Possible UOCAVA Pilot 

Projects for the 2012 and 

2014 Federal Elections

Approved by the TGDC for transmittal to the

EAC on

January 14, 2011
More information can be found at http://www.vote.nist.gov

This document has been prepared by the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) to present the work of the UOCAVA Working Group of the 

Technical Guidelines Development Committee. It does not represent a 

consensus view or recommendation from NIST, nor does it represent any 

policy positions of NIST.

Certain commercial entities, equipment, or material may be identified in the 

document in order to describe a concept adequately. Such identification is 

not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that these 

entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the 

purpose.
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

1

1 Introduction

The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act requires that 

states and territories allow military personnel and family members, as well 

as US citizens living abroad, to register and vote in Federal elections. 

Historically this has been accomplished with mail-in absentee voting. Due in 

part to long transit times between overseas voters and election offices, 

UOCAVA voters face many challenges obtaining and returning ballots in time 

to be counted.

In 2002, Congress directed the Department of Defense to conduct a 

demonstration project to allow uniformed service members to cast ballots 

through an electronic voting system. Congress delayed implementation of 

this project in 2004 until the Election Assistance Commission establishes 

guidelines for electronic absentee voting systems. Furthermore, in 2009 

Congress passed the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE 

Act), which allows the Federal Voting Assistance Program to conduct pilot 

programs that use new and emerging technology to improve the UOCAVA 

voting process. It further instructs the EAC and NIST to support these 

efforts by providing standards or best practices, and directed the EAC to 

create a detailed timeline for the development of guidelines for electronic 

absentee voting systems.

In response to the MOVE Act, the EAC issued a report to Congress in April of 

2010 detailing a roadmap for the development of these guidelines. This 

roadmap was created in collaboration with FVAP and NIST. It consisted of a 

deliberative and iterative approach for the guidelines’ creation and 

implementation, with multiple phases of remote electronic absentee voting 

pilots to determine approaches that best meet the needs of UOCAVA voters 

and provide adequate reliability, usability, accessibility and security.

According to the EAC’s roadmap, the first phase of the remote electronic 

absentee voting system pilots is to be implemented in the 2012 Federal 

election. The roadmap calls upon the Technical Guidelines Development 

Committee, with technical support from NIST, to provide supporting 

materials for the pilot project, which could involve the development of 

testable requirements, guidelines or best practices. 

The first step in the implementation of the initial phase of the pilot projects 

is to identify one or more possible pilots to support for the 2012 or 2014 

elections. While the roadmap gives the EAC the authority to select the pilot 

project, all stakeholders will be involved in the identification, selection and 

implementation of the project. 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

2

This whitepaper of the TGDC’s UOCAVA Working Group explores some of the 

possible pilot projects that could be conducted in the 2012 and 2014 Federal 

elections. 

2 Pilot Project Goals

The EAC has charged the TGDC with developing guidelines for remote 

electronic absentee voting, while the responsibility of improving the current 

process resides in the EAC, FVAP, and state and local jurisdictions. While all 

stakeholders in the process, including the FVAP, EAC, NIST and the TGDC, 

hope for an end product that will dramatically improve the UOCAVA voting 

process for military personnel and overseas citizens, the near-term goals of 

interim pilot projects in the roadmap may have a different focus. In the 

near term, the goal of improving the UOCAVA voting process may not 

necessarily coincide with the Congressional mandate to develop guidelines 

for remote electronic absentee voting. 

As such, we must carefully consider the goals of pilot projects and how they 

fit into the context of the overall UOCAVA voting efforts of the EAC, FVAP 

and states. This section identifies a possible set of goals for pilot efforts. 

Pilot projects may not necessarily meet every goal; there is an 

understanding that many pilots may need to be conducted before final 

guidelines can be developed, and different pilots may focus on different 

goals.

When evaluating possible pilot projects in this whitepaper we will consider 

the following basic goals:

 It should be possible to deploy a pilot system in the 2012 or 2014 

Federal election.

 The pilot project should be a learning opportunity to test key 

technologies or processes that are necessary to conduct secure, 

usable, and accessible remote electronic absentee voting, or improve 

election management.

 The performance of pilot project systems regarding usability, 

accessibility for disabled voters, security, and ease of election 

management should be monitored and documented 

 The resulting pilot system should make improvements to the UOCAVA 

voting process for UOCAVA voters and/or local election officials 

charged with collecting and tabulating ballots from UOCAVA voters. 

