THE U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION 

FISCAL YEAR 2013 

INTERIM CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION 

February 13, 2012
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

2

Page Intentionally Left Blank
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

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

FY 2013 Priority Goals.......................................................................................5 

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

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

EAC’s Goals and Structure.................................................................................8 

Operating Plan Summary..................................................................................10 

Budgetary Changes..........................................................................................11 

Budget Requests and Performance Measures by Strategic Plan Goal.................................11 

Improper Payments......................................................................................... 22 

Information Technology Infrastructure and Security...................................................22 

 Appendix A -- FY 2011 Annual Performance Report 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

4

Page Intentionally Left Blank
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

5

VISION AND MISSION 

Vision 

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

accurately. 

Mission 

Assist the effective administration of Federal elections. 

FY 2013 Priority Goals 

• Ensure that voting systems and modifications of already certified systems submitted to EAC’s 

Voting System Testing and Certification program are successfully and efficiently tested to 

Federal standards. 

• Serve as a Clearinghouse and provide election officials and voters with necessary information 

regarding the elections process. 

• Provide election officials with guidance and information to support poll worker training, 

educate the public, and provide information to voters about the voting process generally. 

• Disseminate voluntary best practices for computerized Statewide voter registration list 

requirements and registration by mail guidance to the States, and review and update the 

National Voter Registration Form. 

• Distribute voter guides and glossaries designed to assist citizens who are not proficient in 

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

the Voting Rights Act Section 5 languages. 

Salaries and Expenses Resources Available for Obligation 

FY 2011 

Enacted 

FY 2012 

President’s Budget 

FY 2013 

President’s Budget 

FTE Dollars FTE Dollars FTE Dollars 

 

48 $16,267,400

 

38 $11,500,000 29 $11,500,000
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

6

Appropriations Language

For necessary expenses to carry out the Help America Vote Act of 2002, [$16,300,000] 

$11,500,000, of which [$3,250,000] $2,750,000 shall be transferred to the National Institute of 

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

Help America Vote Act of 2002. (Financial Services and General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2012.) 

Legislative proposals

None at this time due to lack of a quorum of Commissioners. 

EAC Background and Mission

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

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

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

administration studies, voluntary guidance and materials; and a program to distribute and oversee 

federal funds. 

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

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

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

guide the EAC. 

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

statutorily required to: 

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

• Distribute HAVA funds to states for election administration improvements. 

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

Guidelines (VVSG) that set the standards against which voting systems are tested. 

• Accredit voting system test laboratories and certify voting equipment. 

• Conduct mandated research and periodic studies of election administration issues as 

determined by the Commission. 

• Establish best practices and guidance on election administration for State and local 

election officials. 

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

Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993. 

• Provide Congress with a biennial report to assess the impact of the NVRA. 

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

Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) and other election administration issues. In addition, the 

Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) assists EAC in the preparation of the 

VVSG. The Director of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s National Institute of Standards and 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

7

Technology (NIST) serves as the Chair of the TGDC. In addition, NIST and EAC jointly choose 

four members of the TGDC. EAC uses the work products of the TGDC as the basis for all 

voluntary voting systems guidelines promulgated by the Commission as prescribed by the Help 

America Vote Act. HAVA specifies that NIST provide recommendations to EAC regarding 

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

included funds for NIST support. 

Since 2002, Congress has appropriated nearly $3.3 billion and EAC has disbursed $3.2 billion 

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

improvements pursuant to Titles I and II of HAVA. The General Services Administration (GSA) 

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

Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands on EAC’s behalf in FY 2003. 

Of the $3,237,464,148 disbursed to date, $349,718,384 was disbursed for Section 101 Payments 

to States for activities to improve administration of elections; $300,317,737 in Section 102 

Replacement of Punch card or lever voting machines funds; and $2,587,428,027 in Section 251 

Requirements payments. Requirements payments are distributed to the States by formula based 

on voting age population for activities related to compliance with Title III Uniform and 

Nondiscriminatory Election Terminology and Administration Requirements. 

States use(d) these funds to carry out activities such as: 

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

2) establishing a computerized statewide voter registration database, 

3) improving polling place accessibility, and 

4) training election officials, pollworkers and election volunteers. 

