2011 ACTIVITIES REPORT

U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

OPERATIONS 5

The U.S. Election Assistance Commissio 

Executive Director 

General Counsel 5

The Office of Inspector General 5

EAC Federal Advisory Committees 

Public Meetings 

Operating Budget 8

Freedom of Information Act Report 8

FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO IMPROVE FEDERAL ELECTIONS 11

Help America Vote Act Funds 11

Help America Vote College Program .

Mock Election Grant Program .

The Voting System Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing and Post-Election Audit Initiative 15

The Military Heroes Initiative 18

The Accessible Voting Technology Initiative 19

VOTING SYSTEM TESTING AND CERTIFICATION .

Voting System Test Laboratory Accreditation 21

Voting System Certification 22

Quality Monitoring Program .

Communication and Clarification 24

Meetings and Roundtables .

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 24

UOCAVA and Pilot Program Testing Requirements 25

RESEARCH, POLICY AND PROGRAMS 27

Research .

Policy .

Programs 29

THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL ACTIVITIES 33

COMMUNICATIONS AND CLEARINGHOUSE .

Preparing for the 2012 Elections: The Roundtable Series of Public Discussions 35

Social Media Initiatives 36

EAC.gov Initiatives 3

MOVING FORWARD .

APPENDIX .

FY 2011 Tally Votes 41

Board Rosters .

Commissioners’ Biographies .

Executive Director’s Biography 53

 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s focus in 2011 was on saving election officials time and money. With loca

state and federal governments facing declining 

budgets, funds for election offices have been cut

Election officials have been asked to do more with 

less. In this period of fiscal restraint, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) strived to fi

gaps in resources and expertise. The EAC worked

to provide 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

During Fiscal Year 2011, EAC made a great deal 

of progress in achieving the various program area 

goals described in its Strategic Plan, which is based 

on the mandates of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) 

of 2002

GRANTS MANAGEMENT

FY 2011 Highlights include:

•	 Resolved and implemented allrecommendations

contained in the audit report on the Administration of Grant funds Received under the Help 

America Vote College Program by Project Vote

Collected all grant funds awarded to Project Vote 

in the amount of $33,750

•	 Paid $30,032,325 from the FY 2008 appropriation,

$38,299,071 from the FY 2009 appropriation and 

$28,173,566 from the FY 2010 appropriation to the 

States for Section 251 Requirements Payments, 

which are used for meeting HAVA Title III voting 

system and other requirements, and to improve 

the administration of Federal elections;

•	 ReportedtoCongress onhowthe Stateshave spent

HAVA funds; 

•	 Coordinated a series of teleconferences for the

College Poll Worker and Mock Election Competitive Grant 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 Testing 

& Post-Election Audit Initiative for development, 

documentation and best practices

VOTING SYSTEMS TESTING 

AND CERTIFICATION

In FY 2011 Highlights include:

•	 Certified one full system, ES&S Unity 3.2.1.0, and

one modification, Unisyn 1.01

•	 Performed testing during FY2011 for elevenvoting

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;

•	 PerformedongoingworkwiththeNationalInstitute

1
2

of Standards and Technology (NIST) to complete

revisions to Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 

(VVSG) 1.1 Draft

•	 Participated in the SLI Global National Voluntary

Laboratory Accreditation Program audit January 

31–February 2, 2011;

•	 Held roundtable discussions regarding 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;

	 •	 Voting system sustainability;

	 •	 Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP)

UOCAVA remote voting solutions;

	 •	 VVSG requirements;

	 •	 Thedevelopment oftest suites to accompany the

VVSG requirements; and

	 •	 Oklahoma State voting system test campaign.

RESEARCH, POLICY AND PROGRAMS

FY 2011 Highlights include: 

•	 Administered the 2010 Election Administration

and Voting Survey to 50 States, the District of 

Columbia, and four territories;

•	 Reported to Congress on the findings of the 2009-

2010 Impact of the National Voter Registration Act

of 1993 (released in June 2011); 

•	 Released the 2010 Statutory Overview report,

describing States’ election laws and procedures 

(May 2011); 

•	 Drafted the HAVA-mandated Recounts and Contests Report;

•	 Awardeda competitive contracttocollect andanalyze data for the HAVA-mandated 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 (NVRA) of 1993

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 oftheGlossaries 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;

•	 TheHAVA-mandatedstudyonUseofSocialSecurity

Numbers forthePurposeofVoterRegistration; and

•	 The 2010 UniformedandOverseasCitizensAbsentee Voting Act Report

COMMUNICATIONS & 

CLEARINGHOUSE

FY 2011 Highlights include:

•	 Built The Election Official Exchange to help local

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

information;

•	 Revampedthe eac.gov searchtoolbasedonusability studies and user feedback;

•	 Added events finderto the website for a more comprehensive presentation of all EAC public events; 

•	 Madeon-demandwebcastsofpublicmeetings and
3

roundtables available within 24 hours;

•	 Providedcustomizedprogramupdates sothepublic 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 the 2012 federal election cycle, that were 

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

throughout the webcasts

During FY 2011, EAC continued to improve its 

programs and operations, and information technology across the agency

5

 OPERATIONS

EAC is an independent, bipartisan agency created by HAVA that assists and provides guidance to state and local election administrators 

in improving the administration of elections for federal office. EAC provides assistance by disbursing

federal funds to states to implement HAVA requirements, auditing the use of HAVA funds, adopting 

the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) and 

serving as a national clearinghouse and resource of 

information regarding election administration. EAC

also accredits voting system testing laboratories and 

certifies, decertifies and recertifies voting systems

At the beginning of FY 2011, the EAC had three 

commissioners serving, Gineen Bresso, Donetta 

Davidson, and Gracia Hillman, and one vacancy

With the resignation of Commissioner Hillman in 

December 2010, the EAC has since lacked a quorum

Commissioners, who are nominated by the President 

and confirmed by the U.S. Senate, may serve only tw

consecutive terms. The terms are staggered by statute. No more than two commissioners may belong t

the same political party.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Thomas Wilkey was named executive director of 

EAC in May 2005 by a unanimous vote of the commissioners and was unanimously reappointed to 

the post in June 2009 for another 4-year term.His

duties include managing daily operations, preparing program goals and long-term plans, managing 

VVSG development, reviewing reports and studies 

and overseeing EAC staff appointments. In FY 2011,

Mr. Wilkey announced his intent to retire in 201

GENERAL COUNSEL

Appointed by the Commission in September 2010, 

EAC General Counsel Mark A.Robbins has 20 years

of experience in public policy, federal administrative law and executive management. He is the former

executive director of the White House Privacy and 

Civil Liberties Oversight Board and the former general counsel for the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.In accordance with HAVA, the general couns

is appointed to a 4-year term and may serve additional 

terms by a vote of EAC. As EAC’s chief legal officer, M

Robbins provides advice to commissioners and senior 

leadership on legal issues affecting EAC’s activities 

and operations

THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

EAC’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducts 

audits, investigations and other reviews of EAC’s 

programs and operations. This includes internal

reviews of how EAC conducts business as well as 

reviews of recipients of funds disbursed by EAC

Its work is designed to enhance the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of EAC. The OIG also works

to detect and prevent fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement in EAC programs and operations. Its

reports serve to educate and inform clients (EAC, 

the Congress, the Office of Management and Budget, the Government Accountability Office, state 

governments, other federal entities, and the public) 

of opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of EAC and its programs
6

EAC FEDERAL ADVISORY 

COMMITTEES

Board of Advisors

EAC’s Board of Advisors includes 37 members 

appointed by the following groups as specified in 

HAVA (two members appointed by each): National

GovernorsAssociation;NationalConference of State

Legislatures; National Association of Secretaries

of State; The National Association of State Election Directors; National Association of Counties;

National Association of County Recorders, Election

Officials and Clerks; The United States Conference of 

Mayors; Election Center; International Association 

of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials and Treasurers; the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights; and th

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board

Other members include representatives from 

the U.S. Department of Justice, Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division and the Voting Sectio

of the Civil Rights Division; the director of the U.

Department of Defense Federal Voting Assistance 

Program; four professionals from the field of science 

and technology, with one each appointed by the 

Speaker and the Minority Leader of the U.S. Hous

of Representatives and by the Majority Leader and 

Minority Leader of the U.S. Senate; and eight members representing voter interests, with the chairs an

the ranking minority members of the U.S. House o

Representatives Committee on House Administration and the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules an

Administration each appointing two members

The Board of Advisors elects a chair, vice chair 

and secretary from its members. Officers serve for

a term of one year and may serve no more than two 

consecutive terms in any one office

The Board held its annual meeting June 6–7, 

2011, in Washington, D.C. Agenda items include

EAC program updates, a presentation by staff of 

the Congressional Sub-Committee on Elections, 

Committee on House Administration and other 

administrative matters. The Board passed the following motions during the June meeting

•	 [The Board of Advisors] recommends that local

and state election officials enter into maintenance 

contracts and keep them in effect throughout the 

life cycle of the equipment they manage

•	 [The Board of Advisors] recommends that the

USEAC create an election management resource 

in the form of voting system life cycle guidelines 

for maintaining current voting systems

•	 The EACattempt to schedule a roundtable discussion on voter registration file maintenance and 

advocate their practice to ensure that the requisite 

distribution and representation is present at the 

table for that discussion

•	 EAC should award returned or newly-available

HAVA funds as soon as practicable according to 

the HAVA formula. The funds are needed by the

States to improve the federal elections process

(Completed September 2011)

•	 [TheBoardofAdvisors] commends theU.S.Election

Assistance Commission (EAC), as the ninth anniversary of passage of the Help America Vote Act of 2002

approaches, for its successful continuing efforts at: 

	 •	 Facilitating a bipartisan conversation about

elections and election administration through 

reports and studies based on facts and data 

rather than partisanship and anecdotes, and 

maintaining positive and productive working 

relationships with election officials at every level 

across the country; 

	 •	 Promoting voting access for the disabilities

community through study, discussion and 

communication; 

	 •	 Providing assistance through its invaluable

Quick Starts and Management Guidelines, 
7

especially to smaller jurisdictions around the 

country; 

	 •	 Examining important issues associated with

language accessibility and ballot design; and 

	 •	 Overseeing the funding sources for the nationwide replacement of antiquated state voting systems, addressing the issues related to the life 

cycle of existing equipment and implementation 

and operation of a voluntary testing and certification process for new voting systems

•	 [The Board of Advisors] believes the USEAC

is a positive force for the administration and 

improvement of elections for America and that 

we support continuation of the agency and its 

functions

•	 EACshouldissue aQuickstart onissues associated

with the MOVE Act

•	 [The Board of Advisors] asks EAC to hold a roundtable discussion on the definition of voter fraud 

and voter intimidation

•	 [TheBoard ofAdvisors]thanks Jim Dickson for his

work over the past year

The Board of Advisors’ motions, meeting minutes and presentations are available at EAC.go

