THE U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

FISCAL YEAR 2012 

INTERIM CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION 

February 14, 2011
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

2

Page Intentionally Left Blank
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Vision and Mission .......................................................................................5 

FY 2012 High-Performance Priority Goals............................................................5 

Appropriations Language.................................................................................6 

Legislative Proposal.......................................................................................6 

EAC Background and Mission..............................................................................6 

EAC’s Goals and Structure..............................................................................9 

The High-Performance Priority Goals......................................................................10 

Operating Plan Summary................................................................................11 

Budget Requests and Performance Measures by Strategic Plan and High Performance 

Priority Goals..............................................................................................12 

Improper Payments...................................................................................... 27 

Acquisition Strategies....................................................................................27 

Information Technology Infrastructure and Security................................................27 

Human Resource Management .........................................................................28 

Appendix A -- FY 2010 Annual Performance Report 

Appendix B -- Retrospective of Expenditure of Grant Funds April 2003 – December 2010 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

4

Page Intentionally Left Blank
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

5

VISION AND MISSION 

Vision 

Lead election reform that reaffirms the right to vote and to have all eligible votes counted 

accurately. 

Mission 

Assist the effective administration of Federal elections. 

Salaries and Expenses Resources Available for Obligation 

FY 2010 Enacted FY 2011 FY 2012 President’s Budget

Annualized Continuing 

Resolution Level 

FTE Dollars FTE Dollars FTE Dollars 

 

50 $17,959,000

 

50 

 

$17,959,000 49 $13,715,665

FY 2012 Priorities 

• Serve as a clearinghouse and provide election officials and voters with information 

regarding the process for casting a vote in the 2012 Federal elections. 

• Provide election officials with technical assistance and information, as appropriate, to 

support poll worker training, educate the public, and help provide voters access to 

information on such topics as when and where to vote for the 2012 Federal elections. 

• Distribute materials designed to allow citizens who are not proficient in the English 

language to participate fully in Federal elections to any jurisdictions covered by the 

Voting Rights Act Section 5 languages prior to and as a result of the 2010 Census. 

• Provide voluntary best practices for computerized statewide voter registration list 

requirements and registration by mail guidance to the States. 

• Assist election officials by ensuring that voting systems and modifications of alreadycertified systems submitted to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s (EAC’s) 

program are successfully and efficiently tested to Federal standards. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

6

Appropriations Language

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

SALARIES AND EXPENSES 

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS) 

For necessary expenses to carry out the Help America Vote Act of 2002, [$17,959,000] 

$13,715,665, of which [$3,500,000] $3,250,000 shall be transferred to the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology for election [reform] administration activities authorized under the 

Help America Vote Act of 2002. [Provided, that $750,000 shall be for the Help America Vote 

College Program as provided by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-252): 

Provided further, that $300,000 shall be for a competitive grant program to support community 

involvement in student and parent mock elections.] (Financial Services and General Government 

Appropriations Act, 2010.) 

Legislative Proposal 

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-252) is amended by: (a) inserting in 

Section 255(b)(42 U.S.C.15405) “posted on the Commission’s website with a notice” after 

“cause to have the plan”; (b) inserting in Section 253(d)(42 U.S.C. 15403) “notice of” prior to 

“the state plan”; (c) striking in Section 254(a)(11)(A)(42 U.S.C. 15404) “in the Federal 

Register”; and (d) inserting in Section 254(a)(11)(C)(42 U.S.C. 15404) “notice of” prior to "the 

change.” 

The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 requires publication of State plans for use of 

HAVA requirements payments funds in the Federal Register. The cost to publish these 

documents is significant, as is the time it takes for large documents such as the plans to be 

published. EAC believes it will be faster and less costly to publish a reference to the State plans 

in the Federal Register with a hyperlink directing interested parties to the eac.gov website. 

EAC Background and Mission

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

need for States to invest in their election infrastructure and required EAC to establish a voluntary 

federal testing and certification program for voting systems, a clearinghouse replete with election 

administration studies, voluntary guidance and materials and a program to distribute federal 

funds. 

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 the Technical Guidance Development Committee-- 

guide the EAC. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

7

Its mission is to assist in the effective administration of Federal elections. EAC is statutorily 

required to: 

• Create a clearinghouse of information for election officials and the public. 

• Distribute HAVA funds to states for election administration improvements. 

• Issue, and periodically review and modify, as necessary, Voluntary Voting System 

Guidelines (VVSG). 

• Accredit voting system test labs and certify voting equipment. 

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

Commission. 

• Establish best practices and guidance 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 input 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 set the standards against which voting systems are tested. The Director of the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) serves as the Chair of the TGDC and 

provides technical support to the Committee. In addition, NIST and the EAC jointly choose four 

member of the TGDC. The EAC uses the work product of the TGDC as the basis for all 

voluntary voting systems guidelines promulgated by the Commission as prescribed by HAVA. 

Additionally, HAVA specifies that NIST provide recommendations to EAC regarding voting 

system test laboratories. Since Fiscal Year (FY) 2004, EAC’s annual appropriations have 

included funds for NIST support. 

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

January 2004 with an operating budget of $1.7 million. At the close of the fiscal year, EAC had a 

staff of 18. 

As EAC did not begin operations until 2004, the General Services Administration (GSA) initially 

distributed HAVA funds to the fifty States, American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, 

Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands on EAC’s behalf in Fiscal Year 2003. EAC’s focus in 

2004 was to assemble staff, obtain office space, arrange for administrative support from GSA, 

establish a website, start clearinghouse operations, and distribute Federal financial assistance to 

states. In regard to Federal financial assistance, Congress appropriated nearly $3 billion in Fiscal 

Years 2003 and 2004 for payments to the fifty States, the District of Columbia, and territories for 

the replacement of punch card and lever voting machines and other election administration 

improvements pursuant to Titles I and II of HAVA. Specifically, states used these initial funds 

to carry out activities such as: 

1) ensuring voting systems met the minimum standards under HAVA, 

2) establishing a computerized statewide voter registration database, 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

8

3) improving polling place accessibility, and 

4) training election officials, pollworkers and election volunteers. 

In FY 2004, EAC 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 focus in subsequent years was on establishing and subsequently 

updating the VVSG, completing mandated research to promote effective Federal elections and to 

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 effective 

election practices to its stakeholders. 

In FY 2007, the full-time equivalent staffing ceiling of 24 was lifted. As of the end of FY 2010, 

EAC had a full-time permanent staff of 46 employees, including three Commissioners and four 

special assistants. In FY2011, one Commissioner left the agency. 