EAC’s focus in subsequent years has been on establishing and subsequently updating the 

Voluntary Voting System Guidelines, completing mandated research to promote effective 

Federal elections and to present key data on election practices and voting; instituting a voting 

system testing and certification program; providing technical assistance to the States on use of 

HAVA funds; and providing information on effective election practices to its stakeholders. 

Among EAC’s key stakeholders are election officials. Leading up to an election year, State and 

local election officials are faced with the enormous responsibility of informing voters about 

where, when and how to vote; training Election Day poll workers; and conducting fair, 

accessible, accurate and secure elections. Federal elections are locally administered with a wide 

variety of practices and policies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Election practices and laws 

vary from State to State and an estimated 11,000 jurisdictions nationwide. 

EAC assists States and local election officials by providing tools and best practices to improve 

election administration practices. Under EAC’s Election Management Guidelines Program, 

EAC provides a wealth of information about pre-election activities, including ballot preparation 

and design; voting system security; contingency planning; voting system certification; voting 

system acceptance testing; and parallel testing. The materials promote a proactive approach to 

election management. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

8

States are looking at new technology and practices in voting such as remote access voting for 

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

internet voting, and accessible technology for disabled voters. To assist the States, EAC has 

produced reports on A Survey of Internet Voting, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee 

Voting Act Registration and Voting Process and UOCAVA Pilot Program Testable 

Requirements; 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 discusses the new technologies and practices 

with its advisory boards. 

EAC’s Goals and Structure

EAC’s offices are aligned to address the goals in the Strategic Plan: 

• Goal 1, Communicate is administered by the Office of Communications and 

Clearinghouse. 

• Goal 2, Fund and Oversee is administered by the Grants Management and Inspector 

General Offices. 

• Goal 3, Study, Guide, and Assist, is administered by the Research, Program and Policy 

unit. 

• Goal 4, Test and Certify is administered by the Voting System Testing and Certification 

unit. 

• Goal 5, Manage is administered by the Boards, Commissioners, Executive Director, 

Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel. 

 A cost allocation model distributing administrative costs to the four program goals is part of the 

annual Agency Financial Report. The model is reviewed by EAC’s financial statement auditors 

and is used to present the FY 2013 budget request. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

9
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

10

Operating Plan Summary 

Salaries and Expenses FY 11 Enacted FY 12 Enacted 

FY 13 President’s 

Budget 

Full-Time Equivalent Staff (FTE) 47.6 38 29 

Full-Time Staff 46 35 28 

Other than Full-Time Staff 9 6 2 

Note: Distribution of staff is expected to change after restructuring in FY 2012 or 2013. Figures above 

represent goals for FY 2013. 

Category FY 11 Enacted FY 12 Enacted 

FY 13 President’s 

Budget 

Payroll Full-time Personnel 5,037,209 3,575,956 3,230,644 

Payroll Other than Full-time Personnel 420,105 367,139 187,030 

Subtotal Personnel Compensation 5,457,314 3,943,095 3,417,674 

Personnel Benefits 1,355,323 964,165 815,886 

Transit and Parking Benefits 

 

67,611 58,742 54,779 

Subtotal PC&B 6,880,248 4,966,002 4,288,339

Travel 622,946 327,460 369,798 

Rent 1,034,000 972,495 907,665 

Communications, Equipment Rentals 

 

124,259 129,208 133,008 

Printing, Reproduction 

 

440,957 57,650 81,176 

Other Services 

 

2,562,175 2,198,749 2,861,810 

NIST 

 

3,243,500 2,750,000 2,750,000 

Supplies and Subscriptions 

 

120,035 89,001 87,839 

Equipment 

 

106,320 9,435 20,365 

Subtotal, Non-personnel 8,254,192 6,533,999 7,211,660 

Planned carryover 1,132,960

Total 16,267,400 11,500,000 11,500,000 

 Note: FY 2013 assumes a .5% Cost of Living Adjustment. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

11

Budgetary Changes FY 2012 to FY 2013 

(in whole dollars) 