Standards Board

The Standards Board consists of 110 members; 55 are 

state election officials selected by their respective 

chief state election officials and 55 are local election 

officials selected through a process supervised by the 

chief state election official. HAVA prohibits any two

members representing the same state to be members 

of the same political party

The Board elects nine members to serve as an 

executive board, of which not more than five can 

be state election officials, not more than five can be 

local election officials and not more than five can be 

members of the same political party

The Board held its annual meeting on February 

24–25, 2011 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Agenda

items included EAC program updates, commercial 

off-the-shelf products and cost savings and elections

No resolutions were passed by the Standards Board

at the February 2011 meeting

Standards Board meeting minutes and presentations are available at EAC.go

TECHNICAL GUIDELINES 

DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

HAVA mandates that the TGDC help EAC develop the 

VVSG, a task that was initally completed in May 2005

The VVSG are not mandatory and each state retains 

the prerogative to adopt these guidelines

By law, the chairperson of the TGDC is the 

director of NIST. The TGDC is composed of 14 other

members appointed jointly by EAC and the director of NIST. Members include representatives from

the EAC Standards Board, EAC Board of Advisors, 

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board,American National Standards Institute,

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, The 

National Association of State Election Directors (2

representatives) and other individuals with technical 

and scientific expertise related to voting systems and 

voting equipment

TGDC meeting minutes, roster, resolutions 

and other related material are available at www

vote.nist.g

PUBLIC MEETINGS

In FY 2011, EAC held two public meetings and five 

roundtable discussions, which were available to the 

public via webcast. Public meetings may only be held

with a quorum of commissioners. Roundtable discussion topics included Commercial-Off-The-Shelf

(COTS) Products, Using New Media to Manage an

Election, Ballot Design and Contingency Planning in 
8

Elections. Public meetings and hearings are available

to the public via archived webcasts and meeting agendas, minutes and testimony are posted at EAC.go

OPERATING BUDGET 

Since 2004, EAC has received funds in three appropriations: Salaries and Expenses (S&E), 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 t

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 $16,267,400 funded a $3.2 million transfer to

NIST; and general office expenses including salaries,

travel, rent, and expenses incurred for telecommunications, printing, contracts, supplies, and equipment. EAC is currently administering 28 multi-year

College Poll Worker recruitment and training grants 

and 15 Mock Election for high school student grants 

funded in the S&E appropriation

During FY 2011, EAC received an unqualified 

opinion on the financial statement and was found in 

compliance with the Federal Information Security 

Management Act audits. Also during FY 2011, EAC

made great progress in the program areas, achieving 

goals described in the EAC Strategic Plan, which is 

based on the mandates of the Help America Vote Act

In FY 2011, EAC awarded, from the Election 

Reform Programs funds specifically appropriated 

by Congress, two Accessible Voting Technology Initiative grants totaling $7 million to support research 

and activities to increase the accessibility of new, 

existing and emerging technological solutions that 

help ensure all citizens can vote privately and independently; and 12 Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy 

(L&A) Testing and Post-Election Audit Initiative 

grants totaling $1,463,074 to 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

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 

In FY 2011, the EAC received six requests under the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), all of which were 

processed and completed

The median processing time was 14 days; and 

the average was 12.8 days. The range in number o

days for response was 1 to 19 days. All requests were

completed within 20 days

There were no instances in which the EAC did 

not comply with a request, no appeals were made, 

there were no instances where a court reviewed a 

decision to withhold documents, no administrative 

appeals were made, and there were no expedited 

review requests

One EAC employee processes FOIA requests, but 

this employee is not solely dedicated to FOIA activities. The EAC spent approximately $15,000 processing

FOIA requests in FY 2011. The EAC granted fee waiver

requests onall sixFOIArequests.Nodocumentswere

withheld, and there were no fee waiver adjudications

The EAC’s FOIA regulations instructions for submitting a request and the FOIA Reading Room are 

available to the public at www.eac.g
9

11

 FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO IMPROVE FEDERAL ELECTIONS

EAC’s Grants Management Division distributes 

and monitors HAVA funds, provides technical 

assistance to states and grantees on the use of 

funds, and reports on requirements payments and 

discretionary grants to improve the administration of 

elections for federal office.The division also ensures

the negotiation of indirect cost rates with grantees 

and resolves audit findings on the use of HAVA funds

HAVA FUNDS

HAVA Section 251 funds, also known as requirements payments, are distributed according to a 

formula based on the voting age population of the 

state according to the most recent Census and the 

total voting age population of all states. To draw the

funds, the states certify that they are in compliance 

with applicable laws and requirements per HAVA 

Section 253

A state may use a requirements payment 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, per Section 

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

other activities will not exceed an amount equal to 

the minimum payment amount applicable under 

Section 252 on fund allocation. Title III includes

voting system standards, voting information 

requirements, provisional voting, statewide voter 

registration lists and identification requirements 

for voters who register by mail

For requirements payments, Congress appropriated $115 million in FY 2008, $100 million in FY 

2009 and $70 million in FY 2010. EAC has distributed

$111,238,915 in FY 2008 funds, $96,729,491 in FY 2009 

funds and $56,559,806 in 2010 funds, which represents all funds requested by states as of September 

30, 2011

Each year, EAC prepares a report for Congress 

that describes how the states have spent HAVA funds

On February 14, 2011, the division released Strengthening the Electoral System One Grant at a Time: A 

Retrospective of Grants Awarded by EAC, April 2003–

December 2010. The report was released along with

the FY 2012 Congressional Budget Justification and 

FY 2010 Annual Performance Report. Additionally, a

comprehensive chart detailing all HAVA funds provided to the states is available at EAC.go

To assist state and local governments regarding the proper use of HAVA funds, EAC established 

the Funding Advisory Opinion request process, 

through which any federal or state government official, any local election official (provided the local 

jurisdiction received or anticipates receiving HAVA 

funds), or any member of the EAC staff may request 

an advisory opinion concerning the use of HAVA 

funds. Prior to losing its quorum of Commissioners, in FY 2011 EAC issued one Funding Advisory

Opinion. All Funding Advisory Opinions are available at EAC.g

HELP AMERICA VOTE 

COLLEGE PROGRAM

The Help America Vote College Program, established 

by HAVA Section 501, provides grants to encourage 

student participation as poll workers or assistants, 
12

to foster student interest in the electoral process and 

to encourage state and local governments to use students as poll workers

EAC did not award new College Poll Worker 

grants in FY 2011, but continued to monitor and 

provide technical assistance to its 2009 and 2010 

College Poll Worker grant recipients. In FY 2011,

EAC coordinated a series of teleconferences based 

on areas of interest identified by staff 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 groups including instructors, 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 current College Poll Worker grantees are 

as follows:

•	 Alverno College, Milwaukee, WI: $40,800 

 To partner with the City of Milwaukee Election 

Commission to recruit, train and place 200 students from the Milwaukee Area Technical College, the Milwaukee School of Engineering and 

the Art Institute of Wisconsin to work the polls on 

November 2nd by planning and developing a poll 

worker recruitment and training program that 

incorporates course development, video production, and social media outreach strategies

•	 Benedictine University, Lisle, IL: $55,385

 To partner with the DuPage County Election 

Commission to train and recruit 100 students 

by using online judge certification training, 

incorporating material on elections, voting 

and political participation in Political Science 

courses, and requiring Political Science majors 

and minors to participate in the poll worker 

program

•	 Central Connecticut State University, Hartford, 

CT: $32,107

 To build off of 2004 College Poll Worker grantee, 

Asnuntuck Community College and work with 

the Connecticut Association of Town Clerks to 

recruit 250 college poll workers, targeting first 

year students to create a pool of students who 

will return to work as student mentors for other 

students in future elections

•	 College of the Canyons, Santa Clarita, CA: $59,200

 To recruit and train 750 poll workers and students bilingual in Spanish, facilitate students 

with disabilities, and create a replicable program 

to be used by other colleges and universities in 

future years

•	 Harris-Stowe State University, St. Louis, MO:

$43,433

 To increase student knowledge of election and 

voting processes and participation through voting by working with the St. Louis City Board of

Election Commissioners to implement a college 

poll worker program to recruit 100-150 students

•	 Keystone College, La Plume, PA: $39,996

 To recruit and train culturally diverse students 

and students who are multi-lingual to become 

poll workers to serve in Lackawanna, Wyoming, 

Bradford and Susquehanna Counties through 

the Step Up to the Poll! Challenge campaign

•	 Kids Voting of Central Ohio, Columbus, OH: 

$84,000

 To develop innovative outreach and training 

strategies through the creation of a virtual polling place that uses an avatar to recruit and train 

500 college students from the Ohio State University and Columbus State Community College to 

serve as poll workers in theNovember elections.

•	 Kutztown University, Kutztown, PA: $58,868

 To partner with Berks County Board of Elections to 

expand the pool of poll workers and available poll 
13

interpreters, assess and address the accessibility 

of the polling places, and produce an updated poll 

worker recruitment and training video to be used 

by the county

•	 Lourdes College, Sylvania, OH: $34,783

 To recruit 120 students from diverse backgrounds including underrepresented groups, 

those with disabilities and veterans by partnering with the Lucas County Board of Elections 

and conduct a needs assessment of access to 

voting resources among economically disadvantaged neighborhoods and individuals with 

disabilities

•	 Marshall-Wythe Law School Foundation, Williamsburg, VA: $63,700

 To recruit and train 240 college students from 

six colleges in the Tidewater region including 

ChristopherNewportUniversity,Hampton University, Norfolk State University, Old Dominion University, Regent University and William 

& Mary through the Tidewater Roots Polling 

Project which aims to not only teach students 

the skills needed to be effective poll workers, 

but also to ensure lasting impact by inspiring 

students and instilling a sense of civic spirit

•	 Morehouse College, Atlanta, GA: $38,037

 To collaborate with the Brisbane Institute 

and the Bonner Office of Community Service 

of Morehouse, and to partner with the Fulton 

County Election Commission to recruit, train 

and mobilize 75 students to become poll workers through Voter Education classes, website 

development, and pre and post surveys

•	 Southern Utah University, Cedar City, UT: $46,480

 To work with the Lieutenant Governor and five 

County Clerk offices to recruit 30 students to 

become poll workers using social media tools and 

campus mass texting network to target Native

American and Hispanic students through the 

NativeAmericanStudentUnionandtheHispanic

Student Association, as well as students with disabilities through the Disability Support Center

•	 Suffolk University, Boston, MA: $30,211

 To build on past successes by expanding its 

poll worker program through partnership with 

Wheelock College, the Colleges of Fenway and 

the Disability Law Center to recruit 250 students 

to serve as poll workers

•	 University of Rochester, Rochester, NY: $62,000

 To partner with the Monroe County Board of 

Elections to recruit and train 150 college poll 

workers from the University of Rochester, Monroe Community College and Roberts Wesleyan 

College with emphasis on disabled students

•	 University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN: $61,000

 To partner with the Knox County Election Commission to recruit and train at least 200 college 

students to become poll workers on Election Day 

through the development of a series of videos 

and website for an online college student poll 

worker training program

The Help America Vote College Poll Worker 

grants help relieve poll worker shortages across the 

country and provide election officials with technically proficient poll workers. According to EAC’s 2008

Election Administration and Voting Survey, nearly 

one-half of the jurisdictions reported experiencing 

difficulties recruiting poll workers. Thanks to these

grants, many grantees reported having an adequate 

number of poll workers, some for the first time

As of FY 2011, EAC had awarded 89 grants totaling $3.1 million to recruit and train college poll workers since 200

MOCK ELECTION GRANT PROGRAM

The Mock Election Grant Program, authorized under 

HAVA Section 295, encourages youth participation and civic engagement by enabling high school 
14

students to participate in simulated elections with 

voting equipment, ballots and poll workers. The grants

enable 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 responsibilities

EAC did not award new Mock Election Program 

grants in FY 2011, but continued to monitor and provide technical assistance to its 2009 and 2010 Mock 

Election Program grant recipients. In FY 2011, EAC also

conducted a series of teleconferences based on areas 

of interest found during analysis of narrative reports 

from Mock Election Program grantees. Developing

a Mock Election Program that meets its objectives 

can be a challenge without the support of teachers, 

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 current Mock Election Program grantees 

are as follows:

•	 Seminole County Supervisor of Elections, Sanford, 

FL: $15,441

 To partner with Crooms Academy of Information 

Technology to hold debates in which candidates, 

voters and community leaders discuss issues 

before the students and to train students to serve 

as poll workers on Election Day

•	 Polk County Auditor’s Office, Des Moines, IA: 

$49,293

 To educate students using computer simulations of common and lesser known aspects of 

the voting process, from establishing eligibility 

and operating voting equipment to casting a 

provisional ballot and assisting voters who have 

special needs

•	 Office of the Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Franklin, KY: $44,553

 To engage a large population of students—30,940 

students in underserved counties throughout 

the state—in mock elections and related educational activities through partnerships with 

the Kentucky Department of Education and the 

NewCities Institute.