The pilot system should help improve access, usability, accessibility for 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

3

disabled voters, security, and ease of election management.

 The pilot system should use existing technologies with a proven track 

record in voting or e-commerce applications. 

 The pilot system should be an incremental step beyond previous 

efforts. Past pilot efforts by FVAP, and/or state and local jurisdictions 

should not be duplicated unless it is to address problems identified in 

previous efforts or obtain additional information.

3 Project Descriptions

The TGDC’s UOCAVA Working Group has identified the following five projects 

as possible pilot projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal elections.

3.1 Electronic Ballot Delivery System Pilot

3.1.1 Description of Project

This pilot project would involve the development of electronic ballot delivery 

systems. While several different architectures could be considered, the most 

likely architectures involve delivery of ballots over web sites. However, 

there are many different ways to implement web-based delivery of electronic 

ballots. One issue to consider is the data format of blank ballots. Ballots 

could be transmitted as static documents, such as PDFs, or race and 

candidate information could be sent electronically, perhaps using a votingspecific data format, and rendered on-screen. Another issue to consider is 

how voters interact with the blank ballots. Voters could be expected to print 

out and mark ballots by hand, or the system may provide an on-screen 

wizard for marking the ballot. A third issue to consider is the identification 

of voters and ballot styles, and voter authentication. These choices have 

different implications for the usability, accessibility and security of the 

system.

3.1.2 Purpose of Pilot Project

The purpose of this pilot is to build on the successes of blank ballot delivery 

systems deployed by FVAP and states and improve them in several key 

areas. 

While the primary reason for running additional electronic ballot delivery 

pilots would be to immediately improve the UOCAVA voting process, a pilot 

could investigate several key aspects in working toward final guidelines for 

UOCAVA voting systems
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

4

 Usability: If the voting system includes an on-screen wizard for 

marking ballots, this pilot would help us identify issues with applying 

existing usability requirements for polling place voting machines to 

UOCAVA systems. Issues could be identified through expert review of 

pilot voting systems, or by conducting usability studies remotely with 

volunteer participants.

 Accessibility: A voting system with on-screen ballot marking wizard 

could either include accessibility features for disabled voters as part of 

the wizard, or the wizard could be designed to interoperate with 

commonly-used personal assistive technologies. Pilot systems could 

explore how to design the software with tags and other necessary 

structures for assistive technology to work on systems with this 

technology preinstalled and to have built-in access features delivered 

by the software interface itself. As with usability, systems could be 

studied with expert reviews or by conducting accessibility studies 

remotely with volunteer participants.

 Security: This pilot would include operating a high-availability server 

for distributing blank ballots in a potentially hostile threat 

environment. If the pilot system includes a voter authentication 

component, as opposed to authenticating voters with hand-written 

signatures on marked ballots, the pilot would provide an opportunity to 

learn challenges and solutions for remotely authenticating voters. 

 Election Management: Past electronic ballot delivery efforts have 

been hampered by problems exporting ballot style information from 

jurisdictions’ existing election management systems. This pilot could 

explore methods for exporting this data and importing it into UOCAVA 

blank ballot delivery systems.

3.1.3 Past Efforts and Related Work

While email and fax delivery of blank ballots has been conducted in several 

states, the move to web-based delivery of blank ballots is more recent. A 

large number of states moved to web-based delivery of blank ballots for the 

2010 election, many of which provided an online ballot marker to mark and 

print ballots.

In 2010, FVAP operated a portal that links voters to information on how to 

fill out an absentee ballot. Through this portal, FVAP allowed voters to fill 

out a Federal Write-In Ballot (FWAB) using an on-screen wizard that 

presents voters with the candidate names for Federal races. A marked PDF 

document was constructed on the FVAP server, and voters were told to 

download, print and mail the marked FWAB. In some cases, the FVAP portal 

also linked voters to web sites running states’ own MOVE Act systems for 

electronic ballot delivery.
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

5

The Overseas Vote Foundation, a nonprofit organization, operates a similar 

website that also links voters to state-specific information, and provides a 

wizard for marking FWABs with on-screen candidate lists.

3.1.4 Role of NIST/TGDC

At this time there are no detailed standards or guidelines for electronic ballot 

delivery systems. The TGDC could develop a standard for these systems if 

there is agreement that states and manufacturers need more guidance in 

implementing, configuring and/or using these systems.