Personnel Compensation and Benefits -$(677,663), - 9 FTE 

Decrease of 7 full-time and 4 part-time positions 

Other Services +663,062 

Increases for Public Meeting Videostreaming ($152,648), Financial 

Services ($202,967), Clearinghouse Enhancements ($241,760), Research 

($132,970); miscellaneous administrative decreases (-$67,283) 

Miscellaneous +$14,601 

Travel ($42,338), Rent (-$64,831), Printing ($23,526), Communications 

and Equipment Rentals ($3,800), Supplies and Subscriptions (-$1,162), 

Equipment ($10,930) 

Budget Requests and Performance Measures by Strategic Plan Goal

COMMUNICATE

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

Clearinghouse is required under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 and provides a 

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

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

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

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

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

elections offices. 

The primary purposes of the Clearinghouse are to: 

• Disseminate election information to the Public. 

• Supplement States’ efforts to provide information to assist voters. 

• Provide a central location for best practices, shared practices, innovations and creative 

solutions in election administration. 

• Share research findings and data about elections. 

• Provide information about EAC’s voluntary voting system certification and testing 

program. 

• Report on the expenditure of HAVA funds. 

• Notify the public about EAC’s funding for grants opportunities. 

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

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

EAC. The anticipated outcome of the goal is to help ensure that Congress, Federal agencies, 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

12

State and local election officials, and the Public receive reliable, accurate, and non-partisan 

information about administering, conducting and participating in Federal elections and how, 

where, and when Americans vote. 

EAC Strategic Outcome -- Communicate 

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

Enacted Enacted President’s Budget 

Direct Costs $730,103 $405,996 $740,697 

Indirect Costs 1,280,960 523,559 729,881 

Total $2,011,063 $929,555 $1,470,578 

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

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

objectives: 

1) operate EAC’s Elections Clearinghouse effectively; 

2) respond to outside requests about EAC timely and accurately; and 

3) convey the results of EAC operations and accomplishments. 

The first of the strategic goals is aimed at providing resources on the Federal election voting 

process, and providing a central resource about election administration for election officials and 

other stakeholders. 

In order to implement the goal, EAC employs such strategies as: 

• Using the latest technology and communication tools for EAC’s website, www.eac.gov. 

• Complying with Open Government requirements and continuing to operate transparently. 

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

comments can be submitted to www.eac.gov/contact. Throughout EAC’s website, the 

agency has applied the concept of open government as well as implemented tools to 

facilitate a conversation with the Public and election officials about voting and election 

administration. 

• Providing more tools for the Public and election officials to communicate with EAC and 

each other. Users can customize their online experience by signing up for automatic email alerts on a variety of election topics and events, including Public Meetings, advisory 

board meetings, reports, policies and agency news. Other features include a multimedia 

center that provides training and educational videos on polling place management, 

election contingency planning, voting accessibility, and voting system testing and 

certification. The videos are also available on YouTube. 

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

The Communications and Clearinghouse office is responsible for communicating with the media 

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

the public. The Communications division is responsible for administration of www.eac.gov, 

which contains thousands of documents with information about voting system test plans, agency 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

13

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

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

videotapes on the programs, Twitter account “@EACgov”, the Election Official Exchange of 

information, a blog, a monthly newsletter about EAC activities and events that goes to 

approximately 1,200 subscribers, and a weekly email on internal operations. The unit coordinates 

with EAC staff to communicate policies, guidance, research, and other agency initiatives to the 

public. 

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

elections and election administration. By 2013, EAC’s stakeholders will access a new, 

separately identifiable Clearinghouse on EAC’s website. The fixed price for the website contract 

in FY 2013 is $185,160. The request also includes $233,650 for optional time and materials task 

orders, and production of videos and other media; funds for staff; $7,000 for staff travel; $17,000 

for printing of the EAC Annual Report; and $31,000 for supplies and subscriptions. 

FUND AND OVERSEE

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

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

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

improve the administration of elections for Federal office. 