•	 Michigan Government Television, Lansing, MI: 

$42,000

 To partner with Leland Public Schools to recruit 

100,000 students in rural and urban areas to 

participate in educational election activities 

leading up to the National Student/Parent

Mock Election

•	 State of Montana Secretary of State, Helena, MT: 

$30,000

 To partner with the School Administrators of 

Montana and the Office of Public Instruction 

to educate students living on American Indian 

reservations about the election process through 

a customizable election curriculum that incorporates a variety of multimedia platforms

•	 League of Women Voters of Oregon Education 

Fund, Salem, OR: $41,413

 To partner with the Governor’s Office, the secretary of state, the Oregon Department of Education, the Oregon School Board Association 

and the Oregon Association of Student Councils 

to reach 80,000 students in 350 schools to participate in a simulated election of the state’s 

vote-by-mail system and election-related educational and leadership development activities

•	 State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, 

Providence, RI: $37,300

 To partner with the Rhode Island Board of Elections, Rhode Island Department of Elementary and 

Secondary Education and Roger Williams University to develop and implement a statewide voter 

education project that will reach at least one-half 

of the state’s high school population of 46,000 and 

target urban and immigrant communities
15

•	 Office of the Washington Secretary of State, Olympia, WA: $40,000

 To provide students in 100 schools with opportunities to participate in online voting, electionrelated educational activities and two televised 

segments cosponsored by TVW, Washington’s 

public affairs broadcast network, on the mock 

election that will feature interviews with students and teachers and a forum in which student 

audience members engage with panelists on 

national and local issues

The Mock Election program promotes voter participation in national elections through voter education activities for students, building community 

involvement in awareness of the election process, 

and encouraging continued civic engagement and 

participation by the youth population

As of FY 2011, EAC had awarded over 25 grants 

totaling $998,820 to 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

THE VOTING SYSTEM PRE-ELECTION 

LOGIC AND ACCURACY 

TESTING AND POST-ELECTION 

AUDIT INITIATIVE

The Voting System Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy 

(L&A) Testing and Post-Election Audit Initiative grant 

is aimed at developing and documenting processes 

and best practices for coordinating quality and costeffective voting system pre-election logic and accuracy testing and post-election audits. Through this

initiative, EAC seeks to capture and test innovative, 

high-quality processes and tools, as well as practices 

that are cost effective and evidence based for performing voting system pre-election L&A testing and 

post-election audits by jurisdictions of varying sizes, 

locations and equipment configurations. Congress

funded this initiative under the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010.In FY

2011, EAC awarded twelve grants totaling $1,463,074 

to five states, six counties and one city. The Voting

System Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy Testing and 

Post-Election Audit Initiative grantees are:

•	 California Secretary of State, Sacramento, CA: 

$230,000

 The California Secretary of State (SOS) plans to 

conduct a two year pilot program to test new, 

risk-limiting audit models, as developed by Dr

Philip B. Stark of the University of California,

Berkeley. Up to twenty California counties will

be participating in the pilot with the audits taking place during the post canvass period following live elections held during 2011-2012. The

team will document the pilot audits, analyze and 

present findings and recommendations on the 

effectiveness, efficiency, usability, challenges, 

mitigations, costs and benefits of risk-limiting 

audits. The team will also develop and document

a set of tools, processes and best practices for 

conducting risk-limiting post-election audits, 

including easy-to-follow statistical formulas and 

rules to set the initial sample size and escalation 

triggers

•	 State of Colorado, Denver, CO: $230,000

 The Colorado Department of State plans to pilot 

risk-limiting audits in five counties in a mix of 

areas – urban, suburban, and rural. CO will

develop, test, and implement a risk-limiting 

audit system that helps meet legislation requiring the state’s jurisdictions to implement a risklimiting audit system by the 2014 elections. The

research team will review current election processes in target counties and solicit input from 

other stakeholders, including county election 

officials, voters and concerned citizen groups

The team will also review existing best practices 
16

in the state and the nation, selecting the most 

promising practices for testing the appropriate 

target counties

•	 State of Connecticut, Hartford, CT: $230,000

 The CT Secretary of State’s office will be partnering with the University of Connecticut to test 

the accuracy of the memory cards used in optical scan voting machines and to demonstrate a 

prototype of an Audit Station, as developed by 

the research team. The Audit Station is a combination of hardware, specialized software, methodology and auditing procedures for automating

hand count activities. During the two year project period, the research teams anticipate collecting data from approximately six live elections,

which will provide enough data to determine the 

failure rate of the memory cards, and analyze 

the cost, time, and accuracy of current audit procedures as compared to the new Audit Station

•	 Cuyahoga County, Cleveland, OH: $50,000

 CCBOE plans to create a virtual how-to-guide 

and web reporting program based on best practices for all optical scan election jurisdictions 

to utilize during L&A testing and Post-Election 

audits. The funds provided will allow the CCBOE

to further document, in writing and on film, 

each process including L&A testing, poll book 

justification, ballot reconciliation, chain of custody verification, and post election audit. The

CCBOE plans to share these procedures with 

election jurisdictions throughout the country by 

providing the resources in an online format. The

CCBOE intends to create a virtual “post-election 

audit how-to guide” that will illustrate how to 

conduct different types of audits from start to 

finish and will include a web-based program to 

organize and report audit outcomes

•	 County of Boone, Columbia, MO: $25,000

 County of Boone, Missouri plans to develop 

computer programs that will enable local 

jurisdictions to generate logic and accuracy 

(L&A) test scripts that meet State of Missouri 

regulations. Having ready-made test scripts will

improve accuracy, eliminate tester bias, reduce 

cost for local jurisdictions and remove reliance 

on voting equipment vendor-generated test 

decks. While the project will first focus on developing test scripts for Boone County, additional

programming will be developed that will allow 

other jurisdictions in the state to generate test 

scripts from voter registration data regardless 

of the ballot counting system

•	 County of Humboldt, Eureka, CA: $25,000

 The Humboldt County Elections Department 

(HCED) has been working with the Humboldt 

County Election Transparency Project (ETP) for 

more than two years, supplementing the Department’s official vote counting equipment by scanning all cast ballots on a commercial off the shelf 

scanner. The resulting ballot images are made

available to interested parties, so that any interested party may conduct their own vote counts 

off of their ballot images. The open source software developed by Mitch Trachtenberg is freely

available, and the current version builds its own 

“ballot definition files” by scanning ballots via 

optical character recognition, thus eliminating 

the need to reprogram for each ballot. Funds

from this award will be used to develop better 

reporting capabilities for the software and for 

a training manual to assist those conducting 

audits in Humboldt and other counties interested in this method

•	 Cook County, Chicago, IL: $125,000

 Cook County Clerk, David Orr, plans to document 

current Pre-Election Logic and Accuracy testing 

and Post election audit processes and develop 

an improved data-driven Election Verification 
17

and Audit Tool Kit that integrates and analyzes all 

election data streams. Funds from this award will

be used for enhanced database design, real time 

connectivity, customized code development, and 

the development of a public guide to these testing 

procedures. The Tool Kit in combination with the

public guide will achieve a level of automation 

and database utilization that will provide both a 

diagnostic tool to identify areas of focus for judge 

training and streamlined election administration, as well as a replicable prototype for other 

election jurisdictions that wish to enhance their 

ability to produce data that can augment vote 

count accuracy

•	 Indiana Election Division, Indianapolis, IN:

$143,074

 The State of Indiana, which uses both direct 

recording electronic and optical scan voting 

systems, will develop general protocols for L&A 

checklist as well as specific protocols for different 

voting systems, based on the surveys with election officials. In addition, current procedures

governing chain of custody of voting records will 

be collected from the counties and analyzed in 

order to develop improved procedures to govern 

post-election audits. Post-election audit forms

will be developed to manage the procedures to 

be followed after the election

•	 City of Takoma Park, Takoma Park, MD: $25,000

 The City of Takoma Park, MD proposes to document the procedures, practices, and policies 

when using post-election End-to-End (E2E) 

verifiable voting technologies, and to measure 

the impact of E2E voting on voters and election 

officials. All documentation produced by this

project will be reviewed by the City of Takoma 

Park election officials, along with experts in the 

fields of computer security, election systems, and 

accessibility through its research partner, the 

Voting Systems Institute (VSI). The results of this

research will increase knowledge and understanding on how other jurisdictions can successfully implement E2E verifiable post-election 

audit technology

•	 State of New York Board of Elections, Albany, NY:

$230,000

	 	 The New York StateBoard of Elections is refining

the Logic and Accuracy and Post-Election audit 

procedures that are used in its 62 county board 

of elections. For the L&A portion of its proposal,

NYSBOE will develop training materials and

identify changes to current practices for cost savings. NYSBOE also plans to develop a post election audit procedure that will statistically verify 

the results obtained from the voting systems

Anticipated outcomes include the use of ballot 

images, the identification (through the use of 

statistical modeling) of an appropriate sample 

size, development of proper chain of custody 

procedures, and development of a threshold that 

adjusts the audit percentage based on the closeness of the election. Based on the results of the

project, the current L&A and Post-election Audit 

procedures will be revised and disseminated for 

statewide implementation

•	 Orange County, Santa Ana, CA: $125,000

 Orange County Registrar of Voters proposes a 

two phase approach to examining and improving its current audit processes and procedures: 