Alternatively, the role of the TGDC may be more narrowly focused, with a 

goal to make it easier for vendors, jurisdictions, and organizations to 

implement and deploy electronic ballot delivery systems. Pilot projects 

directed at this goal could include development of an electronic blank ballot 

specification, or a common data format for integrating UOCAVA voting 

systems with existing Election Management systems. Those pilot projects 

are described in later sections of this document.

3.1.5 Necessary Partners

The success of this pilot relies on interest from manufacturers to design, 

implement and market new or updated electronic ballot delivery systems 

based on the TGDC’s recommended standard. It also depends on the 

interest of states, local jurisdictions, Federal agencies and/or private 

organizations to buy and deploy these systems. As many state and local 

governments have already invested in electronic ballot delivery systems for 

MOVE Act compliance, it is not clear how many jurisdictions would be willing 

or able to obtain new systems.

3.2 Attended Kiosk-based Remote Voting System Pilot

3.2.1 Description of Project

A kiosk-based remote voting system is a type of Internet voting system 

where voters cast votes on specially configured machines, rather than 

personally-owned devices. One model for a kiosk-based voting system 

involves staffed locations for kiosks, using pre-built kiosk voting machines 

designed for use with elections. Election workers would set up these 

machines at kiosk locations, check-in voters, and monitor kiosks during the 

voting period.

A small-scale kiosk-based remote voting system was deployed in the 2008 

election for overseas and military voters. However, this system only allowed 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

6

voters from a single county to vote, with a limited number of ballot styles. 

An important element of this proposed pilot is using a single kiosk platform 

to support voting from multiple jurisdictions, which has not been attempted 

in the United States.

3.2.2 Purpose of Pilot Project

The architecture of kiosk-based remote voting systems is very similar to that 

of today’s PC-based Internet voting systems. The front-end of the system, 

the terminals used by voters to cast ballots, differs greatly between a kioskbased voting system and an Internet voting system where votes are cast on 

personal computers. However, the back-end of the system, which stores 

voter lists, ballot definitions, and cast ballots, is largely the same. A kioskbased remote voting system would be a safer environment to investigate 

many of the challenges facing deployment of an Internet voting system.

 Usability: Pilot systems would be expected to meet voting system 

usability requirements. The usability of voting systems could be

evaluated by a usability expert for conformance to the requirements 

and for overall usability.

 Accessibility: Kiosk voting systems would be expected to meet 

accessibility requirements for disabled voters. These systems could 

investigate the feasibility of designing remote voting systems with 

accessibility features built-in to the voting application that would not 

require additional personal assistive technologies.

 Security: This pilot would include operating a high-availability server 

for allowing voters to cast ballots. Pilots could investigate challenges 

facing the auditability of the records produced by these systems, or 

cryptographic key management in a large system spread across 

geographically-diverse regions. While an attended kiosk could have 

voter authentication performed by election workers at the kiosk 

location, pilot systems that include an electronic voter authentication 

component would provide an opportunity to learn challenges and 

solutions for remotely authenticating voters. 

 Election Management: Past kiosk-based remote voting pilot projects 

have been limited to single jurisdictions. A larger-scale kiosk voting 

pilot project could investigate the ability of kiosk systems to scale to 

support many jurisdictions, including logistical challenges of managing 

many ballots styles from several jurisdictions, and routing cast ballots 

to the appropriate jurisdiction for tabulation and reporting.
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

7

3.2.3 Past Efforts and Related Work

Okaloosa County, Florida, in partnership with Operation BRAVO and Scytl, 

deployed a kiosk-based remote electronic voting system for the 2008 

Federal election. Okaloosa County set up three remote voting kiosks in 

England, Germany and Japan, each of which was staffed by two election 

workers. The voting system underwent testing by the State of Florida, and 

received a provisional certification.

In 2009 the EAC established a working group to draft testable requirements 

for kiosk-based remote electronic voting systems for use in a pilot 

certification testing program. The final version of these requirements was 

posted in August of 2010. The intent of the pilot certification program was 

to encourage deployment of kiosk-based voting systems servicing multiple 

jurisdictions in an effort to learn more about the technical, administrative 

and procedural challenges involved with deploying Internet voting systems, 

as well as to create a starting point for future work on the development of 

guidelines for remote electronic voting systems. However, no state or local 

jurisdictions chose to deploy kiosk-based remote voting systems in the 2010 

election.