EAC’s Goals and Structure

EAC’s offices are aligned to address the goals in the Strategic Plan: Goal 1, Communicate is 

administered by the Office of Communications and Clearinghouse. Goal 2, Fund and Oversee is 

administered by the Grants Management and Inspector General Offices. Goal 3, Study, Guide, 

and Assist, is aligned with the Research, Program and Policy unit. Goal 4, Test and Certify is 

administered by the Voting System Testing and Certification unit. Goal 5, Manage is aligned 

with the Boards, Commissioners, Executive Director, General Counsel, Chief Operating Officer, 

and Chief Financial Officer. A cost allocation model distributing administrative costs to the 

goals is part of the annual Agency Financial Report. Budgets correspond with the goals and 

information in the financial statements. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

9

The agency has four high-performance priority (HPP) goals. HPP Goal One aligns with the 

Communicate goal; Goals Two and Three align with the Study, Guide, and Assist goal; and HPP 

Goal Four aligns with Test and Certify. 

The High-Performance Priority Goals

Voters need easy access to up-to-date information on where, when and how to vote. Leading up 

to an election year, State and local election officials are faced with an enormous responsibility 

for informing voters and training Election Day poll workers. 

Federal elections are locally administered with a wide variety of practices and policies from 

jurisdiction to jurisdiction. State and local election officials work hard to conduct fair, 

accessible, accurate and secure elections. They do this by informing the electorate and properly 

training poll workers. EAC assists States and local jurisdictions by providing tools and best 

practices to election officials to improve election administration practices. Under EAC’s 

Election Management Guidelines Program, EAC provides a wealth of information about pre-
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

10

election activities, including ballot preparation and design, voting system security, contingency 

planning, voting system certification, voting system acceptance testing and parallel testing. The 

materials promote a proactive approach to election management. 

As States look to new technology and practices in voting (including remote access voting for 

Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) voters, vote by phone and 

accessible technology for disabled voters and any new voting systems manufacturers market in 

the future), EAC must be in a position to test the new systems against rigorous Federal standards 

in a timely, efficient and high-quality manner. EAC's work to develop testable guidelines and 

test procedures and criteria for UOCAVA pilot voting systems directly relates to the agency’s 

mission to test, certify and decertify voting systems as prescribed under HAVA. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

11

Operating Plan Summary 

Salaries and Expenses FY 10 

Enacted 

FY 11 Annualized 

Continuing 

Resolution (CR) 

FY 12 

Request 

Full-Time Equivalent Staff (FTE) 50 50 49 

Full-Time Permanent Staff 46 46 47 

Other than Full-Time Permanent Staff 18 9 7 

Personnel Compensation and Benefits 

11.1 Payroll Full-Time Personnel 

 

4,234,324 4,832,567 

 

4,889,436 

11.3 Payroll Other than Full-Time Personnel

 

668,811 542,738 

 

393,965

12 Benefits 

 

1,480,015 1,281,827 

 

1,279,138 

Subtotal PC&B 

 

6,383,150 6,657,132 

 

6,562,539

Non-Personnel 

21 Travel 

 

871,894 949,141 

 

684,239 

23.1 Rent 

 

850,200 1,034,000 

 

1,059,364 

23.3 Communications, Utilities, Postage 

 

120,400 122,808 

 

113,969 

24 Printing, reproduction 

 

601,933 673,112 

 

81,870 

25 Other Services 

 

4,168,630 3,840,802 

 

1,791,134 

25.3 Transfer to NIST 

 

3,500,000 3,500,000 

 

3,250,000 

26 Supplies and subscriptions 

 

154,733 113,685 

 

123,150 

31 Equipment 

 

258,060 18,320 

 

49,400 

41 Grants 

 

1,050,000 1,050,000 - 

Subtotal, Non-personnel 

 

11,575,850 11,301,868 

 

7,153,127 

Total 

 

17,959,000 17,959,000 

 

13,715,665 

Notes: 

 FY 2012 assumes no Cost of Living Adjustment. Assumes a non-pay inflationary increase of 1.4 percent. 

 FY 2011 assumes half of anticipated end of year balance of $867,665 is made available in FY 2012 pursuant to Section 609 of 

the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act. EAC requested and received $175,000 of FY 2009 

Salaries and Expenses remaining balances for use in FY 2010 pursuant to Section 609. The funds were obligated for 

expenses related to the agency Information Technology Modernization Project. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

12

Budgetary Changes FY 2011 to FY 2012 

(in whole dollars) 

Personnel Compensation and Benefits -$94,594, -1 FTE 

Decrease of one position in CFO for procurement 

Travel -$264,902 

Testing and Certification to FY 2010 actual level; Public Meetings; 

Research, Policy and Programs; Grants Management monitoring; 

Inspector General; Commissioners; Executive Director; miscellaneous 

Printing -$591,242 

Assumes research, testing and certification, and educational products are 

available on-line only; State Plan amendments referenced in Federal 

Register (pending enactment of legislative proposal) 

Other Services -$2,049,668 

EAC website enhancements; Public Meetings; administrative services; 

contracted audits; one-time move costs; escrow services for election 

system software 

Transfer to NIST -$250,000 

Grants -$1,050,000 

College Poll Worker, Mock Elections 

Miscellaneous +$57,070 

Rent, Telecommunications, Supplies and subscriptions, Equipment and 

furniture. Assumes carryover from FY 2011 to 2012.

Budget Requests and Performance Measures by Strategic Plan and

High Performance Priority Goals

COMMUNICATE

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. The anticipated outcome of the goal is to help ensure that 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. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

13

EAC Strategic Outcome -- Communicate 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Enacted CR Request 

$848,752 $897,758 $669,583 

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

Office of Communications and Clearinghouse. The goal will be achieved via three strategic 

objectives: 1) operate the EAC Elections Clearinghouse effectively; 2) respond to outside 

requests about the EAC timely and accurately; and 3) convey the results of EAC operations and 

accomplishments. 

High-Performance Priority Goal 1: Serve as a Clearinghouse and provide election officials 

and voters with necessary information regarding the process for casting a vote in the 2012 

Federal elections. Provide States with funding, and election officials with technical 

assistance and information, as appropriate, to support activities such as poll worker 

training, educating the public, and helping provide voters with access to information such 

as when and where to vote for the 2012 Federal elections. The first of the high-performance 

priority goals is aimed at assisting eligible voters so that they have the information on how to 

cast a ballot for a federal election, and providing a central resource about election administration 

for election officials. Part of the first high-performance priority goal is also to share information 

with the Public about EAC’s budget, internal operations and structure, as well as other policies 

and procedures that impact the public. 

In order to implement the goals, EAC will employ such strategies as: 

• Using the latest technology and communication tools for www.eac.gov (recognized in the 

Top Five Federal Websites by Congress.org in December 2010) 

• Complying with Open Government requirements and continue to operate transparently 

• Providing more tools for the public to interact with and provide input to EAC 

• Integrating various EAC operations, information and resources into the Clearinghouse 

EAC’s website will continue to be the platform to facilitate meeting this high priority goal. The 

new website, unveiled in 2010, is designed to support the Commission’s efforts to increase 

transparency. It features leading-edge search, navigation and content-delivery tools that 

transformed the site into a more modern, dynamic and transparent source of information for the 

public and election officials. 