The first phase will analyze paper ballot accounting and the potential conflicts associated with 

the process of paper voting, chain of custody, 

canvass instructions, rosters, board member 

qualifications, supplies, and seals. The second

phase will examine the voting performance of 

the county’s Hart InterCivic electronic voting 

systems including the Voter Verified Paper Audit 

Trail (VVPAT). A detailed review of policies and
18

procedures in these areas ensures post-election 

audits are conducted with integrity and transparency which enhances public confidence in 

the voting process

•	 County of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA: $25,000

 The Santa Cruz County Clerk proposes to 

improve current pre-election logic and accuracy 

testing and post-election auditing for blended 

voting systems. The county will create procedures, checklists, physical measures, etc that

create a more efficient process by removing overlapping procedures, reducing staff required, and 

increasing uniformity both between counties 

and internally from one election to the next. The

work will focus on more comprehensive testing 

prior to the election and a more detailed series 

of post-election audits focusing on easy audits 

and clear and comprehensive chain of custody 

procedures to promote greater transparency and 

more uniform results. By focusing on blended

systems, the new procedures will be written for 

the most complex and time intensive items to 

help the counties meet certification deadlines 

while still performing top quality audits. The

county plans to seek data from twenty two counties for voting system specific audits and testing and from all fifty eight counties for audits 

required under state law

THE MILITARY HEROES INITIATIVE

In FY 2010, EAC established and awarded the Military 

Heroes Initiative, a $500,000 two-year grant aimed at 

advancing voting technology and processes for recently 

injured military personnel and veterans. Throughout

FY 2011, this initiative continued in earnest with the 

grantee making substantial progress toward project 

completion in 2012. The Information Technology and

Innovation Foundation (ITIF), a leading technology 

and innovation policy think tank, conducts this initiative along with the Georgia Technology Applied 

Research Corporation, a research institute with extensive experience working with military institutions and 

conducting accessibility research, and with Operation Bravo Foundation, a pioneer in developing voting 

alternatives for military and overseas citizens. The EAC

and ITIF are also working with the National Institute

of Standards andTechnology (NIST) onthis Initiative.

HAVA disability requirements (specifically 

Section 301 on Voting Systems Standards) and the 

Military Oversees Voting Empowerment Act contain provisions aimed at significantly improving 

the voting process for people with disabilities and 

military personnel. The grant seeks to enhance voting technology and processes for military service

members who have sustained disabling injuries 

in combat operations. According to the Department of Defense’ statistics on Global War on Terror

Casualties, more than 45,500 U.S. service member

in recent years have returned from a combat zone 

with a range of disabilities, including loss of limb, 

loss of sight and traumatic brain injury. In addition, hundreds of thousands of service members and

veterans deal with non-visible injuries, such as post 

traumatic stress disorder

Under the ITIF grant, the Initiative seeks to: 1) 

assess the voting needs of recently injured service 

members with civilian status; 2) perform an assessment of current voting technology and processes; 3) 

research voting technology and process alternatives 

and best practices that may better meet the needs 

of injured service members; and 4) develop a set of 

technical and policy recommendations to improve 

accessibility. As part of this program, ITIF will also

propose a demonstration project that will showcase 

short-term recommendations for improving voting 

accessibility for recently injured service members

To date, ITIF has conducted research for the purposes of understanding current limitations experienced 
19

by military voters as a result of their injuries and the 

barriers those voters encounter in the voting process

In order to understand the functional limitations the 

injured service members might experience when 

engaged in voting activities, a sample of the target population was interviewed using structured interviews

Due to the nature of the military environment, 

particularly in hostile, deployed settings, service 

members experience a range of injuries that differs 

from those typically found in the general population

Thus, the range of accommodations recommended 

for military voting will likely also differ from those 

published for the general population. ITIF and their

partners have also reviewed election administration practices, focusing primarily on the State of 

Georgia, and election assistance services provided 

by the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs

They have developed a set of preliminary recommendations for state election offices, the Departments 

of Defense and Veterans Affairs, and the Election 

Assistance Commission. These preliminary recommendations will be analyzed in conjunction with

research results from other tasks to develop a final 

set of recommendations, which will be documented 

in a later report. This initiative is funded under the

Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Years 

2009 and 2010

THE ACCESSIBLE VOTING 

TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

In FY 2011, the EAC awarded the Accessible Voting 

Technology Initiative, a $7,000,000 grant to advance 

voting accessibility technology to enable citizens 

with disabilities to vote privately and independently 

as set forth in HAVA. During FY 2011, EAC conducted

the grant competition and worked closely with the 

grantees to develop a results-based structure for the 

program moving forward. In July of FY 2011, the EAC

awarded two three-year grants under the Initiative

The grant recipients are Clemson University, which 

is funded at $4,500,000 and the Information Technology Innovation Foundation, which is funded at 

$2,500,000. The EAC, Clemson University, and ITIF

are also working closely with NIST on this Initiative.

This effort seeks to increase the accessibility of 

new, existing and emerging technological solutions 

in such areas as assistive technologies, interoperability and voting system design. According to statistics compiled by the U.S. Census, there are mo

than 50,000,000 Americans with disabilities and 

the United States also faces a rapidly approaching 

demographic shift to an older population, which will 

result in an increase in the incidence of disability

The HAVA disability requirements, specifically Section 301, recognized the necessity for dramatically 

improving the voting process for this population

These grants help further this vital mission

Clemson University and their partners are 

working to advance the accessibility of elections and 

voting through applied research, development, evaluation, dissemination and implementation of concepts 

and technologies. Clemson University has partnered

with other professional organizations including the 

Election Center and Rutgers University

ITIF seeks to use a design-led innovation process 

to translate research, observations and insights into 

actionable steps to change voting system technologies 

and processes to improve the voting experience for people with disabilities. They are working closely with severalorganizations includingtheNationalFederationo

the Blind and the Georgia Technology Applied Research 

Corporation. In Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013, ITIF intends

to conduct two rounds of competitive sub-grant competitions to consider innovative grant proposals

The initiative is funded under the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act for Fiscal Years 2009/2010.

21

 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 the National Institute of

Standards and Technology 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; and 

•	 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

In FY 2011, the Voting Systems Testing and Certification division certified one full voting system and 

one system modification; initiated a formal voting 

system investigation; processed and monitored the 

testing for nine full 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 revisions to Voluntary Voting

System Guidelines (VVSG) 1.1 Draft; participated

in a National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation

Program audit; and held roundtable discussions 

regarding 2010 elections and preparations for 2012, 

Commercial- Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software and the 

Life Cycle of Voting Systems

VOTING SYSTEM TEST 

LABORATORY ACCREDITATION

HAVA Section 231 requires EAC and NIST to develop

a program for accrediting voting system testing 

laboratories. The National Voluntary Laboratory

Accreditation Program (NVLAP) of NIST evaluates

test laboratories and performs periodic re-evaluations 

to verify that the laboratories continue to meet the 

accreditation criteria.When NIST determines a laboratory is technically competent to test systems, the 

NIST director recommends a laboratory to EAC for

accreditation. EAC makes the final determination

to accredit the laboratory. EAC issues the accreditation certificate to approved laboratories, maintains

a register of accredited laboratories and posts this 

information on its Web site EAC.go

Laboratories must adhere to the requirements 

of EAC’s Voting System Test Laboratory Program 

Manual or face possible suspension or revocation of 

accreditation. These requirements include stringent

conflict-of-interest and compliance-management 

programs

Currently, two test laboratories are accredited 

by EAC: SLI Global Solutions (formerly SysTest Laboratories) and Wyle Laboratories. In FY 2011, EAC
22

participated in the SLI Global NVLAP auditJanuary

31–Febuary 2, 2011

Information on Voting System Test Laboratory 

Accreditation, including the Voting System Test 

Laboratory Program Manual, is posted in the Testing and Certification section of the EAC Web site at 

EAC.go

VOTING SYSTEM CERTIFICATION

HAVA instructs EAC to establish the federal government’s first voluntary program to test and certify 

voting equipment. The certification program was

established after the 2005 VVSG were adopted and 

the first recommendations regarding laboratories 

for federal accreditation were given to EAC by NIST

in February 2007

The first step in the certification process is manufacturer registration. Applicants are required to

provide written policies regarding quality assurance 

and document retention and also provide a complete 

list of manufacturing facilities. Through registration

with EAC, the manufacturer agrees to meet all program requirements

A manufacturer that has a system ready for 

testing submits an application for testing to EAC 

and selects an EAC-accredited laboratory to conduct the testing. The laboratory submits a test

plan to EAC for approval; tests the voting system; 

and provides a test report, based on the findings 

from testing, to EAC for review and action. EAC

technical reviewers and staff members review the 

test reports. If the testing and report of a system

demonstrate conformance with all applicable voting system standards or guidelines, the program 

director will recommend the system for certification. EAC’s executive director will consider the

recommendation and provide a final decision on 

the system. Commissioners serve as the appeal

body. Upon certification, a system may bear an

EAC mark of certification and may be marketed as 

EAC certified

In FY 2011, the Testing and Certification Division continued its thorough and transparent testing 

process.While implementing a number of internal

changes to further streamline the certification process and reduce the time and cost of testing, the EAC 

certified one full voting system, ES&S Unity 3.2.1

and one modification, Unisyn OpenElect 1.0

In addition to monitoring the ongoing testing 

activities of nine voting system and system modifications, the Certification Division:

•	 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; 

•	 Issued requests for information regarding the

Unity 3.2.0.0 investigation to Wyle Labs, Cuyaho

County, iBeta Quality Assurance and ES&S; 

•	 MetwithSLI andHartInterCivic inDenverregarding current testing for the State of Oklahoma and 

the potential for this testing to be used in an 

upcoming Federal testing campaign for Hart

Information regarding systems in testing, test plans, 

test reports and decisions on certification are posted 

in the Testing and Certification section of the EAC 

Web site at EAC.go

QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM

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 in fact 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 
23

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 permission from election 

officials, the EAC conducts reviews of systems that 

are in use in the field

System Advisory Notices are also an important part of the Quality Monitoring Program. EAC

issues advisories to inform jurisdictions and members of the public of an existing anomaly or issue 

with an EAC-certified system. The advisory notice

describes the nature of the issue identified, the root 

cause of the issue if known, and the current status 

of a solution to the issue. EAC will follow up with

additional advisory notices regarding unresolved 

issues as more information is gathered and the 

problem is resolved

CERTIFIED SYSTEMS

Manufacturer Voting System (Name/Version) Testing Standard

MicroVote EMS Ver. 4.0B (Modification) 2005 VVSG

MicroVote EMS Ver. 4.0 2005 VVSG

ES&S Unity 3.2.1.0

Previously Unity 3.0.1.0 & Unity 

3.0.1.1 w. ATS 1.3

2002 VSS

ES&S Unity 3.2.0.0 Rev 1 (Modification) 2005 VVSG & 2002 VSS

ES&S Unity 3.2.0.0 2002 VSS

ES&S/ Dominion (Premier) Assure 1.2 2002 VSS

Unisyn OpenElect v.1.0.1 (Modification) 2005 VVSG

Unisyn OpenElect 1.0 2005 VVSG

ACTIVE SYSTEMS

Manufacturer Voting System (Name/Version) Testing Standard

Dominion Sequoia WinEDS 4.0 2002 VSS

Dominion Democracy Suite 4.0 2005 VVSG

ES&S EVS 5.0.0.0 2005 VVSG

ES&S Unity 3.2.0.0 Rev. 2 (Modification) 2005 VVSG

ES&S Unity 3.3.0.0 (Modification) 2005 VVSG

ES&S Unity 3.4.0.0 (Modification) 2005 VVSG

ES&S Unity 3.2.1.0 Rev. 1 (Modification) 2005 VVSG

Precise AEVS Ver. 1.0 2005 VVSG

Unisyn OpenElect v.1.1 Modification 2005 VVSG
24

These notices support EAC’s quality monitoring program requirement related to identifying and 

reporting anomalies of fielded EAC systems. These

notices are issued after an anomaly or issue is identified and verified through conversations with the 

jurisdiction fielding the system and the manufacturer of the system

In addition, as part of the Quality Monitoring 

Program, EAC is required to conduct onsite manufacturing assessments. These onsite visits provide the

opportunity for EAC to ascertain that the manufacturers of voting systems are following EAC’s required 

procedures. In FY 2011, the 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.