 

 

FY 2011 

Enacted 

FY 2012 

Enacted 

FY 2013 

President’s 

Budget 

Grants 

Management Direct Costs $799,405 $415,776 $236,475 

OIG Direct Costs 1,873,979 1,250,000 1,250,000 

 Indirect Costs 2,113,202 1,308,898 1,094,822 

 Total $4,786,586 $2,974,674 $2,581,297

 

Goal 2 consists of three strategic objectives: 

1) accurately and timely disburse Federal financial assistance administered by EAC; 

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

3) provide technical assistance and guidance on the management of Federal financial 

assistance administered by EAC to reduce the risk of inappropriate use of funds and 

accounting errors. 

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

General (OIG). 

The Grants Management Division 

EAC’s Grants Management unit is responsible for distributing grants funds, monitoring, and 

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

requirements payments and discretionary grants (College Poll Worker, Mock Elections, 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

14

Disability Technology, and Pre-Election Logic & Accuracy Testing and Post-Election Audit) to 

improve administration of elections for Federal office. The office recommends audit resolution 

on the use of HAVA funds, and via a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services, negotiates indirect cost rates with grantees. An effective system 

for tracking audits and completion of corrective actions has been established by the office. 

EAC’s Grants Management division provides technical assistance to the States and grantees by 

offering workshops and training sessions using webinars tools. For example, in FY 2011, a 

webinar was held for State grantees on HAVA-related audit issues and follow up. EAC will 

continue to work with the States and grantees to clarify the responsibilities they have in 

managing the funds they receive. 

For FY 2013, the request for the unit consists of funds staff; an estimated $800 for grant site visit 

travel; $9,504 for webinar services, $2,334 will be needed to print references to State Plans and 

grants notices in the Federal Register after passage of the FY 2012 legislative proposal 

eliminating the need to print full State plans and amendments, $25,000 for a Memorandum of 

Understanding with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for indirect cost rate 

negotiation, $25,000 for assistance with audit resolution, $2,000 for peer reviewers for Logic & 

Accuracy grants if EAC cannot make the awards in FY 2012 due to lack of a quorum, and $50 

for supplies. 

Office goals are to achieve the performance targets for timeliness in EAC’s Strategic Plan (see 

chart in the attached Annual Performance Report), such as resolving 100 percent of audit 

findings within established timeframes, awarding grants in established timeframes, and 

submitting State Plans to the Federal Register within 30 days of receipt. 

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) 

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) was established by HAVA and the Inspector General Act 

(IG Act) of 1978, as amended, to provide independent and objective reporting to EAC and 

Congress through its audit and investigative activities. Charged with the identification and 

prevention of waste, fraud, and abuse of Federal resources, OIG strives to promote economy, 

efficiency and effectiveness in EAC programs and operations. To accomplish this goal, OIG 

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

operations, and periodic reviews, investigations and audits of EAC program operations and 

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

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

Section 902 of HAVA gives EAC and other agencies making a grant or payment the authority to 

conduct audits of any recipients of funds. EAC is further authorized to conduct regular audits of 

funds distributed under HAVA. OIG conducts those audits on behalf of EAC. 

Over the past several years, OIG has focused on auditing the large grants distributed to States 

under Title II of HAVA. These grants represent the vast majority of grant funds distributed by 

EAC. The objectives of the State audits are to determine whether the State: (1) expended 

HAVA payments in accordance with HAVA and related administrative requirements; and (2) 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

15

complied with HAVA requirements for replacing punch card or lever voting machines, 

establishing an election fund, appropriating five percent matching funds, and maintaining State 

expenditures for elections at a level not less than expended in the State’s base fiscal year. Since 

the inception of the audit program, OIG has completed audits of 36 States. The Federal 

government has made a sizable investment in the American electoral system. Congress has 

appropriated $3.256 billion and EAC has disbursed approximately $3.236 billion in grant funds 

to the States for improvement of election infrastructure and processes, leaving $18.2 million to 

be distributed as of January 31, 2012. To date, OIG has audited $2.1 billion of the $3.256 billion 

in grants. OIG will continue to focus its efforts on the $3.256 billion in grants disbursed to the 

States to date. 