EAC’s most commonly provided materials, such as the National Mail Voter Registration Form, 

voter’s guides, Election Management Guidelines, and National Voter Registration Act reports 

are easily access from the website. The new Election Resource Library holds all of these 

materials for easy searching, sorting and browsing.

Open Government and Public Participation Activities

EAC’s Open Government activities are available at www.eac.gov/open. General comments can 

be submitted to www.eac.gov/contact. Throughout EAC’s website, the agency has applied the 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

14

concept of open government as well as implemented tools to facilitate a conversation with the 

public about voting and election administration. 

EAC’s new website provides several mechanisms through which the public can provide direct 

feedback to EAC on agency activities and operations. For instance, the public can rate and 

comment on nearly 200 EAC reports, policies, manuals and Election Management Guidelines in 

the Election Resource Library. In addition, EAC’s new Public Comment section makes it easier 

for the public to keep track of draft EAC policies on which the agency is seeking public input. 

Users can also 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. Other new features include a multimedia center that provides 

educational and training videos on polling place management, election contingency planning, 

voting accessibility, and voting system testing and certification. The videos are also available on 

YouTube at youtube.com/helpamericavote. 

EAC Elections Clearinghouse 

EAC’s mission is to assist the effective administration of Federal elections. The Elections 

Clearinghouse is mandated by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, and provides a 

public portal for information about elections. Currently, EAC’s website serves as a national 

Clearinghouse of election administration information. Among its thousands of pages of content 

are test plans and reports of voting system manufacturers seeking Federal certification, datasets 

containing detailed information by State on voter registration and turnout statistics in recent 

Federal elections, and information for voters on how to register to vote and contact their State 

elections offices. 

The Communications division is instrumental in ensuring that all stakeholders receive 

information about the voting system testing and certification program, among other activities. 

The Communications staff post and disseminate voting system reports and studies that have been 

conducted or commissioned by a State or local government on the EAC’s Testing and 

Certification Voting System Reports Clearinghouse. 

The Communications and Clearinghouse Division 

EAC’s Communications Division is responsible for communicating with the media and 

stakeholders, including election officials, academics, policy-makers, advocacy groups and the 

public. The Communications division maintains the agency’s website, www.eac.gov, which 

contains thousands of documents with information about voting system test plans, agency 

correspondence, and testimony from EAC hearings and Public Meetings and hearings; and 

external and internal communications such as press releases, news articles and speeches, 

informational videotapes on the programs, a monthly newsletter about EAC activities and events 

that is disseminated to approximately 1,200 subscribers, and a weekly email on internal 

operations. The unit coordinates with EAC staff to communicate policies, guidance, research, 

and other agency initiatives to the public. 

EAC will continue to achieve its goal of serving as the trusted source for information about 

elections and election administration. The FY 2012 request includes $220,000 for the website 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

15

contract, training videos, and staff training. The request also includes $7,000 for staff travel, 

$26,000 for printing of the mandated EAC Annual Report and Freedom of Information Act 

notices in the Federal Register, $5,000 for public education materials during a presidential 

election year, and $30,000 for supplies and subscriptions such as the National Journal. Goal 1 is 

administered by a staff of three full-time employees. 

Strategic Goal One: Communicate Performance Measures 

Performance Indicator 

Type of 

Indicator 

FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Planned 

Strategic Objectives 

Operate the EAC clearinghouse effectively. 

Post applicable information on 

the website within 24 hours of 

receipt.1/ Output 

100% of data 

posted within 

24 hours 

100% of data 

posted within 

24 hours 

100% of data 

posted within 

24 hours 

100% of data 

posted within 

24 hours 

100% of data 

posted within 

24 hours 

100% of data 

posted within 

24 hours 

Respond to outside requests about the EAC timely and accurately. 

Respond to 75 percent of nonFOIA requests within 72 hours. Output 

75% response 

rate in 72 

hours 

100% 

response rate 

in 72 hours 

100% 

response rate 

in 72 hours 

100% 

response rate 

in 72 hours 

100% 

response rate 

in 72 hours 

100% 

response rate 

in 72 hours 

Convey the results of EAC operations and accomplishments. 

Issue quarterly press releases 

summarizing EAC activities. Output 

4 press 

releases 

26 press 

releases 

4 press 

releases 

25 press 

releases 

4 press 

releases 

4 press 

releases 

Provide regular briefings 

regarding EAC activities to 

Congressional staffers. Output 

2 formal 

briefings 

2 formal 

briefings; 

inquiries 

completed and 

chronicled 

2 formal 

briefings 

4 formal 

briefings 

2 formal 

briefings 

2 formal 

briefings 

1/ Note: This is a change to the Strategic Plan, replacing “web-based Clearinghouse” with “website. This excludes Commissioner 

approval of tally votes or voting system reports from States that are posted within 48 hours. 

FUND AND OVERSEE

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

anticipated outcome of the goal is for States and other recipients to promptly and 

accurately receive Federal funds administered by EAC and use the funds appropriately to 

improve the administration of elections for Federal office. 

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

 Enacted CR Request 

Grants Management $1,914,069 $1,776,928 $372,500 1/

OIG 1,770,259 1,864,979 1,562,346 

Total $3,684,328 $3,641,907 $1,934,846 

 1/ Reflects decreases of $1,050,000 for discretionary Help America Vote College Poll Worker, and National Student and 

Parent Mock Election grants; and $294,500 for printing of State Plans in the Federal Register, assuming EAC’s legislative 

proposal (see page 6) is enacted 

Goal 2 consists of three strategic objectives: 1) accurately and timely disburse Federal financial 

assistance administered by EAC; 2) effectively monitor Federal financial assistance administered 

by EAC; and 3) provide technical assistance and guidance on the management of Federal 

financial assistance administered by EAC to reduce the risk of inappropriate use of funds and 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

16

accounting errors. Goal 2 is administered by the Grants Management division and the Office of 

the Inspector General (OIG). 

The Grants Management Division 

EAC’s Grants Management division is responsible for distributing, monitoring, providing 

technical assistance to States and grantees on the use of funds, and reporting on requirements 

payments and discretionary grants to improve administration of elections for Federal office. The 

office resolves audit findings on the use of HAVA funds, and sets indirect cost rates with 

grantees. A system to track audits and State completion of corrective actions has been 

established by a grants officer with lead responsibility for the grant audit function. 