•	 Reviewed installation of Cuyahoga County, Ohio

system fixes by ES&S in June

•	 Issued ballot drop system advisory notices for

Unity 3.2.0.0 system and Unity 3.2.0.0

Modification

•	 IssuedDS200unresponsive touchscreenandballot

skew advisory notices for the Unity 3.2.1.0 sys

•	 Received AV-TSX “System Halt – 13”error message

system advisory notice (voluntarily submitted by 

manufacturer) for the Premier Assure 1.2 syste

Information generated by the Quality Monitoring 

Program, including anomaly reports, are posted in 

the Testing and Certification section of the EAC Web 

site, EAC.go

COMMUNICATION AND 

CLARIFICATION

In an effort to increase efficiency and streamline the 

certification process, EAC established the Requests 

for Interpretation (RFI) process. This process enables

program participants to request interpretations of 

the VVSG. In addition, EAC established the Notice

of Clarification (NOC) process, through which EAC

issues clarifying language based on written requests 

from manufacturers or test laboratories seeking 

clarification about a program requirement, policy or 

guideline. In FY 2011, the EAC issued NOC 2011-01

Clarification of De Minimis Change Determination 

Requirements Related to Data. All RFIs and NOCs

are available in the Testing and Certification section 

of the EAC Web site at EAC.go

MEETINGS AND ROUNDTABLES

In Fiscal Year 2011, Testing and Certification:

•	 Moderated a break-out session on voting system

sustainability at the Election Center Conference 

in San Antonio in August

•	 Held roundtable discussions regarding 2010 elections and preparations for 2012; Commercially 

available Off-the-Shelf (COTS) software; and Life 

Cycle of a Voting System; and

•	 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

•	 ParticipatedintheStateCertificationmeetingatthe

Center for Elections, Kennesaw, GA in September

VOLUNTARY VOTING 

SYSTEM GUIDELINES

The VVSG is the set of testable standards by which 

EAC evaluates all voting systems. EAC’s accredited

laboratories conduct a conformance assessment 

using the VVSG to evaluate the voting systems. A

system submitted to EAC’s program will receive certification only if it complies with the VVSG; nothing 

guarantees that a system will meet the VVSG requirements and ultimately receive an EAC certification
25

EAC, the TGDC and NIST work together to

develop voluntary testing standards. The 2005 VVSG

are currently in place, while EAC and NIST are formulating future versions and updates

After reviewing comments and receiving input 

from a series of roundtable discussions about the 

next iteration of guidelines, EAC determined the 2005 

VVSG should be revised before the adoption of the 

next iteration, which may not occur for several years

To implement updates to the 2005 VVSG, EAC 

followed the procedures in HAVA, which included 

providing a 120-day public comment period, longer 

than what is required by HAVA, and soliciting input 

from EAC advisory boards. EAC and NIST are currently reviewing the boards’ input and will present 

an update to EAC for final adoption

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 Draf

•	 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)atWyleLabsinHuntsville,ALinJune.

•	 Participated in Election Assistance Commission’s

Technical Guidelines Development Committee 

(TGDC) meeting at NIST in July.

UOCAVA AND PILOT PROGRAM

TESTING REQUIREMENTS

The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act 

requires that EAC work with NIST and the Federal

Voting Assistance Program to develop requirements for remote electronic voting pilot projects

EAC cosponsored a number of roundtable events 

anddiscussionswithNISTand FVAPinthe following

areas: Pilot Program Testing Requirements, Internet 

voting and UOCAVA remote voting systems

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

•	 Completed the UOCAVA Pilot Program Testable

Requirements document and forwarded 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

Information regarding the Pilot Program Testing 

Requirements and the Voting System Pilot Program 

Testing & Certification Manual is posted in the Testing and Certification section of the EAC Web site at 

EAC.go

27

 RESEARCH, POLICY AND PROGRAMS

The Research, Policy and Programs (RPP) 

division is responsible for several research, 

policy and program initiatives, including 

HAVA-mandated research that covers topics such 

as the number of ballots cast in federal elections and 

returned in accordance with the Uniformed and 

Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) 

of 1986 ; the number of registration applications 

submitted through various sources as stipulated 

by the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of

1993 ; administration of the NVRA form; language

accessibility; and election management resources

In FY 2011, RPP began or completed several 

research projects, policy and program initiatives, 

many ofwhicharemandatedbyHAVAand/or authorized by Congress. The list of projects and initiatives

will continue to be revised in accordance with EAC 

and/or Congressional priorities.

In addition to conducting HAVA-mandated 

research, RPP produces materials for voters and election officials to facilitate successful participation in 

federal elections. For voters, EAC’s national mail voter

registration form can be used in almost every State in 

the country. For election officials and voters, EAC’s A

Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections can supplement state 

and local education materials. Many of the materials,

such as A Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections and the 

Glossaries of Election Terminology, are available in 

several languages other than English

The division also administers the Election 

Management Guidelines program to help election 

officials promote secure, accurate, and accessible 

elections by providing information on topics such as 

military and overseas voters, communication with 

voters and the public, serving voters in long-term 

care facilities, ballot design, contingency planning, 

and many others

RESEARCH 

Under HAVA requirements, EAC collects information 

about election administration issues and shares that 

information with Congress, election officials, and 

the public. In FY 2011 EAC continued its research

efforts on three HAVA-mandated studies: (1) Recounts 

and Contests, (2) Use of Social Security Numbers for

the Purpose of Voter Registration, and (3) Election 

Administration in Urban and Rural Settings. EA

also administered the 2010 Election Administration 

and Voting Survey (EAVS), a biennial national survey 

of election administration covering the 50 states, the 

District of Columbia, and 4 territories. The EAVS is the

Federal government’s most comprehensive collection 

of election administration data

The 2010 Election Administration and Voting Survey

In FY 2011, EAC administered the fourth iteration of 

the EAVS. Survey data provided by the states cover

topics such as voter registration, military and overseas ballots, provisional ballots, domestic civilian 

absentee ballots and early voting. A significant part

of the EAVS is a Statutory Overview of states’ election administration laws and procedures related to 

various topics such as absentee and early voting, voter 

registration, provisional balloting, and post-election auditing. In FY 2011, EAC released both the 201

Statutory Overview and a report to Congress on The 
28

Impact of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 

on the Administration of Elections for Federal Office, 

2009–2010. EAC research and accompanying data

sets are available at www.eac.gov and www.data

Data are provided in several formats to accommodate 

multiple audiences

Highlights from the 2009–2010 NVRA report

include the following:

•	 Voter registration decreased during the two years

leading up to the 2010 elections. The total number of

voters reported to be eligible and registered for the 

November 2010 elections was nearly 187 million,

a decrease of more than 3.6 million from the 2008

elections. Yet it was an increase of about 14 million

voters from the last midterm election in 2006

•	 States andterritories reportedreceivingmore than

45 million voter registration forms. Use of the mail

(or fax or email) increased from the previous election cycle, with 21% of registration forms being 

delivered through these means. Another 14.5

of applications were made in person at elections 

offices, and 37% through motor vehicle agencies

Seventeen States reported receiving voter registration applications over the Internet, which 

accounted for nearly 2% of all registration forms 

received

•	 Ofthe 45 million voterregistration forms received,

nearly 14.4 million of these applications were from

new voters; that is, voters who were not previously 

registered in the local jurisdiction or had not previously registered in any jurisdiction (there were 

fewer than 24.6 million new registrants during

the 2006 to 2008 election cycle and 17.3 million

during the 2004 to 2006 election cycle). More than

18 million of the registration forms received represented a change to name, address, or party of the 

registrant

•	 States and territories found invalid or otherwise

rejected nearly 1.4 million applications, and found

that 2.9 million applications were duplicates of

existing registrations. Altogether, 9.4% of registration applications were invalid or duplicat

•	 States and territories sent 14.6 million removal

confirmation notices to names on their registration rolls, as allowed by NVRA after two cycles of

voter inactivity. More than 15 million voters were

removed from voter registration lists, for reasons 

including death, felony conviction, lack of response 

to a confirmation notice and subsequent failure to 

vote in consecutive elections, having moved from 

one jurisdiction to another, or at the voter’s request

Highlights from the 2010 Statutory Overview 

include the following:

•	 States reported matching their voter registration

databases with a number of other databases to 

maintain voter rolls including State departments of 

motor vehicles (DMV), the Social Security Administration, State departments of public health, Federal and State court systems, State Police, and U.

Attorneys

•	 States varied in whether or not they require an

excuse for absentee voting, whether or not they 

allow in-person early voting, and in the processes 

and procedures for counting early, absentee, and 

Uniformed and Overseas Citizen Absentee Voting 

Act (UOCAVA) ballots

•	 Statesprovidedvarious situations thatrequireprovisional voting including: when a voter’s name is 

not on the registration list, a voter’s registration 

reflects an error in party listing, a voter’s eligibility 

cannot be immediately established, a voter is challenged as ineligible, and when a voter does not have 

proper identification, among other situations

•	 States varied in the identification that is required

when registering to vote, when casting an in-person ballot, when casting a mail-in or absentee ballot, and when casting a ballot under UOCAVA, with 
29

some States requiring identification in addition to 

the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) identification 

requirements

•	 Most States indicated thatthey require pollworker

training, but States differed in when training is 

required, how often workers must undergo training, and who is required to attend training

POLICY

In FY 2011, the Policy Department of RPP prepared 

a survey about state policies and local procedures 

for conducting provisional voting and commenced 

work on the HAVA-mandated voluntary guidance 

that will be provided to the states. Another major

area of activity was the Notice of ProposedRulemaking (NPRM)for updating the regulations pertaining

to the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of

1993. The Policy Department of RPP is also charged

with creating guidance for commissioner review 

about statewide voter registration databases. In FY

2011, EAC began work on statewide voter registration 

database guidance. Work will continue throughout

FY 2012

Proposed Changes to the National Voter 

Registration Act Regulations

Section 9(a) of the NVRA requires the EAC to issue

regulations for developing a national mail voter registration form and for submitting a biennial report to 

Congress on the effect of the NVRA. In accordance

with HAVAand EAC’s Strategic Plan, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) related to the National

VoterRegistrationAct(NVRA) of 1993wasdeveloped

and published in the Federal Register in FY 2010. In

Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011, EAC sought comments 

on the proposed regulations. The comment period

lasted over 100 days.