OIG’s program to ensure economy, efficiency and integrity in the use of funds is not limited to 

audits. OIG has also worked with EAC to help educate States on the requirements that are 

associated with Federal funding. When allegations are made concerning the misappropriation of 

HAVA funds, OIG is responsible for investigating those allegations. OIG has instituted a 

number of new activities to improve and increase information available to EAC employees and 

the general public about how and when to make complaints of fraud, waste, abuse and 

mismanagement. OIG retooled its website to provide more information about waste, fraud and 

abuse and how to report it. OIG’s website provides information concerning its operations, issued 

reports, rights and protections for whistleblowers, as well as an on-line form for making 

complaints. 

OIG does not currently employ an investigator. When issues arise that require investigation, 

OIG contracts with other government agencies for investigative services. OIG is also 

responsible for conducting reviews, audits, and investigations of EAC’s internal policies, 

procedures, and actions. Over the past several fiscal years, the OIG has conducted a number of 

internal reviews. The OIG has issued a total of 14 reports regarding EAC’s operations. These 

reports assess the efficiency of EAC’s operation and its compliance with governing statutes and 

regulations, including compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act 

(FISMA) and compliance with the Federal Travel Regulations. Each year, OIG oversees the 

financial statement audit. The final reports of the audits are available every year by November 

15. When OIG identifies potential wrongdoing, it can institute an investigation. OIG will 

continue to rely upon interagency agreements with other Offices of Inspector General to conduct 

investigations of fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2013, OIG will continue its programs of auditing EAC grant recipients, 

conducting external investigations, and auditing and investigating EAC programs and operations. 

Due to budgetary constraints, OIG’s FY 2013 request reduces the total number of audits, reviews 

and investigations that it will conduct in comparison to the FY 2010 and FY 2011 levels. OIG is 

currently staffed by two full-time employees: the Inspector General and the Assistant Inspector 

General for Audits. The attorney position is currently vacant. A decision will be made in FY 

2012 as to whether to fill this position. 

OIG will continue to use contract auditors in FY 2013 to conduct audits due to budgetary 

restrictions. Over the past several years, OIG has relied primarily on contract auditors to conduct 

audits of grants to States. If resources allow, OIG will begin auditing other EAC grant programs, 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

16

including the Mock Election, College Poll Worker, Election Data Collection, Military Heroes 

Initiative, and other grant programs administered by the EAC. 

OIG uses various tools to communicate with EAC, Congress, and the general public concerning 

the status of EAC’s programs and operations as well as IG’s activities in conducting audits, 

evaluations, inspections, and investigations. OIG issues reports following each formal 

engagement, regardless of type. Reports are disbursed to the entity that is subject to the audit or 

evaluation, as well as to EAC and oversight and appropriations committees of Congress. 

OIG produces two semi-annual reports to Congress in each fiscal year. The reports summarize 

the audit, evaluation, inspection and investigation reports issued by OIG during the relevant six 

months. The document also reports on OIG activities by including statistics such as the number 

of findings that are outstanding, the amount of costs that were questioned, as well as how much 

in Federal funding could be put to better use. 

In FY 2013, OIG will continue its outreach efforts to keep EAC, Congress and the public 

informed of OIG’s activities as well as its reviews of EAC programs and operations. As OIG 

evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of EAC programs and operations, it is important for 

OIG to ensure that its operations are effective and efficient, including having the needed policies, 

procedures and practices to underpin its operations. In FY 2013, OIG will evaluate its 

operations, including its policies, helping ensure that OIG has a firm foundation for its 

operations. In addition, OIG will focus on providing a supportive working environment 

including providing professional education and training for its employees. 

OIG’s FY 2013 request is the same as the FY 2012 appropriation in keeping with the agency’s 

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

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

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

the FYs 2010 and 2011 levels. OIG’s request includes $3,600 as a transfer to the Council of 

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

Inspector General Reform Act of 2008. Of the total requested, $5,000 is for training and 

professional development for staff: all OIG staff will be required to meet the continuing 

education requirements applicable under the Generally Accepted Government Auditing 

Standards. 