EAC’s Grants Management staff emphasizes financial management technical assistance to the 

States and grantees, offering workshops and training sessions using webinars tools. For example, 

in FY 2010, a webinar was held for State grantees on completing the Standard Form 425 Federal 

Financial Report. EAC will continue to work with the States and grantees to clarify the 

responsibilities they have in managing the funds they receive. 

The Grants Management Office is currently staffed by an acting director, a grants officer and a 

grants specialist with contractor and one part-time peer review coordination staff support. Funds 

for the contractor and peer review coordinator are not requested for FY 2012. Interagency 

arrangements for indirect cost rate negotiations will be brought in-house. Office goals are to 

achieve the performance targets for timeliness in the Strategic Plan (see chart next page), such as 

resolving 100 percent of audit findings within established timeframes, submitting State Plans or 

references to the Plans to the Federal Register within 30 days of receipt. 

Strategic Goal Two: Fund and Oversee Performance Measures 

 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Performance Indicator 

Type of 

Indicator Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Planned 

Strategic Objectives 

Accurately and timely disburse Federal financial assistance administered by EAC.  

 

Award grants within established 

timeframes. Output 100% 100% 100% 

100% of 

requirements 

paymts & 1 

yr. grants, 

33% no yr. 

discretionary 

grants 100% 100% 

Submit State plans for publication in 

the Federal Register within 30 days of 

receipt of the plan. Output 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Submit payment requests to GSA 

within 10 days of receipt of acceptable 

requests/certifications. Output 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Provide technical assistance and guidance on the management of Federal financial assistance administered by EAC to reduce the risk of inappropriate use 

of funds and accounting errors. 

 

Respond to all inquiries by recipients 

about the use and administration of 

funds in accordance with EAC 

requirements in a timely manner. Output 

24 hour 

turn-around 

for phone & 

email 

response 

time 

To be 

measured 

beginning 

in FY 2010 

24 hour 

turn-around 

for phone & 

email 

response 

time 75% 

24 hour 

turn-around 

for an email 

or phone 

response 

90% 

24 hour 

turn-around 

for phone & 

email 

response 

time 85% 

24 hour turnaround for 

phone & 

email 

response time 

100% 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

17

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) 

EAC’s OIG conducts regular audits of recipients of grant funds distributed by the agency, annual 

audits of EAC’s operations, and periodic reviews and audits of EAC program operations and 

transactions. In addition, OIG conducts investigations in response to allegations against the 

EAC, its grant recipients, or other third parties involved in EAC programs. 

OIG has focused on auditing the grants distributed to States under the Help America Vote Act 

(HAVA). These grants represent the vast majority of grant funds distributed by EAC. The 

objectives of the State audits, in part, are to determine whether the State: 

1) expended HAVA payments in accordance with the HAVA and related administrative 

requirements; and 

2) complied with the HAVA requirements for: 

--replacing punch card or lever voting machines, 

--establishing an election fund, 

--appropriating five percent matching funds, and 

--maintaining State expenditures for elections at a level not less than expended in 

the State’s base fiscal year per HAVA Section 254(a)(7). 

Since the inception of the audit plan, OIG has completed 31 audits, with 11 additional audits 

underway in FY 2011. To date, OIG has audited $1.23 billion of the $3.09 billion of 

requirements payment grants appropriated by Congress. Additionally, OIG has issued 12 reports 

regarding EAC’s operations. The reports on State HAVA funds audits, EAC audits and 

evaluations, investigations, and Semi-Annual Reports to Congress are available at 

www.eac.gov/inspector_general. 

OIG uses various tools to communicate with EAC, Congress, and the public. OIG operates a 

website, located at www.eac.gov/inspector_general, which includes the ability to file an on-line 

complaint. OIG uses its newsletter to remind EAC employees and the public about their ability 

and responsibility to report fraud, waste, and abuse, and to educate States and other grantees on 

such topics as common audit findings. 

Over the past several years, OIG has relied primarily on contract auditors to conduct audits of 

grants to States. Currently, when issues arise that require investigation, OIG enters into 

Interagency Agreements with other Office of Inspector General for investigative services. 

OIG’s FY 2012 initial request of $1,837,836 maintains its activities at the level requested for FY 

2011. The initial request is reduced by $275,490 to $1,562,346 in keeping with the agency’s 

funding level for FY 2012 and in consultation with the IG. The lower amount reflects foregoing 

hire of three full-time and one part-time staff previously requested. The decrease in funding will 

reduce the number of audits, reviews and investigations that OIG will conduct in comparison to 

the FYs 2010 and 2011 levels. OIG’s request includes $3,750 as a transfer to the Council of 

Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE) in keeping with the provisions of the 

Inspector General Reform Act of 2008. Of the total requested, $13,000 is for training and 

professional development for staff: all OIG staff will be required to meet the continuing 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

18

education requirements applicable under the Generally Accepted Government Auditing 

Standards. 

STUDY, GUIDE, AND ASSIST

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

regarding the administration of elections for Federal office and issue guidance, 

translations, best practices and recommended improvements as required by HAVA, and 

carry out responsibilities under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The 

anticipated outcome of this goal is: 1) the election community and other key stakeholders are 

provided pertinent, impartial, timely, and high-quality information, recommendations, guides and 

other tools on election and voting issues to help improve the administration of elections for 

Federal office, 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. 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Enacted CR Request 

$1,544,817 $1,443,636 $1,137,025 

Goal 3 consists of four strategic objectives: 

1) complete research on issues deemed relevant by the Commission that improves the 

administration of elections for Federal office and expeditiously report on critical 

administration subjects and election data; 

2) identify and collect required and useful data on election administration practices, 

voting methods, and demographics pursuant to HAVA and, if deemed necessary by 

the Commission, provide recommendations for improving the quality of practices, 

methods and data; 

3) issue voter’s guides, translations and other tools that are timely and useful; and 

4) update and maintain a national mail voter registration application and report to the 

Congress as required by NVRA. 

High-Performance Priority Goal 2: Support jurisdictions covered by the Voting Rights Act 

Section 5 languages so that all jurisdictions have access to and use materials designed to 

allow citizens who are not proficient in the English language to participate fully in Federal 

elections. 

The goal is to make available materials such as voter guides and glossaries for eligible voters that 

reside in jurisdictions covered under Section 5 prior to and as a result of the 2010 Census. These 

voters include persons who are Native American, Asian American, Alaskan Natives or are of 

Spanish heritage. These materials are intended to provide assistance and support to limited and 

non-English proficient voters who wish to register and vote. The lead EAC office responsible 

for implementing the goal is the Language Accessibility Program of the Research, Policy and 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

19

Programs Division. Partners in the effort include State and local election officials, voter 

advocacy groups and other stakeholders. 

EAC’s strategy to achieve the goal is to receive the 2010 Census data and translate the EAC 

Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections and other materials to any additional languages and 

jurisdictions determined to be covered under minority language provisions of the Voting Rights 

Act, and any other jurisdiction that may have a need based on their population. Resources 

needed to achieve the goal include funds for translations and publications and the ability to 

convene working groups and roundtables. 