IntheNPRM,EACproposed to amend itsNVRA

regulations to ensure they are consistent with HAVA 

and to make some technical amendments. EAC also

asked for public comment on other issues related to 

the national mail voter registration form and administration of the NVRA. The public could comment

on the NPRM via postal mail, e-mail, or www.regulations.gov until November 23, 2010. Commen

received were posted at www.regulations.gov. E

received numerous comments and prepared summaries of them for policy consideration once a quorum 

has been re-established at EAC

EAC finished its public hearings in FY 2011, holding its third hearing in October 2010.The testimony

presented was made available to the public on the 

EAC Web site at EAC.gov  Once a quorum is reestablished, EAC will issue one or more Final Notice(s) 

Proposed Rulemaking. In addition, EAC will analyze

the public input to determine whether the national 

mail voter registration form must be revised and the 

nature of guidance that EAC should provide to the 

states regarding the form

PROGRAMS

The primary focus of the Programs Department of 

RPP was to provide additional resources for both voters and election officials before the 2010 federal general election. Resources included everything from

election management materials to registration deadlines to basic information about federal elections

Resources for Voters

In FY 2011, RPP’s program division worked to 

serve voters by offering innovative and revamped 

resources. The Language Assistance Program

launched a new online translation tool called the 

Interactive Glossary of Election Terminology. This

online tool supports the EAC’s strategic goal of 

meeting the language needs of minority voters who 

participate in federal elections. It allows voters and

election officials to electronically search and translate common election terminology
30

The RPP division also revised and released a 

new version of the Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections

in anticipation of the 2012 election cycle. The Voter’s

Guide to Federal Elections was updated to reflect new 

information and legislation that has taken place 

since the original release in 2008. Additionally, the

updated Voter’s Guides were translated into Cherokee, Chinese, Dakota, Japanese, Korean, Navajo,

Spanish, Tagalog,Vietnamese, and Yup’ik. The Office

of Citizenship of the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship an

Immigration Services distributed more than 700,000 

copies of the Voter’s Guide to Federal Elections to new 

citizens in 2011

Resources for Election Officials 

One of EAC’s top priorities is providing assistance to 

election officials.The Election Management Guidelines (EMG) and Quick Start Management Guides were

created to assist state and local election officials with 

effectively managing and administering elections

•	 100 experts in election administration from over

30 States and the District of Columbia have participated in working groups to help EAC create these 

guides

•	 To date, 19 Election Management Guidelines and

21 Quick Start Guides have been sent to over 5,000 

election officials in every State and are available 
31

by request and on EAC’s website.This means that

well over 100,000 Election Management Guidelines 

and Quick Start Guides have been disseminated to 

election officials across the country

EAC presented information from its Election 

Management Guidelines program at conferences 

throughout the country and provided copies of materials upon request throughout FY 2011. During FY 2011,

EAC heard feedback about the program and ways to 

improve and expand upon it in the future. EAC now

plans to update select EMGs each year to keep the 

information current for election officials

33

 THE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

I

n FY 2011, the EAC Office of Inspector General issued 15 reports: thirteen audits of states 

that received funding under the HAVA grant 

programs and two audits of EAC’s operations. All

reports are available on the OIG Web site, EAC.gov/

inspector_general

Audits of states receiving funding from EAC 

under the HAVA grant programs found weaknesses 

in the states’ maintenance of inventory records for 

equipment purchased with federal funds, failure 

to appropriately document and support personnel 

costs and failure to account for interest earned on 

federal funds either at the state or county (subgrant) 

level. The thirteen audits resulted in $27 million in

questioned costs related to the use of federal funds for 

noncompetitive procurements and for insufficiently 

documented personnel charges.The audits identified

an additional $2.6 million that is owed to the states’

election funds

The OIG provided oversight to the independent public accounting firm that performed the 

annual audits of EAC’s financial statements and its 

compliance with the Federal Information Security 

Management Act (FISMA). EAC received an unqualified opinion of its financial statements. The annua

FISMA audit revealed that EAC was in compliance 

with FISMA

In addition to conducting the audit and performing investigative work, the OIG annually 

issues a report to EAC outlining the most significant management challenges. In FY 2011, the

OIG reported on four management challenges: 

performance management and accountability, 

information technology management and security, 

human capital and records management. Based on

agency-reported action, the OIG closed the challenge related to information technology management and security. The OIG will continue to track

EAC’s progress on the other three challenges

35

 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

•	 Social media

•	 Media inquires

•	 External communications

•	 Congressionalrelations

•	 The Freedom of Information Act

•	 National Archives and Records Act

•	 Editorial support: press releases, speeches, and

Congressional testimony

The agency’s web site, w w w.eac.gov, is th

primary communications tool. EAC.gov contain

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 userdriven 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

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

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

Roundtables held by the EAC during FY 2011:

•	 Contingency Planning in Elections (September 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 
36

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 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

•	 Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Products (February 14–15, 2011): EAC held a meeting with Election Officials, Voting System Vendors, Computer 

Experts, and Commercial Product manufacturers to discuss the impact of commercial-off-theshelf products on voting systems. This discussion

is a continuation of EAC’s recent effort to understand the challenges that COTS products pose 

and help EAC begin to address these challenges 

within its testing and certification program

SOCIAL MEDIA INITIATIVES 

The EAC has been extremely active using social 

media to reach election officials in new and engaging ways. Technology is transforming elections and

the EAC strives to be at the forefront of the field. In

particular, the EAC has developed an interactive 

blog and an active twitter account. Additionally,

the EAC cultivates a list of Election Office Twitter accounts to facilitate ongoing communication 

among election officials

Social media initiatives developed by the EAC 

in 2011 include:

•	 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: 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.

EAC.GOV INITIATIVES

The EAC also dedicated itself in 2011 to building 

a wider and more informative internet presence 

through our official web site www.eac.g
37

NewinitiativesontheEACwebsitein2011include:

•	 TheElectionOfficialExchange: anonline resource

built by EAC to help local election officials connect 

and leverage their collective expertise by sharing 

best practices and knowledge. By participating in

the Exchange, any U.S. election official can call o

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

•	 Enhanced and improved search tool: based on

usability studies and user feedback, EAC revamped 

its search tool enabling a more intuitive and userfriendly way for the public to find information on 

EAC.go

•	 Events finder: a 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. Al

meeting materials such as speaker statements are 

also available to the public

•	 Customized programupdates:The public cancustomize the kind of information and the frequency 

that it is delivered by signing up for EAC’s newsletter and automatic program updates. Users are

notified daily or weekly when new documents are 

posted—they set the delivery preferences

39

 MOVING FORWARD

I

n fiscal year 2012 the U.S. Election Assistanc

Commission plans to build upon its core mission work: developing guidance to meet HAVA 

requirements, adopting voluntary voting system 

guidelines, providing technical assistance to grantees, and serving as a national clearinghouse of information on election administration. However, the

EAC anticipates it will experience challenges due to 

the absence of a quorum

In FY 2012, EAC plans on finalizing the records 

management handbook. 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 MailVoter Registration Form.

41

 APPENDIX

FISCAL YEAR 2011 TALLY VOTES

Number Title Decided by 

votes of:

Date 

Transmitted

Certified 

Date

1 Approve The Appointment Of Thomas R. Wilkey As 

The Designated Federal Officer To the Board Of 

Advisors

3 9/29/2010 10/1/2010

2 Renewal Of EAC Standards Board Charter 3 10/7/2010 10/12/2010

3 Approval of 2010 Voting Technology and Accessibility 

Research - Accessibile voting Technology Initiative 

Notice Of Funds Availability

3 10/14/2010 10/18/2010

4 Appointment Of A Designated Agency Ethics Official 3 10/18/2010 10/20/2010

5 Update To Virginia State-Specific Instructions On The 

National Mail Voter Registration Form

3 11/8/2010 11/10/2010

6 Advisory Opinion In Response To Alaska’s Request 

To Use Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Section 

251 Funds To Purchase An Automated Mail Ballot 

Processing System To Accommodate The Growing 

volume of Mail Ballots Within Required Timeframes

12/1/2010 WITHDRAWN

7 Recommendation To Adopt The Open Government Plan 3 12/6/2010 12/8/2010

8 Approve the Renewal Charter For The Board of Advisors and Publish Notice of the Renewal Charter in the 

Federal Register

3 12/8/2010 12/10/2010

9 Advisory Opinion In Response To Alaska’s Request 

To Use Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Section 

251 Funds To Purchase An Automated Mail Ballot 

Processing System To Accommodate The Growing 

volume of Mail Ballots Within Required Timeframes

3 12/10/2010 12/14/2010
42

FISCAL YEAR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT–EAC BOARD OF ADVISORS LIST

The following former members of the EAC Board of Advisors served in fiscal year 2011: Orange County, Florida 

Supervisor of Elections- Bill Cowles; IBM Human Ability & Accessibility Center member Phillip Jenkins.

Appointed by First 

Name

Last 

Name

Title City St

Architectural and Transportation 

Barrier Compliance Board

Ron Gardner National Federation of the 

Blind of Utah

Bountiful UT

Architectural and Transportation 

Barrier Compliance Board

Vacant

Chief, Public Integrity Section, 

Criminal Division, 

U.S. Department of Justice

Richard Pilger U.S. Department of Justice 

- Director, Election Crimes 

Branch

Washington DC

Chief, Voting Section, 

Civil Rights Division, 

U.S. Department of Justice

Chris Herren Chief Washington DC

Committee on House 

Administration—Ranking Member

Donald Jones Advocate Willingboro NJ

Committee on House 

Administration—Ranking Member

Stewart Cohen Attorney Philadelphia PA

Committee on House 

Administration—Chair

Jill LaVine Registrar of Voters - 

Sacramento County

Sacramento CA

Committee on House 

Administration—Chair

Keith Cunningham Elections Division, 

OH Secretary of State

Columbus OH

Director, Federal Voting 

Assistance Program, 

U.S. Department of Defense

Robert Carey Director, FVAP Arlington VA

International Association of Clerks, 

Recorders, Election Officials 

and Treasurers

Robert Saar Election Commissioner Wheaton IL

International Association of Clerks, 

Recorders, Election Officials 

and Treasurers

Vacant

National Association of Counties Helen Purcell Maricopa County Recorder Phoenix AZ

National Association of Counties Wendy Noren Boone County Clerk Columbia MO

National Association of County 

Recorders, Election Officials 

and Clerks

Jan Kralovec Director of Elections, Cook 

County, IL

Chicago IL

National Association of County 

Recorders, Election Officials 

and Clerks

Neal Kelley Registrar of Voters, 

Orange County

Santa Ana CA

National Association of 

Secretaries of State

Beth Chapman Alabama Secretary of State Montgomery AL

National Association of 

Secretaries of State

Mark Ritchie Secretary of State - State 

of Minnesota

St Paul MN
43

FISCAL YEAR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT–EAC BOARD OF ADVISORS LIST

The following former members of the EAC Board of Advisors served in fiscal year 2011: Orange County, Florida 

Supervisor of Elections- Bill Cowles; IBM Human Ability & Accessibility Center member Phillip Jenkins.

