
Election Assistance Commission 

71
Election Assistance Commission 

72
Election Assistance Commission 

73
Election Assistance Commission 

74
Election Assistance Commission 

75
Election Assistance Commission 

76
Election Assistance Commission 

77
Election Assistance Commission 

78
Election Assistance Commission 

79

III.B. EAC’S RESPONSE TO THE MOST SERIOUS MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES 

FACING EAC ACCORDING TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
Election Assistance Commission 

80
Election Assistance Commission 

81

III.C. IMPROPER PAYMENTS 

The Improper Payments Act requires each Federal agency to assess all programs and identify 

which, if any, may be subject to high risk with respect to improper payments. For fiscal year 

2011, EAC does not believe that it has any programs where the erroneous payments could 

exceed 2.5 percent of program payments or $10.0 million threshold (set in OMB Guidance) to 

trigger further agency action. 

III.D. SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT AND MANAGEMENT 

ASSURANCES 

SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR2011FINANCIALSTATEMENT AUDIT

Audit Opinion Unqualified

Restatement None

Material Weaknesses

Beginning

BalanceNewResolvedConsolidated

Ending

Balance

Financial Accounting & Reporting 0000 1

TOTAL WEAKNESSES 0000 1

SUMMARY OFMANAGEMENTASSURANCES

Statement of Assurance

(FMFIA§ 2) Qualified

No. Summary

Beginning

BalanceNewResolvedConsolidated

Ending

Balance

1 Material Weaknesses

(FMFIA§ 2) 1 0 0 0 1

TOTAL 1000 1
Election Assistance Commission 

82