The request includes payroll and benefits for staff, $10,000 for travel related to grant audits, 

$3,000 for printing, $882,300 for contracted audits, investigations and legal opinions; $4,000 for 

supplies and subscriptions, and $5,000 for equipment. 

STUDY, GUIDE, AND ASSIST

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

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

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

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

anticipated outcome of this goal is: 1) the election community and other key stakeholders are 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

17

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

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

Federal office, and 2) eligible citizens use the mail voter registration application to register to 

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

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

Enacted Enacted President’s Budget 

Direct Costs $1,069,728 $1,029,925 $1,021,688 

Indirect Costs 1,901,362 1,047,119 1,094,821 

Total $2,971,090 $2,077,044 $2,116,509 

Goal 3 consists of four strategic objectives: 

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

administration of elections for Federal office and expeditiously report on critical 

administration subjects and election data; 

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

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

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

methods and data; 

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

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

Congress as required by NVRA. 

The Research, Policy and Programs Division 

The Research, Policy and Programs division administers: 

1) The Election Management Guidelines and Quick Start guides which provide information to 

State and local election officials and voters on various topics, such as technology in elections, 

voter accessibility and election office administration; 

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

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

NVRA and Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA); 

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

election process and election terminology in languages other than English; 

4) Responsibilities of the National Voter Registration Act regarding the national mail voter 

registration form; and 

5) Provisions of HAVA requiring voluntary guidance to the State regarding provisional voting 

and statewide voter registration databases. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

18

In 2013, EAC plans on updating its educational materials designed to improve the administration 

of Federal elections such as certain Quick Start guides, key election management guideline 

materials, poll worker training manuals, and other products. 

After the November 2012 presidential election, EAC will release a survey to the States for data 

that will be used to produce two mandatory reports to Congress due June 30 of odd-numbered 

years based on data collected during the general election: the Impact of the National Voter 

Registration Act (NVRA) on the Administration of Elections for Federal office and the 

Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). The comprehensive 

Election Administration & Voting Survey report, which includes additional election 

administration-related topics, is scheduled for release in Fall 2013. The Statutory Overview, 

which is a review of State election laws, will be released in Spring 2013. 

Based on the findings from the 2010 Census, EAC plans on creating voter educational products 

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

languages. 

In 2013, EAC anticipates completion of its work, started in 2009 when the NVRA regulations 

were transferred from the Federal Election Commission, related to reviewing and updating the 

National Voter Registration form and coordinating regulations. EAC staff plan on presenting 

information and proposing regulation changes to Commissioners, once a quorum is established, 

collected from consultations with election officials, public rulemaking hearings, a public 

comment period, and a review of current regulations. EAC anticipates that final regulations will 

be adopted by a vote of the Commission following the Public rulemaking process and printed in 

the Federal Register before taking effect. Further, EAC will update the Federal Election 

Commission’s existing NVRA implementation manual to reflect any changes in the regulations 

and the additional requirements added by the passage of HAVA. 

The division requests funding in FY 2013 for staff; $5,000 for printing the results of the 2012 

Election Administration & Voting Survey; $632,020 for publication design and layout services 

for election management guidelines, quick starts, voter’s guides, provisional voting, and studies 

on subjects identified by the Commissioners; $7,500 for conferences and staff training; and 

$1,000 for supplies. 

TEST AND CERTIFY

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

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

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

securely and is more accessible to the disabled. States participate in EAC’s testing and 

certification program to ensure that their voting systems meet the voluntary voting system 

guideline standards (VVSG). 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

19

Goal 4 consists of three strategic objectives: 

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

2) provide for the accreditation of independent laboratories qualified to test voting 

systems to Federal standards, and for the revocation of accreditation as appropriate; 

and 

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

system hardware and software by accredited laboratories. 

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

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

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

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

certifying voting equipment, such as voting equipment system information, test plans and 

reports, and reports on anomalies in the field. 

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

Certification Program Manual. The program also: 

• supports local election officials in the areas of acceptance testing and pre-election system 

verification for EAC-certified systems, 

• increases quality control in voting system manufacturing by means of periodic 

manufacturing facility audits of EAC-registered manufacturers, and 

• provides procedures to manufacturers for the testing and certification of voting systems to 

specified Federal standards consistent with the requirements of HAVA Section 

231(a)(1). 