3.2.4 Role of NIST/TGDC

Little additional work would be needed by the TGDC and NIST to support a 

pilot using an attended kiosk architecture. The EAC’s existing pilot 

certification requirements for kiosks provide a good starting point for an 

attended kiosk-based remote voting system pilot. 

3.2.5 Necessary Partners

A kiosk-based voting system pilot would require the cooperation and support 

of voting system manufacturers and state/local election jurisdictions. State 

and local jurisdictions, as well as the Department of Defense, have had 

reservations about deploying kiosk-based systems due to cost and logistical 

concerns, as well as questions about their effectiveness at reducing the 

challenges faced by overseas voters. 

3.3 Unattended Kiosk Remote Voting System Pilot

3.3.1 Description of Project

Attended kiosk-based remote voting systems have been criticized as being 

logistically difficult and expensive to deploy. Alternative architectures for 

kiosk voting systems could mitigate some of these concerns. A possible 

second type of kiosk-based voting system uses an unattended kiosk built 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

8

using off-the-shelf hardware and software components. Election workers 

would be required to set up the kiosk voting system voting system at remote 

locations, but would not monitor the kiosks continuously throughout the 

voting period.

There are two different models for deploying an unattended kiosk that could 

be explored:

1. The unattended kiosk system could be entirely software-based. Prior 

to the election, software could be distributed to remote locations via 

CDs or using a secured network connection. Election workers could 

install that software on computers already available at the remote 

location, such as a shared computer at a military base.

2. Unattended kiosks could be built from off-the-shelf, low-cost, highly 

mobile computer platforms, such as a netbook or Internet tablet. 

While there may be added expense to distributing this hardware to 

remote locations, they could be delivered preconfigured.

In either case, an unattended kiosk architecture requires a secure and 

reliable method for remotely authenticating voters. It also requires that the 

kiosks be sufficiently secured to prevent users from tampering with the kiosk 

machines. 

3.3.2 Purpose of Pilot Project

Pilots based on an unattended kiosk voting system architecture could test 

many of the same technologies and election administration processes as a 

system with an attended kiosk. However, the unattended nature of these 

kiosks could allow systems to be fielded at reduced cost and fewer logistical 

challenges. In addition, this pilot could explore usability, accessibility, and 

security issues that are likely to come up in systems which allow voters to 

cast ballots from personally-owned devices at home, or shared devices (e.g., 

public library computers). 

 Usability: Pilot systems would be expected to meet voting system 

usability requirements. The usability of voting systems could be 

evaluated by a usability expert for conformance to the requirements 

and for overall usability.

 Accessibility: Kiosk voting systems would be expected to meet 

accessibility requirements for disabled voters. Prior to the 

implementation of pilot project systems, information regarding known 

accessibility issues with off-the-shelf devices such as netbooks and 

Internet tablets should be collected, and plans developed to mitigate 

or solve identified problems. Pilot systems could investigate how the 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

9

accessibility features included in off-the-shelf components, such as 

netbooks or Internet tablets, could be leveraged to create accessible 

remote voting systems. 

 Security: This pilot would include operating a high-availability server 

for allowing voters to cast ballots, as well as some type of electronic 

authentication mechanism to authenticate voters. Compared to an 

attended kiosk, unattended kiosks would require deployed systems to 

include greater physical security protections to protect kiosks from 

tampering. Experienced gained from designing such systems may be 

useful if unattended kiosks are used for future UOCAVA voting systems 

or early voting stations. However, results may not be relevant for 

developing UOCAVA voting systems in which voters obtain or cast 

ballots using personally owned devices.

 Election Management: An unattended kiosk architecture may be 

able to scale better than an attended kiosk architecture, potentially 

resulting in more kiosk locations, and a larger number of participating 

jurisdictions. A large-scale unattended kiosk voting pilot project could

investigate the ability of kiosk systems to scale to support many 

jurisdictions, including logistical challenges of managing many ballots 

styles from several jurisdictions, and routing cast ballots to the 

appropriate jurisdiction for tabulation and reporting.

3.3.3 Past Efforts and Related Work

Unattended kiosks were identified in the California Internet Voting Task 

Force as a possible step beyond supervised voting from attended kiosks. 

However, there are no known cases of unattended kiosk-based voting 

systems being deployed or developed. 

3.3.4 Role of NIST/TGDC

While the EAC’s existing requirements for attended kiosks could serve as a 

useful starting point for guidelines for unattended kiosks, the differences 

between the attended kiosk architectures described in the previous section 

and the unattended kiosk architecture described in this section will likely 

require development of additional guidelines or best practices. Notably, the 

EAC’s requirements for attended kiosks does not include requirements for 

remote voter authentication, which is an important element to this pilot 

project.