EAC is excited to announce its partnership with the Office of Citizenship within the U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services. The goal of the partnership is to provide every new 

citizen a copy of EAC's Voter's Guide to Federal Elections brochure in the U.S. naturalization 

ceremony packet. Given the current naturalization rates, the Office of Citizenship estimates that 

they will print and distribute 750,000 to 800,000 copies of the guide each year. The Office of 

Citizenship will start with 650,000 brochures and reprint copies at their expense as needed. EAC 

will provide the Office of Citizenship with updated information contained in the Guide on a 

yearly basis. 

High-Performance Priority Goal 3: Provide States with voluntary guidance on 

computerized voter registration lists and the national mail voter registration form. 

The aim of Goal 3 is to encourage the 50 States, American Samoa, the District of Columbia, 

Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands to utilize best practices that encourage increased 

voter participation. The lead EAC division for the effort is Research, Policy and Programs, in 

partnership with State and local election officials, voter advocacy groups and other stakeholders. 

In order to achieve Goal 3, EAC, using in-house research, will help election officials educate 

voters on the need to update their registration status, and provide assistance regarding training 

poll workers on how to assist voters who have relocated within the same State (locating the new 

polling place, procedures for casting provisional ballots, acceptable forms of identification, etc.). 

EAC plans on issuing voluntary guidance that may include but is not limited to: voter 

registration database matching protocols, maintenance of accurate voter registration lists, data 

collection and storage, online functionality, identification requirements for first-time voters, and 

inter- and intra-operability of databases; and help States promote intergovernmental cooperation 

between their various agencies and departments such as Election Offices and Social Services. 

The Research, Policy and Programs Division 

EAC’s Research, Policy and Programs (RPP) division administers: 

1) The Election Management Guidelines Program which provides information to State and local 

election officials and voters on various topics, which during 2010 have included technology 

in elections, voter accessibility and election office administration; 

2) The Language Accessibility Program which provides informational materials on the Federal 

election process and election terminology in languages other than English. In 2010, the 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

20

program provided new translations of resources in three Native American languages and one 

Native Alaskan; 

3) Technical assistance and program support to EAC grantees who are working to encourage 

college students to serve as poll workers and high school students to conduct “mock” 

elections; and 

4) Election research on mandated topics including administering the biennial Election 

Administration and Voting Survey, which includes mandatory reports to Congress on the 

National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) and Uniformed and Overseas Citizens 

Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). 

Research projects that were started in FY2010 but continue through FY2011 include the study of 

differences between administering elections in urban and rural areas, a study on vote count and 

recount procedures, and other topics Commissioners or the EAC Board of Advisors may 

identify. 

EAC plans to release two mandatory reports to Congress based on data collected during the 2010 

general election: the Impact of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) on the 

Administration of Elections for Federal office and the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens 

Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). The comprehensive Election Administration and Voting 

Survey report, which includes additional election administration-related topics, is scheduled for 

release in 2011. In 2012, EAC will administer its bi-annual Election Administration and Voting 

Survey to the States. The reports related to the survey will be released in 2013. 

In 2011, EAC will continue its work related to re-issuing the National Voter Registration Act 

regulations. The project involves reviewing the current regulations, making any proposed 

changes to the regulations, and consideration of Public comments. To ensure broad participation 

in the rulemaking process, EAC conducted hearings and provided information to elections 

officials and the public through the public comment period that ensued in the summer of 2010. 

Final regulations will be presented for adoption by the Commission following the public 

rulemaking process and printing of the rule in the Federal Register before taking effect. In 

addition, EAC intends to update the Federal Election Commission’s existing NVRA 

implementation manual to reflect any changes in the regulations and the additional requirements 

added by the passage of HAVA. 

EAC will also work to update key election management guideline materials such as guidance on 

provisional voting, poll worker training manuals, and other critical educational products. Based 

on the findings from the 2010 Census, EAC will also work to create voter educational products 

in newly-identified U.S. Department of Justice Voting Rights Act Section 203 minority 

languages. 

EAC will continue to provide technical assistance and program support to its program grantees 

along with providing opportunities for grantees to share best practices. In 2010 and 2012, EAC 

will also continue extensive outreach to various voting publics as it seeks to update its 

educational materials designed to improve the administration of Federal elections. In 2012, EAC 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

21

plans on completing work related to updating guidance on the ongoing implementation of 

Statewide voter registration databases. 

The division requests funding in FY 2012 for a staff of six; $585,000 for analysis of the biennial 

Election Administration and Voting Survey results; $18,000 in support of working group 

meetings; and $1,000 for registration fees, supplies, and subscriptions. 

Strategic Goal Three: Study, Guide, and Assist Performance Measures 

 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Performance Indicator 

Type of 

Indicator Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Planned 

Strategic Objectives 

Complete research on relevant issues that improve the administration of elections for Federal office and expeditiously report on critical election administration 

subjects and data. 

Establish, in FY 2010, a baseline for measuring 

stakeholder use of EAC research &educational products 

to improve the admin. of elections for Fed’l office. In 

subsequent years, increase % of stakeholder use... Output 

Establish 

baseline 

Baseline 

established 

at 50% 60% 70% 

Identify and collect required and useful data on election administration practices, voting methods, and demographics; and make recommendations for improving 

the quality of practices, methods, and data. 

 

Establish a baseline in FY 2009 on the accuracy and

completeness of data reported by States in response to 

EAC surveys. Increase the accuracy and completeness of 

reported data in each of the succeeding years. Output 

Baseline 

93% Election Day 

Survey 

(EDS) ’04 

95% 

response 

rate to 

EDS ’08 NA 

97% 

response 

rate to 

EDS ‘10 NA 

Include recommendations to improve election data 

collection and data provided to Congress in the biennial 

report on the Election Day Survey. Output 

2008 

election 

recommendations 

Report 

submitted 

June 2009 NA 

Report 

submitted 

June 2011 NA 

TEST AND CERTIFY

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

voting systems to improve system security, operation and accessibility. The 

anticipated outcome of the goal is that voting equipment operates more reliably and 

securely and provides greater accessibility to the disabled. States, the District of 

Columbia, and territories use EAC’s testing and certification program to ensure voting 

systems meet their respective standards and statutory requirements. 

Goal 4 consists of three strategic objectives: 

1) develop and update the voluntary voting system guidelines (VVSG); 

2) provide for the accreditation and revocation of accreditation of independent, nonFederal laboratories qualified to test voting systems to Federal standards; and 

3) administer the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting 

system hardware and software by accredited laboratories. 

FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Enacted CR Request 

$1,861,008 $1,704,685 $1,307,493 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

22

High-Performance Priority Goal 4: Ensure that modifications of certified systems 

submitted to EAC’s program are successfully and efficiently tested to Federal standards. 

The goal is to ensure that new voting systems and modifications of certified systems submitted to 

EAC’s testing and certification program are successfully and efficiently tested to Federal 

standards. The certifications provide a baseline level of conformity to assist election officials in 

maintaining the reliability and security of certified voting systems and the integrity of the overall 

election results. The lead office for implementation of the goal is the Voting System Testing and 

Certification division, with input from partners including the U.S. Department of Commerce 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Technical Guidelines 

Development Committee (TGDC). 

Continued support for the testing and certification program is needed, along with continued 

research and development, to support additional industry-wide solutions that allow voters with 

disabilities to vote privately and independently. 

The Voting System Testing and Certification Program

Under HAVA, EAC is responsible for assisting States with improvements to voting systems 

through the distribution of Federal funds and by providing a voluntary Federal certification 

program. The Federal Government’s first voluntary Voting System Testing and Certification 

Program for the States also provides the public with the opportunity to review every aspect of the 

certification process, such as voting equipment system information, test plans and reports, and 

reports on voting system anomalies in the field. 

EAC accredits voting system test labs which, using Voluntary Voting System Guidelines, 

evaluate voting systems, devices, and software to determine if they provide the functionality, 

accessibility, and security capabilities needed for reliable election results. The test labs 

provide recommendations to EAC, and the Commission’s Executive Director determines 

whether to issue a certification. 

Participation by the States in EAC's Voting System Testing and Certification Program is 

voluntary. States use varying approaches for both the type of testing required and the language 

used to require testing. The following four categories illustrate the diverse approaches taken by 

the State, including the degree States have mandated the use of EAC’s Testing and Certification 

Program. 

• Thirteen States require Federal certification. Relevant State statutes and/or rules require 

that voting systems be certified by a Federal agency. 

• Nine States require testing to Federal voting system standards. The States reference 

standards drafted by the Federal Election Commission (FEC), National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, or the EAC. 

• Thirteen States require testing by a laboratory accredited to Federal standards. 

• Twenty States do not have Federal certification requirements. Relevant State statutes 

and/or regulations do not mention any Federal agency, certification program, laboratory, 

or standard. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

23

These varying requirements of States, the District of Columbia, and territories as well as the 

location of EAC-certified systems, are available via an interactive map on www.eac.gov. 

Comprehensive procedures for the Program are detailed in EAC’s Voting System Testing and 

Certification Program Manual. The program supports local elections officials in the areas of 

acceptance testing and pre-election systems. It also increases quality control in voting system 

manufacturing by means of periodic manufacturing facility audits of EAC-registered 

manufacturers, and provides clear procedures to manufacturers for the testing and certification of 

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

In addition to its certification duties, the division works in a cooperative and coordinated manner 

with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to evaluate and accredit voting 

system test laboratories (VSTLs). A condition for accreditation requires all VSTLs to possess a 

valid accreditation from NIST’s National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NVLAP). NVLAP accreditation is the primary means by which EAC ensures that each VSTL 

meets and continues to meet the technical requirements of the EAC program. It sets the standards 

for each VSTL’s technical, physical and personnel resources, as well as its testing, management, 

and quality assurance policies and protocols. 

After NIST provides its list of recommended laboratories, EAC sends a letter to the laboratories 

inviting them to apply for EAC accreditation under the VSTL program. Procedural requirements 

for the VSTL Program are detailed in EAC’s Voting System Test Laboratory Manual. Currently, 

six voting systems are certified, as are two laboratories. Laboratories apply for EAC 

accreditation by invitation from the Commission. A letter of invitation from EAC identifies the 

scope of accreditation for which the laboratory may apply. After a thorough review of the 

laboratory application, the Commissioners vote on whether to accredit each potential VSTL. 

EAC monitors VSTLs through a comprehensive compliance management program. 

The Compliance Management Program 

Program staff gather information on the procedures and practices of its VSTLs. There are three 

main sources of information: 

1) VSTL Notifications of Changes; 

2) EAC Requests for Documents or Information; and 

3) EAC On-Site Reviews. 

The information collected is reviewed by EAC to ensure that VSTLs meet all program 

requirements. 

EAC staff has continued to improve the certification process by answering technical questions 

from election officials and manufacturers, helping VSTLs understand how to test specialized 

systems, reviewing test plans, tracking anomalies, and keeping the technical review and approval 

process moving forward. The staff has met the commitment made in 2009 to match the testing 

time schedules provided by the voting system test laboratories and manufacturers. 

Each VSTL is also required to provide to division staff a weekly update of the project timeline 

for all voting system testing engagements, and to promptly inform staff when testing 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

24

discrepancies or other actions require changes to the project schedule. Staff continues to hold 

weekly teleconferences with the laboratories and manufacturers of all testing engagements 

underway and to hold kick-off meetings with the labs and manufacturers to give EAC staff and 

technical reviewers an opportunity to meet with the labs and manufacturers and ask technical 

questions about the systems submitted for testing. 

In addition to voting system certification and laboratory accreditation, EAC along with its 

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

(TGDC) (chaired by the director of NIST and comprised of 14 other members) work together to 

update and implement voluntary testing guidelines for voting systems. Efforts 

continue into research and development of improved guidelines for the next iteration VVSG 

document. Issues in the VVSG include: 

• Software Independence 

• Common Data Format 

• Accessibility 

• Vote-by-Phone systems 

• EPollBook 

• Open Ended Vulnerability Testing 

The Voting System Testing and Certification (T&C) Division 

T&C consists of six full-time staff and five part-time technical reviewers. To save contractual 

overhead costs, EAC converted two contractor staff at a cost of $350,000 per year to two halftime technical reviewer staff, taking advantage of the Part-Time Annuitants Act authority at a 

cost of $220,500 in late FY 2010. Further, by the end of FY 2011, EAC plans on decreasing 

staff by one of the part-time reviewers. 

The division’s FY 2012 budget request includes $201,700 for travel, $15,000 for the purchase of 

voting systems for in-house use, $3,500 for supplies, $1,800 for printing, and $1,500 for training. 

Transfer to NIST

In 2012, EAC plans on transferring $3,250,000 to NIST and entering into an interagency 

agreement for the activities specifically required under HAVA Sections 221 Technical 

Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC), 231 Certification and Testing of Voting Systems, 

and 245 Study and Report on Electronic Voting and the Electoral Process. EAC and NIST 

continue to work on the development of testable guidelines for remote electronic voting systems 

to assist voters covered under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act and the 

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

25

MANAGE

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

organization. The anticipated outcome of the goal is that EAC Commissioners and staff 

proficiently carry out EAC’s strategic objectives. 