Appointed by First 

Name

Last 

Name

Title City St

National Association of State 

Election Directors

Christopher Thomas Director of Elections, 

State of Michigan

Lansing MI

National Association of State 

Election Directors

Linda Lamone Executive Director - Maryland 

State Board of Elections

Annapolis MD

National Conference of 

State Legislatures

Sue Landske Senator, Indiana State Senate Cedar Lake IN

National Conference of 

State Legislatures

Thomas Reynolds Representative, Mississippi 

State Legislature

Charleston MS

National Governors Association Vacant

National Governors Association Vacant

Senate Rules & Administration 

Cmte. - Ranking Member

Greg Bell Lieutenant Governor Salt Lake 

City

UT

Senate Rules & Administration 

Cmte. - Ranking Member

Vacant

Senate Rules and 

Administration—Chair

Barbara Bartoletti League of Women Voters - 

New York State

N. 

Greenbush

NY

Senate Rules and 

Administration—Chair

James Dickson V.P. for Organizing and Civic 

Engagement, American 

Association of People with 

Disabilities (AAPD)

Washington DC

The Election Center Doug Lewis Executive Director, 

The Election Center

Houston TX

The Election Center Ernie Hawkins Former Registrar of Voters, 

Sacramento County

Elk Grove CA

U. S. Commission on Civil Rights Abigail Thernstrom Commissioner McLean VA

U. S. Commission on Civil Rights Roberta Achtenberg Commissioner San 

Francisco

CA

U. S. House Minority Leader Lillie Coney Associate Director, Electronic 

Privacy Information Center

Washington DC

U. S. House Speaker Tom Fuentes The Claremont Institute Lake Forest CA

U. S. Senate Majority Leader Dr. 

Barbara

Simons Researcher Palo Alto CA

U. S. Senate Minority Leader Sarah Johnson Executive Director, Kentucky 

Board of Elections

Frankfort KY

United States 

Conference of Mayors

Vacant

United States 

Conference of Mayors

Vacant
44

FISCAL YEAR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT–STANDARDS BOARD LIST

Former Members of the Standards Board who served in FY2011

The following former members of the EAC Standards Board served in fiscal year 2010:

American Samoa HAVA Manager Taufete’e John Faumuina; Arkansas Deputy Secretary of State Janet Harris; Boone County (Arkansas) Clerk 

Crystal Graddy; Broomfield City and County (Colorado) Clerk and Recorder Russ Ragsdale; DC Board of Elections and Ethics Executive 

Director Rokey Suleman; Georgia Assistant Secretary of State Wes Tailor; Hawaii Section Head Scott Nago; Kootenai County (Idaho) Clerk 

Dan English; Illinois State Board of Elections Executive Director Daniel White; Illinois State Board of Elections Executive Director Rupert 

Borgsmiller; Chicago (Illinois) Board of Elections Commissioner Richard Cowen; Sullivan County (Indiana) Circuit Court Clerk Shelly Parris; Jones County (Iowa) Auditor Janine Sulzner; Harford County (Maryland) Board of Elections Election Director James Massey; Michigan 

Administrative Manager Susan McRill; Troy City (Michigan) Clerk Tonni Bartholomew; Nevada Deputy Secretary of State Matthew Griffin; 

New Mexico Secretary of State Mary Herrera; Dona Ana County (New Mexico) Election Supervisor Bob Bartelsmeyer; Assistant Counsel to 

the Governor of New York Jeffrey Pearlman; Counsel to the Ohio Board of Voting Machine Examiners Brandi Laser Seskes; Ohio Director of 

Elections Matt Damschroder; Member of the Lake County (Ohio) Board of Elections Dale Fellows; Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Bureau 

of Commissions, Elections and Legislation Chet Harhut; Butler County (Pennsylvania) Election Director Regis Young; Executive Director 

of Charleston County (South Carolina) Board of Elections & Voter Registration; South Dakota State Election Supervisor Kea Warne; Texas 

Director of Elections Ann McGeehan; Virginia State Board of Elections Confidential Assistant/Policy Analyst James Alcorn; Chair of Arlington 

County (Virginia) Electoral Board Allen Harrison Jr.; Virginia State Board of Elections Confidential Policy Advisor Justin Riemer; Washington 

Director of Elections Nixon Handy

CURRENT STANDARDS BOARD LIST

State Designee First Last Title City State

Alabama State Beth Chapman Secretary of State Montgomery AL

Alabama Local VACANT AL

Alaska State Gail Fenumiai Director, Division of 

Elections

Juneau AK

Alaska Local Shelly Growden Election 

Systems Manager

Fairbanks AK

American Samoa State Soliai T. Fuimaono Chief Election 

Officer

Pago Pago AS

American Samoa Local Vaitoelau Filiga Deputy Director Pago Pago AS

Arizona State Amy Bjelland Deputy Secretary 

of State

Phoenix AZ

Arizona Local Reynaldo Valenzuela Assistant Director 

of Elections

Phoenix AZ

Arkansas State AJ Kelly Deputy Secretary 

of State

Little Rock AR

Arkansas Local VACANT AR

California State Lowell Finley Deputy Secretary 

of State

Sacramento CA

California Local Stephen Weir County Clerk 

Contra Costa 

County

Martinez CA

Colorado State Wayne Munster Deputy Elections 

Director

Denver CO

Colorado Local Gilbert Ortiz Pueblo County 

Clerk and Recorder

Pueblo CO
45

CURRENT STANDARDS BOARD LIST

State Designee First Last Title City State

Connecticut State Ted Bromley Legislation and 

Elections 

Administration 

Division Director

Hartford CT

Connecticut Local Anthony Esposito Hamden Republican 

Registrar of Voters

Hamden CT

Delaware State Elaine Manlove Commissioner 

of Elections

Dover DE

Delaware Local Howard G. Sholl, Jr. Deputy 

Administrative 

Director

Wilmington DE

District of 

Columbia

State VACANT Washington DC

District of 

Columbia

Local VACANT

Florida State VACANT FL

Florida Local Lori Edwards Polk County 

Supervisor 

of Elections

Bartow FL

Georgia State Tim Fleming Assistant Director 

of Elections Division

Atlanta GA

Georgia Local Lynn Bailey Executive Director Augusta GA

Guam State Gerald A Taitano Executive Director Hagatna GU

Guam Local VACANT GU

Hawaii State Judy Gold Precinct Operations 

Section Head

Honolulu HI

Hawaii Local Lyndon Yoshioka Kaua’i County Election AdministratorLihu’e HI

Idaho State Timothy A. Hurst Chief Deputy Coeur d'Alene ID

Idaho Local Patty Weeks Nez Perce 

County Clerk

Lewiston ID

Illinois State Becky Glazier Assistant to 

Executive Director

Springfield IL

Illinois Local Lance Gough Executive Director, 

Chicago Board 

of Election 

Commissioners

Chicago IL

Indiana State Brad King Co-Director, 

Indiana Election 

Division

Indianapolis IN

Indiana Local Fran Satterwhite Scott County 

Circuit Court Clerk

Scottsburg IN
46

CURRENT STANDARDS BOARD LIST

State Designee First Last Title City State

Iowa State Sarah Reisetter Director of 

Elections

Des Moines IA

Iowa Local Ben Steines Winneshiek County 

Auditor & 

Commissioner 

of Elections

Decorah IA

Kansas State Bryan Caskey Assistant State 

Election Director

Topeka KS

Kansas Local Donald Merriman Saline County 

Clerk

Saline KS

Kentucky State Sarah Ball Johnson Executive Director Frankfort KY

Kentucky Local Kevin Mooney Bullitt County Clerk Shepherdsville KY

Louisiana State Angie Rogers Louisiana Commissioner of ElectionsBaton Rouge LA

Louisiana Local H. Lynn Jones, II Calcasieu Parish 

Clerk of Court

Lake Charles LA

Maine State Julie L. Flynn Deputy Secretary 

of State

Augusta ME

Maine Local Lucette Pellerin City Clerk Saco ME

Maryland State Nikki Baines Trella Election Reform 

Director

Annapolis MD

Maryland Local Katie Brown Election Director, 

Baltimore County 

Board of Elections

Catonsville MD

Massachusetts State William F. Gavin Secretary of the 

Commonwealth

Boston MA

Massachusetts Local John McGarry Executive Director, 

Election 

Commission

Brockton MA

Michigan State Susan McRill Administrative Mgr., 

QVF Help Desk & 

Field Svcs.

Lansing MI

Michigan Local Tonni Bartholomew Troy City Clerk Troy MI

Minnesota State Gary Poser Director of 

Elections

St. Paul MN

Minnesota Local Sharon K. Anderson Cass County 

Auditor-Treasurer

Walker MN

Mississippi State Heath Hillman Assistant Secretary 

of State – Elections

Jackson MS

Mississippi Local Robert Harrell Circuit Clerk, Clay 

County

West Point MS
47

CURRENT STANDARDS BOARD LIST

State Designee First Last Title City State

Missouri State Leslye Winslow Senior Counsel to 

Secretary of State

Jefferson City MO

Missouri Local Richard T. Struckhoff Greene County 

Clerk

Springfield MO

Montana State Jorge Quintana Chief Legal Counsel Helena MT

Montana Local Charlotte Mills Gallatin County 

Clerk and Recorder

Bozeman MT

Nebraska State John Gale Secretary of State Lincoln NE

Nebraska Local David Dowling Cedar County 

Clerk & Election 

Commissioner

Hartington NE

Nevada State Scott Gilles Deputy Secretary 

of State for 

Elections

Carson City NV

Nevada Local Harvard L. Lomax Clark County 

Registrar of Voters

North Las Vegas NV

New Hampshire State Anthony Stevens Assistant Secretary 

of State

Concord NH

New Hampshire Local Robert Dezmelyk Moderator, 

Town of Newton

Newton NH

New Jersey State Robert Giles Director Trenton NJ

New Jersey Local Linda Von Nessi Clerk of the Board Newark NJ

New Mexico State Bobbi Shearer Bureau of 

Elections Director

Santa Fe NM

New Mexico Local Lynn Ellins Dona Ana 

County Clerk

Las Cruces NM

New York State Robert Brehm Co-Executive 

Director/Chief 

Election Official

Albany NY

New York Local Robert Howe Cortland County 

Commissioner

Cortland NY

North Carolina State Gary Bartlett Executive 

Director, State 

Board of Elections

Raleigh NC

North Carolina Local Deborah J. Bedford Director of 

Elections

Rutherford NC

North Dakota State James Silrum Deputy Secretary 

of State

Bismarck ND

North Dakota Local Michael M. Montplaisir Cass County 

Auditor

Fargo ND
48

CURRENT STANDARDS BOARD LIST

State Designee First Last Title City State

Ohio State Matt Masterson Deputy Elections 

Administrator

Columbus OH

Ohio Local Steven Harsman Director, 

Montgomery 

County Board of 

Elections

Dayton OH

Oklahoma State Thomas Prince Chairman, State 

Election Board

Edmond OK

Oklahoma Local Doug Sanderson Secretary, 

Oklahoma County 

Election Board

Oklahoma City OK

Oregon State Steve Trout Director Salem OR

Oregon Local Tamara Green Baker County Clerk Baker City OR

Pennsylvania State VACANT PA

Pennsylvania Local VACANT PA

Puerto Rico State María D. Santiago 

Rodríguez

First Vice President San Juan PR

Puerto Rico Local Nestor J. Colόn 

Berlingeri

Second Vice 

President

San Juan PR

Rhode Island State Robert Kando Executive 

Director, State 

Board of Elections

Providence RI

Rhode Island Local VACANT RI

South Carolina State Marci Andino Executive Director Columbia SC

South Carolina Local Edith Redden Director, 

Williamsburg 

County Voter 

Registration

Kingstree SC

South Dakota State Aaron Lorenzen Director of 

Elections

Pierre SD

South Dakota Local Patty McGee Sully County 

Auditor

Onida SD

Tennessee State Mark Goins State Coordinator 

of Elections

Nashville TN

Tennessee Local Marshall McKamey Campbell County 

Election 

Commissioner

LaFollette TN

Texas State Paul Miles Senior Attorney/

Voting System 

Examiner

Austin TX

Texas Local Dana DeBeauvoir Travis County Clerk Austin TX
49

CURRENT STANDARDS BOARD LIST

State Designee First Last Title City State

Utah State Mark Thomas Director of 

Elections

Salt Lake City UT

Utah Local Robert Pero Carbon 

County Clerk

Price UT

Vermont State Kathleen Scheele Director of 

Elections

Montpelier VT

Vermont Local Melissa Ross Hinesburg 

Town Clerk

Hinesburg VT

Virgin Islands State John Abramson, Jr. Supervisor of 

Elections

Kingshill, St. 