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

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

system test laboratories (VSTLs). As a condition of accreditation, all VSTLs must hold a valid 

accreditation from NIST’s National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP). 

NVLAP accreditation is the primary means by which EAC helps ensure that each VSTL meets 

and continues to meet the technical requirements of EAC’s program. It sets the standards for 

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

quality assurance policies and protocols. EAC monitors VSTLs through a comprehensive 

compliance management program. Further, EAC performs on-site reviews to ensure that VSTLs 

meet all program requirements. 

FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 

Enacted Enacted President’s Budget 

Direct Costs $1,302,781 $936,270 $756,914 

Indirect Costs 1,952,380 1,832,457 1,824,703 

Total, Test & Certify $3,255,161 $2,768,727 $2,581,617 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

20

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

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

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

update and implement voluntary testing guidelines for voting systems. Efforts continue into 

research and development of alternative guidelines for the areas of the next iteration VVSG 

document. These areas include: 

• Software Independence 

• Common Data Format 

• Accessibility 

• Vote-by-Phone systems 

• EPollBook 

• Open Ended Vulnerability Testing 

The FY 2013 request is for staff and part-time technical reviewers; $77,500 for travel; $9,504 for 

webinar services; printing at $30,000; other services at $5,000; and $300 for supplies. 

Transfer to NIST

EAC staff expects that the updates for the next iteration VVSG document will be revised and 

published for public comment in FY 2013. In 2013, EAC plans on transferring $2,750,000 to 

NIST via interagency agreement for activities required under HAVA Sections 221 Technical 

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

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

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

to assist Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act and absentee voters as required 

by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. 

MANAGE

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

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

proficiently carry out EAC’s strategic objectives. 

Staffing Reductions 

It would not be feasible for EAC to eliminate any of its Strategic Plan programs, which are based 

on Help America Vote Act mandates. Consequently, EAC plans on achieving required 

reductions through decreasing staff and reducing the annual transfer to NIST proportionate to 

EAC reductions. EAC began a hiring freeze on October 1, 2010. As of this writing, EAC has 

reduced by nineteen full-time staff (fifteen full-time permanent and four full-time temporary) of 

the 50 on-board at the start of the freeze, resulting in a reduction of personnel compensation and 

benefits of approximately $2.6 million. As staff departs, functions are absorbed, eliminated, or 

are addressed via memoranda of understanding with other agencies or with contracts. Limited 

positions requiring certain expertise may be backfilled. 

 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

21

Reduction to the annual transfer to NIST 

The annual transfer to NIST supports EAC’s Voting System Testing and Certification program. 

Cuts to the transfer have the effect of delaying efforts to develop a final set of testable guidelines

for remote electronic voting systems to assist Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting 

Act voters. Cuts will also delay ongoing work with updates of the Voluntary Voting System 

Guidelines. 

Acquisition Improvements 

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

contracts and Memoranda of Understanding with other Federal agencies. This provides 

substantial cost savings in terms of lower prices, strategic sourcing, and internal operational 

efficiencies. EAC has eliminated the vast majority of contracts awarded noncompetitively, 

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

contracts. 

Performance Improvement 

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

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

about eight months after the new CFO department was established. Clean opinions were also 

obtained in FYs 2010 and 2011. 

The second measure is on implementing 90 percent of OIG audit recommendations within 

agreed upon timeframes. Recommendations made in FY 2010 were 100 percent implemented 

within agreed upon timeframes. Financial Statement Audit recommendations made in FY 2011 

are under resolution now. Audit recommendations made in FY 2009, where the Strategic Plan 

was adopted mid-way through the year, and prior are tracked in EAC’s monthly reports to 

Congress on the status of 82 OIG audit recommendations made as of March 2008. To date, two 

recommendations remain open, on National Voter Registration Act regulations and 

communications and clearinghouse policy, which require a quorum of the Commission to be 

implemented. A recommendation on records management should be resolved in FY 2012. 