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

Technical Guidelines Development Committee, Executive Director, General Counsel, Chief 

Operating Officer, and Chief Financial Officer. 

 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

 Enacted CR Request 

Commissioners $1,186,525 $1,103,761 $1,328,497 

Board of Advisors, Standards Board 293,299 274,787 274,460

Executive Director & Public Meetings 627,182 722,514 479,508

Office of the General Counsel 670,677 759,332 517,844

Chief Operating Officer 3,037,900 2,720,467 2,422,704

Chief Financial Officer 704,511 503,993 393,704

Total $6,520,094 $6,084,854 $5,406,718 

 Note: FY 2011 CR amount for Commissioners assumes two new Commissioners are appointed April 2011 

Strategic Goal Four: Test and Certify Performance Measures 

 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 

Performance Indicator 

Type of 

Indicator Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Planned 

Strategic Objectives

Provide for the accreditation and revocation of accreditation of independent, non-federal laboratories qualified to test voting systems to Federal standards. 

 

Complete accreditation reviews for all 

laboratories recommended to EAC by 

NIST and for all emergency actions 

within 90 days. Output 

100% 

complete in 

90 days 

66% 

complete in 

90 days 

75% complete 

in 90 days 

66% complete 

in 90 days 

85% complete 

in 90 days 

95% complete 

in 90 days 

Test and document the results of the 

review of compliance with procedures 

by 100 percent of accredited 

laboratories every 2 years. Output 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Administer the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting system hardware and software by accredited laboratories. 

 

Test 100 percent of systems qualifying 

for testing each year. Output 

100% of 

systems 

submitted 

for testing 

are tested 

according to 

program 

standards 

Completed 

testing 

according to 

standards 

for 60% of 

systems 

submitted (3 

out of 5 

systems) 

Complete 

testing 

according to 

standards for 

75% of systems 

submitted 

Completed 

testing 

according to 

standards for 

60% of systems 

submitted (3 

out of 5 

systems) 

Complete 

testing 

according to 

standards for 

80% of 

systems 

submitted 

Complete 

testing 

according to 

standards for 

90% of 

systems 

submitted 

Respond to requests for interpretations 

of voting system standards within 45 

days (Measures may be modified after 

EAC determines average number of 

requests). Output 45 days 

52.4 days 

(40% on 

target) 50 days 

52.4 days (40% 

on target) 48 days 46 days 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

26

EAC’s first Goal 5 performance measure, “Obtain a clean audit opinion on agency financial 

Statements within two years of the initial Statement preparation” was achieved in FY 2009 

approximately eight months after the new CFO department was established. 

The second measure, on implementing 90 percent of OIG audit recommendations with agreed 

upon timeframes, has been affected by the need for Federal Information Security Management 

Act (FISMA) resolution and a small number of remaining policies and procedures that must be 

put in place. Now that the agency’s first Chief Information Officer is on board, EAC has been 

able to resolve all FISMA audit findings and implement all but one OIG recommendation by the 

end of December 2010. While FISMA audits for the past two fiscal years were addressed with 

the assistance of contractors, starting in FY2011, with the CIO, EAC will be able to address 

future FISMA audits in-house. 

Each month, EAC’s Chair reports on the status of 82 OIG audit recommendations made as of 

March 2008. To date, only three recommendations remain open. With the exception of a 

recommendation related to the National Voter Registration Act rulemaking process, the open 

recommendations are on track for resolution in FY 2011. In addition, there were three 

recommendations made in the FY 2009 Financial Statement audit. One on IT security controls 

was resolved in 2010, one on journal voucher review was implemented, and EAC is in the 

ongoing process of establishing continuous assurance about the effectiveness of internal controls 

relating to effectiveness and efficiency of programmatic operations. 

On the third measure, meeting annual performance measures, management is working to foster a 

culture of accountability among staff. The agency is seeking to improve staff satisfaction ratings 

and achieve management excellence through improved internal controls and human resource 

initiatives. Agency directors who are responsible for the implementation of the EAC Strategic 

Plan goals report on their division metrics for the Agency Financial Report in November, the 

Annual Performance Report along with the Congressional Budget Justification around February 

of each year, and on planned metrics in the OMB Budget Justification each September. The CIO 

and CFO plan to work on automated systems to capture performance data. 

Further, EAC plans on independently verifying the reported programmatic (non-financial) 

metrics data. To provide further assurance, EAC will implement programmatic internal control 

procedures as part of the Agency Financial Report process. This includes sending the program 

managers assessable unit risk assessment questionnaires and having the managers sign individual 

letters of assurance after they have identified risks and have procedures in place to manage the 

risks. The directors’ letters of assurance will be rolled into the CFO’s annual Statement of 

Assurance. 

One of the keys to management excellence is a strong internal control program. EAC staff was 

offered internal control training onsite in two sessions during FY 2010. The agency is working 

towards an integrated internal control evaluation process to evaluate financial and budgeting 

performance, program risks and performance, control activities and assessments, and formal 

monitoring of the effectiveness of programmatic activities on a periodic basis. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

27

Improper Payments 

EAC continues to focus on the elimination of improper payments by enacting new policies and 

procedures as well as reviewing and updating existing policies and procedures that govern the 

processes required for all payments. These processes incorporate sound internal controls and 

segregation of duties to ensure that all payments are made to the correct recipient, for the correct 

amount, and within the correct time frame. EAC incorporates further payment oversight by way 

of reconciliations and reviews performed each reporting cycle. 

Acquisition Strategies 

Acquisition Improvements

EAC has transitioned over 90 percent of its procurements to the utilization of GSA Schedule 

contracts. This provides substantial cost savings in terms of lower prices, strategic sourcing, and 

internal operational efficiencies. EAC has eliminated the vast majority of contracts awarded 

noncompetitively, procurements where only one bid is received, and cost-reimbursement and 

time-and-materials contracts. Only in very rare circumstances do these occur. EAC is 

investigating use of an interagency agreement for procurement services in lieu of an in-house 

contracting officer. 

Acquisition Workforce

EAC is budgeting for continuing educational acquisition training of its current acquisition 

workforce in order to meet current standards and requirements. Additionally, this is also being 

accomplished for current EAC Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) staff. 

Information Technology Infrastructure and Security 

Information Technology Infrastructure 

EAC’s information security program encompasses those measures necessary to protect the 

Commission's information resources. These measures include providing the appropriate 

technical, personnel, physical, administrative, environmental and telecommunications safeguards 

for each project; and continuity of operations through contingency or disaster recovery plans. 

The Commission's protective measures cover: data, applications, software, hardware, physical 

facilities and telecommunications. The Commission's information security program assures that 

each automated information system has a level of security commensurate with the risk and 

magnitude of harm that could result from the loss, misuse, unauthorized disclosure or improper 

modification of the data contained in the system. 