Croix

VI

Virgin Islands Local Corinne Halyard 

Plaskett

Deputy Supervisor 

of Elections

Kingshill, St. 

Croix

VI

Virginia State Don Palmer Secretary, 

Virginia State 

Board of Elections

Richmond VA

Virginia Local Renee Andrews Secretary, City of 

Falls Church 

Electoral Board

Falls Church VA

Washington State Shane Hamlin Co-Director 

of Elections

Olympia WA

Washington Local Kristina Swanson Cowlitz County 

Auditor

Kelso WA

West Virginia State Layna ValentineBrownHAVA Coordinator Charleston WV

West Virginia Local Jeff Waybright Jackson 

County Clerk

Ripley WV

Wisconsin State Nathaniel Robinson Election Division 

Administrator

Madison WI

Wisconsin Local Sandra L. Wesolowski Franklin County 

Clerk

Franklin WI

Wyoming State Peggy Nighswonger State Election 

Director

Cheyenne WY

Wyoming Local Julie Freese Fremont County 

Clerk

Lander WY
50

FISCAL YEAR 2011 ANNUAL REPORT – TECHNICAL GUIDELINES 

DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE LIST

Former Members of the Technical Guidelines Development Committee Who Served in FY2011

The following former members of the EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee served during fiscal year 2010:

Russell G. Ragsdale, Clerk and Recorder, City and County of Broomfield, Broomfield, Colorado – Representing the EAC 

Standards Board Dr. Patrick McDaniel, Associate Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, Pennsylvania State 

University, University Park, PA – Representing IEEE Paul Miller, Senior Technology Policy Advisor, Elections Division, 

State of Washington, Office of the Secretary of State, Olympia, WA – Representing NASED

CURRENT TECHNICAL GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS OF SEPT. 30, 2011

Appointed 

by

First Last Title City State

Director 

of NIST

Dr. 

Patrick D.

Gallagher Committee Chair, Deputy Secretary of 

Commerce and Director of the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology

Gaithersburg MD

Standards 

Board

Donald Palmer Secretary of Elections, Commonwealth of Virginia Richmond VA

Standards 

Board

Don Merriman Saline (KS) County Clerk and Election Officer Salina KS

Board of 

Advisors

Linda Lamone Maryland Administrator of Elections Annapolis MD

Board of 

Advisors

Helen Purcell Recorder, Maricopa County Arizona Phoenix AZ

Access 

Board

Ron Gardner Director of Field Services, National 

Federation of the Blind of Utah

Bountiful UT

Access 

Board

Phillip Jenkins Accessibility Consultant, Business Development 

Consultant and Senior Engineer, IBM Human 

Ability and Accessibility Center

Austin TX

ANSI Dr. David Wagner Professor, University of California-Berkeley Berkeley CA

IEEE VACANT

NASED Ann McGeehan Director of the Elections Division, Office of the 

Texas Secretary of State

Austin TX

NASED Matt Masterson Deputy Election Administrator, Office of the Ohio 

Secretary of State

Columbus OH

Other 

Tech/Sci

Dr. Steven Bellovin Professor of Computer Science, Columbia, 

University

New York NY

Other 

Tech/Sci

Dr. Diane 

Cordry

Golden Program Coordinator, Association of Assistive 

Technology Act Programs

Grain Valley MO

Other 

Tech/Sci

Dr. Douglas Jones Associate Professor, Department of Computer 

Science, University of Iowa

Iowa City IA

Other 

Tech/Sci

Edwin Smith, III Vice President, Compliance and Certification, 

Dominion Voting Systems

Longmont CO

Access Board = Architectural and Transportation Barrier Compliance Board

ANSI = American National Standards Institute.

IEEE = Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.

NASED = National Association of State Election Directors.
51

 COMMISSIONERS

Commissioner Gineen Bresso

Ms. Gineen Bresso was nominated by President

George W. Bush and confirmed by the U.S. Sena

on October 2, 2008, to serve on the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).Ms.Bresso served as Ch

of EAC in 2009.Her term of service extends through

December 12, 2009

Before her appointment with EAC, Commissioner Bresso was the minority elections counsel for 

the Committee on House Administration. She previously served as a policy advisor to former Maryland

Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., a position in whic

her primary area of focus was on election law. She

also served as an attorney-advisor for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, where she reviewed an

prosecuted applications for federal trademark registration. She also served as a judicial law clerk for the

Honorable Arrie W.Davis in the Maryland Court of

Special Appeals

Ms. Bresso received her Juris Doctor from WesternNewEnglandCollege School ofLaw(1999),wher

she was a member of the Law Review. In 1995, she

received a Bachelor of Arts in political science from 

the University of Massachusetts at Amherst
52

Commissioner Donetta Davidson

Ms. Donetta L. Davidson was nominated by President George W. Bush and confirmed by unanimo

consent of the U.S. Senate on July 28, 2005, to serv

on the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EA

She was reappointed to a second term on October 2, 

2008. Ms. Davidson served as Chair of EAC for 201

and 2007. She also served as Vice-Chair in 2008. He

term of service extends through December 12, 2011

Ms. Davidson, formerly Colorado’s secretary of state,

came to EAC with experience in nearly every area of 

election administration—everything from county 

clerk to secretary of state

Commissioner Davidson began her career in 

election administration when she was elected in 1978 

as the Bent County clerk and recorder in Las Animas, 

Colorado, a position she held until 1986. That year, she

was appointed director of elections for the Colorado 

Department of State, where she supervised county 

clerks in all election matters and assisted with recall 

issues for municipal, special district and school district elections

In 1994, she was elected Arapahoe County 

clerk and recorder and reelected to a second term in 

1998. The next year, Colorado Governor Bill Owens

appointed Ms. Davidson as the Colorado secretary of

state, and she was elected to the position in 2000 and 

reelected in 2002 for a 4-year term

She has served on the Federal Election Commission Advisory Panel and the board of directors of the 

Help America Vote Foundation. In 2005, Ms. Davidsonwas elected president oftheNationalAssociati

of Secretaries of State, and she is the former president 

of the National Association of State Elections Directors. Before her EAC appointment, Ms. Davidso

served on EAC’s Technical Guidelines Development 

Committee

In 2005, Government Technology magazine 

named Ms. Davidson one of its “Top 25: Dreamers,

Doers, and Drivers” in recognition of her innovative 

approach to improve government services. She was

also the 1993 recipient of the Henry Toll Fellowship 

of Council of State Governments

Ms. Davidson has devoted much of her professional life to election administration, but her first love

is her family. Born into a military family in Liberal,

Kansas, she became a Coloradoan shortly thereafter 

when her family moved first to Two Buttes then to 

Las Animas, where they settled. Whenever possible,

Ms. Davidson spends time with her family: son Todd,

daughter and son-in-law Trudie and Todd Berich and 

granddaughters Brittany and Nicole.
53

 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S BIOGRAPHY

Executive Director Thomas R. Wilkey

By unanimous vote of the Commissioners, Executive 

Director Thomas Wilkey was reappointed to serve 

another 4-year term beginning June 20, 2009. M

Wilkey has served in this position since 2005

After his brief career as an elementary teacher, 

Mr. Wilkey joined the Erie County Board of Elections (Buffalo, New York) in November 1968 as a

elections clerk. He subsequently rose to the position

of senior election deputy before joining the New

York State Board of Elections in 1979 as public information officer

In 1985, Mr.Wilkey was promoted to the newly

created position of director of elections operations, 

which was formed to administer oversight of New

York’s 57 county boards

Mr. Wilkey was appointed the second executive

director of the New York State Board of Elections in

June 1992—a position he held until August 2003

During 1983, Mr. Wilkey and a small group of

election administrators from throughout the country 

pushed for the creation of the International Center on 

Election Law. Today, the Center represents more than

1,000 foreign, state, county and local election officials

His involvement led to his appointment as chair of the 

Center’s Professional Development Committee, which 

now runs the first university-based professional development program for election officials. In 1995, Wilkey

was recognized for his service by his appointment to 

the Board of Directors of the Center

AnearlyproponentofthecreationoftheNational

Association of State Election Directors (NASED),

Mr. Wilkey served as secretary, treasurer and vicepresident and was elected president for the 1996–97

term. In January 1997, Mr. Wilkey was named chai

of NASED’s Independent Test Authority Accreditation Board, which reviews and approves laboratories 

and technical groups for the testing of voting systems 

under NASED’s national accreditation program. He

was reappointed as chair in February 2000

AnearlyandactivepromoteroftheNationalVoter

RegistrationAct(NVRA),Mr.Wilkeyhasservedaschair

oftheNVRACommitteeofNASEDandasamemberof

the FECAdHocDiscussion Group forNVRA.

In 1998, the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s 

Federal Voting Assistance Program named Mr

Wilkey to its State and Local Alliance Board. The

Board advises the Federal Voting Assistance Program 

about ongoing programs to support and facilitate 

absentee voting requirements for more than 6 million 

military and overseas voters

Following the 2000 general election, Mr. Wilkey

was named to several national commissions to study 

election reform, including those representing the 

NationalAssociation of Secretaries of State, National

Association of Counties, Council of State Governments and the Election Center. In May 2001, the FEC

asked Mr.Wilkey to help draft revised federal Voting

System Standards, due for completion in April 2002

In addition, Mr. Wilkey was actively involved with

the development of HAVA, which Congress passed 

and the President signed into law in October 2002
54

NOTES

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

1201 New York Avenue, NW • Suite 300 • Washington • DC 20005

866–747–1471 (toll free) • HAVAinfo@eac.gov • www.eac.gov