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

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

and achieve management excellence through improved internal controls and human resource 

initiatives. Agency directors responsible for implementation of the EAC Strategic Plan goals 

report on their division metrics for the Agency Financial Report each November, the Annual 

Performance Report along with the Congressional Budget Justification around February every 

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

EAC will continue to focus on working with managers on the relationship between budget and 

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

financial management processes and their responsibilities. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

22

Improper Payments 

EAC continues to focus on the elimination of improper payments by updating and testing 

existing policies and procedures that govern the processes required for all payments. In FY 

2011, in compliance with OMB Circular A-123, EAC reviewed its programs to determine if they 

were susceptible to significant improper payments and if it was cost-effective to perform a 

payment recapture audit on the programs. During this review, management determined it would 

not be cost-effective to conduct annual payment recapture audits and that the internal control 

procedures within the agency are sufficient to preclude the incident of recurring improper 

payments. Any recovery gained by a payment recapture audit would be less than the resources 

needed for performance of the audit. The processes in place incorporate sound internal controls 

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

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

by way of reconciliations and reviews performed each reporting cycle. 

Information Technology Infrastructure and Security 

Information Technology Infrastructure 

The Commission's information security program encompasses those measures necessary to 

protect EAC’s information resources. These measures include providing for each project 

appropriate technical, personnel, physical, administrative, environmental and 

telecommunications safeguards; and continuity of operations through contingency and disaster 

recovery plans. The Commission's protective measures cover the following information 

resources: data, applications, software, hardware, physical facilities and telecommunications. 

The Commission's information security program assures that each automated information system 

has a level of security that is commensurate with the risk and magnitude of the harm that could 

result from the loss, misuse, unauthorized disclosure or improper modification of the information 

contained in the system. 

EAC is now responsible for operating its own infrastructure, rather than depending solely on the 

General Services Administration (GSA) for email, internet and Information Technology (IT) 

security services. A contractor and Communications staff member maintain the website, 

www.eac.gov. For security purposes, EAC uses GSA’s network backbone for its infrastructure, 

and GSA manages a firewall, external intrusion detection, T1 lines and routers and switches for 

Federal Information Security Management Act compliance on EAC’s behalf. Beginning at the 

end of FY 2010, EAC has upgraded personal computers, software, and the telephone system 

using Interactive Voice Response and Voice Over IP. Current IT staff maintains personal 

computers and smartphones, provides software requested by EAC staff, and performs 

vulnerability scans in addition to GSA’s scans. EAC is in the process of establishing an intranet 

where policies and procedures can be posted in place of use of a shared drive. 
 U. S. Election Assistance Commission 

 Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Request 

23

Summary of Information Technology Resources Table 

Salaries and Expenses 

(Dollars in thousands) 

IT Resource Category Budget Activity 

FY 2011 

Enacted 

FY 2012 

Enacted 

FY 2013 

Request 

Major IT Investments Not applicable 

Non-Major IT 

Investments 

Telecommunications Telephone, smartphones, wireless

service for PCs $94.0 $80.3 $80.3

Financial management 

system and reports 

Memorandum of Understanding 

with GSA/Pegasys and FMIS; 

Bureau of Public Debt (beginning 

July 2012) 17.3 17.6 17.6

Payroll processing and 

reports 

Memorandum of Understanding 

with GSA/Comprehensive HR 

Integrated System (CHRIS) 15.0 15.3 15.3

Subtotal, Non-Major 

IT Investments 126.3 113.2 113.2

IT Security Memorandum of Understanding 

with GSA 36.3 37.0 37.0

Infrastructure 

Investments 

EAC website & Clearinghouse 

maintenance 275.0 177.0 418.8

 Staff salaries and benefits 404.6 279.4 272.8

 Memorandum of Understanding 

with GSA (one-time cost) 37.0 0 0

 Personal computers 9.5 10.0 10.0

Subtotal, 

Infrastructure 

Investments 762.4 503.4 738.6

Total, IT Investments $888.7 $616.6 $851.8

Note: IT costs presented above are for information purposes and are a non-add to the budget. 

Cyber Security 

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

of Understanding for IT services at approximately $37,000 for FY 2013. The agreement funds 

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

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

Management dated April 21, 2010.