EAC depends on the General Services Administration (GSA) for email, internet and Information 

Technology (IT) security services, and on a contractor for maintenance of the agency website, 

www.eac.gov. Current IT staff maintains personal computers and smartphones, provides 

software requested by EAC staff, and performs vulnerability scans. EAC’s vision is to be 

responsible for its own infrastructure led by a qualified Chief Information Officer (CIO). EAC 

hired its first CIO in Quarter 3 of FY 2010. In FY 2011, the CIO will implement an Information 

Technology Modernization Project which includes upgrade the agency’s email to MS Outlook 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

28

from Lotus Notes, establish an intranet where policies and procedures can be posted in a user 

friendly format in place of use of a shared drive, and upgrade the agency’s telephone system 

using Interactive Voice Response and Voice Over Internet Protocol. Upgrading of personal 

computers and software related to the Project have occurred. 

In FYs 2011 and 2012, plans are for the CIO to work on integration of EAC systems, assist the 

directors with systems to capture performance metric data, and guide EAC in implementation of 

an e-Travel system. 

Summary of Information Technology Resources Table 

Salaries and Expenses 

(Dollars in thousands) 

IT Resource Category Budget Activity 

FY 2010 

Enacted FY 2011 CR 

FY 2012 

Request 

Major IT Investments Not applicable 

Non-Major IT Investments 

Telecommunications Telephone, smartphones, wireless service for PCs 92.2 94.0 95.3 

Financial management system and 

reports 

Memorandum of Understanding with GSA/Pegasys 

and FMIS 17.0 17.3 17.5 

Payroll processing and reports Memorandum of Understanding with 

GSA/Comprehensive HR Integrated System 

(CHRIS) 14.7 15.0 15.2 

Subtotal, Non-Major IT 

Investments 

 123.9 126.3 128.0 

IT Security Memorandum of Understanding with GSA 5.0 5.1 5.2 

Infrastructure Investments EAC website and intranet enhancements and 

maintenance 400.0 400.0 222.0 

 

Staff salaries and benefits 294.4 399.0 397.5 

 

Memorandum of Understanding with GSA 35.6 36.3 36.8

 

Personal computers 182.4 9.5 9.6 

Subtotal, Infrastructure 

Investments 

 917.4 849.9 671.1 

Total, IT Investments 

 1,041.3 976.2 799.1 

Cyber Security 

EAC uses GSA as a primary Internet Service Provider for its Information Technology needs. 

EAC’s cyber security management needs are covered by GSA through our annual Memorandum 

of Understanding for IT services at approximately $36,800 for FY 2012. The agreement funds 

the tools that enable GSA to continuously monitor EAC 's IT systems security as described in 

OMB M-10-15, FY 2010 Reporting Instructions for the FISMA and Agency Privacy 

Management dated April 21, 2010. Additionally, in FY 2011, EAC implemented its own 

installed its own intrusion detection hardware and software. 

Human Resource Management 

Improving Employee Engagement 

EAC’s Office of Human Resources is responsible for the human capital strategy that is aligned 

with EAC’s mission, goals, and organizational objectives. This strategy is integrated into EAC’s 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

29

budget and strategic plan, consistent with the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM’s) 

Human Capital Assessment and Accountability Framework. It complies with standards for 

internal accountability systems to ensure effective merit-based human resources management. 

In FYs 2011 and 2012, EAC will continue implementing the programs, processes, and strategies 

necessary to accomplish the goals and objectives outlined in the agency’s first Human Capital 

Plan developed in December 2009. Further, the 2009 Annual Employee Survey (AES) results 

have provided valuable indicators of areas where EAC can improve: internal communication, 

leadership, performance culture, and training. 

Through a contractual agreement with a team development facilitator, some of the low-scoring 

issues from the 2008 AES were addressed in 2009. The 2009 AES showed favorable score 

increases in the areas of personal work experience; employee recruitment, development, and 

retention; and job satisfaction. Areas for improvement included personal empowerment to 

change work processes, and the procedures for receiving rewards for creativity and innovation. 

The 2010 AES shows improvement in the areas of perceptions of supervisory performance and 

relationships with staff including diversity, levels of workforce knowledge and skills, 

relationship between individual work and contribution to agency goals and priorities, 

understanding of the performance appraisal process, rewarding creativity and innovation, 

personal empowerment, job satisfaction, and leadership ability to motivate and lead the 

workforce. Areas where survey results indicate the agency still may improve are bettering 

physical working conditions, utilizing staff talents, and assessing training needs. 

Ongoing efforts include: mandatory training for all supervisors – 80 percent of EAC’s 

supervisors have taken the training; brown bag briefings to foster awareness about selected EAC 

topics; relationship-building opportunities between the Executive Director, General Counsel, 

Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and staff; weekly program reports to all staff; 

monthly all staff meetings, monthly Commissioner briefings, and regularly-scheduled meetings 

within program areas and/or units; and continued participation in the Small Agency Council 

Training Program. 

Wellness 

EAC kicked off its Health and Wellness Program in July 2009 to reduce injuries and illness, 

create good will among employees, to improve productivity, and reduce health risk factors. 

Since then, we have: provided an eight-week, on-site nutrition and weight management 

program; offered ergonomic assessments of workstations; partnered with the Pension Benefit 

Guaranty Corporation for Federal Occupational Health (FOH) seminars and lectures; participated 

in FedsGetFit activities, including the Healthy Recipe Challenge; held its first healthy recipe 

potluck lunch; instituted telework and flexible schedule programs; and provided training to 

eleven staff members on Red Cross First Aid, Cardiopulmonary, and Automated External 

Defibrillator use. 

Ongoing efforts include tracking employee usage of health and wellness programs and reaching 

out to Federal Employee Health Benefit carriers to bring health and wellness programs and 

activities onsite. In an effort to promote health and wellness initiatives, EAC provides staff with 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request 

30

an Employee Assistance Program via a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Federal 

Occupational Health. Services under the MOU include clinic services such as health screenings, 

blood pressure checks, physician-prescribed services, health awareness programs, first-aid, 

emergency response, and FOH’s WorkLife4You Program. The Work/Life4You program is 

designed to help employees better manage everyday responsibilities and life events. EAC does 

not have to expend funds for a fitness facility as one is provided to staff in the building to use 

free of charge. EAC participates in the Flexible Spending Account program, and provides 

flexible work schedules, telecommuting, and transit benefits. EAC will continue to monitor 

progress against the Annual Employee Survey items and utilize them as an indicator of our 

success in improving worklife/wellness offerings at EAC. 

Future endeavors include a yoga workshop for anxiety and stress reduction; a tobacco cessation 

program; increasing the healthy food choices in vending machines; partnering with other Federal 

agencies in the building to establish a health and wellness committee; and determining return on 

investment for the wellness program.