3.3.5 Necessary Partners

An unattended kiosk-based voting system pilot would require the 

cooperation and support of voting system manufacturers and state/local 

election jurisdictions. Overseas military bases are good candidates for kiosk 

locations, requiring cooperation with the Department of Defense.
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

10

3.4 Standardized Ballot Delivery Format

3.4.1 Description of Project

While the previous pilot projects described in this whitepaper involve 

development of voting systems that could be directly used for one or more 

aspects of UOCAVA voting, the next two pilot projects involve the 

development of specifications that would make it easier for UOCAVA voting 

system vendors to create products capable of interoperating with other 

election equipment. 

The first option is to develop a specification for querying a ballot style from a 

host system, and returning the proper ballot style in an electronic format 

which can be parsed to support different user interfaces for displaying and 

marking the ballot.

Such a specification may make it easier for jurisdictions and vendors to 

design, implement and deploy a variety of UOCAVA voting systems, 

including electronic ballot delivery systems and kiosk-based voting systems. 

For example, jurisdictions could deploy servers adhering to this specification 

that host ballot styles for their voters. Kiosk systems then would not 

necessarily need to hold ballot styles for all jurisdictions locally. Instead, 

using a single, common protocol, kiosk systems could query jurisdictions’ 

servers for the proper ballot style, and present it to the voter.

3.4.2 Purpose of Pilot Project

Nearly any type of proposed voting system for UOCAVA voters would benefit 

from the use of a standard electronic format for blank ballots. The 

development of a specification for a standard format for ballot definitions 

would be an important first step in supporting near-term pilot projects 

involving electronic ballot distribution or kiosks, as well as longer-term 

efforts on remote voting. This pilot project would provide fewer 

opportunities to learn about usability, accessibility, and security issues 

related to UOCAVA voting, but the effort could investigate data fields which 

could support those goals. 

3.4.3 Past Efforts and Related Work

The Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards 

(OASIS) has established a technical committee on Election and Voter 

Services that has produced the Election Markup Language (EML) based on 

the Extensible Markup Language (XML) with the goal of allowing hardware, 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

11

software, and service providers of election system and service providers to 

exchange information. More recently, the Institute of Electrical and 

Electronics Engineers (IEEE) has begun investigating data formats to allow 

voting systems to exchange information electronically. 

3.4.4 Role of NIST/TGDC

There is no single, widely accepted common data format used to describe 

ballot styles in the United States. While there are several candidates for a 

common data format, there’s general agreement that any existing format 

would need to be tailored to meet the needs of election officials in the United 

States.

Furthermore, the scope and purpose of this pilot project is different than 

past work on a common data format for voting systems. First, this project is 

focused on election data for overseas and military voting. Second, the scope 

of this work is potentially larger than just a common data format for ballots. 

In addition to a common format for exchanging voter and candidate 

information, the TGDC may need to identify a common communications 

interface for allowing different systems to interact with each other. 

3.4.5 Necessary Partners

Implementation of this pilot project would require coordination with software 

vendors that would provide UOCAVA voting solutions with state and local 

election officials. 

3.5 Common Data Format for EMS Integration

3.5.1 Description of Project

The specification would identify a common data format for integrating 

UOCAVA voting systems with jurisdictions’ existing Election Management 

Systems (EMS). The first phase of this project could include development of 

a specification for a common data format that would allow Election 

Management Systems to export ballot styles so that they can be imported 

into a UOCAVA voting system used for electronic blank ballot delivery, kiosk 

voting, or other forms of remote voting. The second phase of this project 

could include development of a common data format for reporting, so that 

cast ballots from the UOCAVA voting system can be imported into Election 

Management Systems for tabulation and reporting with jurisdictions’ other 

voting methods.
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

12

3.5.2 Purpose of Pilot Project

The development of a common data format linking UOCAVA voting systems 

with jurisdictions’ Election Management Systems would facilitate the 

development of UOCAVA voting systems that are easier to manage, 

particularly in systems which collect and tally ballots from UOCAVA voters. 

For instance, cast ballots or tabulation reports from a kiosk voting system 

could be imported into a jurisdiction’s election management system for 

reporting purposes. Like the development of a standard electronic ballot 

definition format, this pilot project would provide few opportunities to learn 

about usability, accessibility, and security issues related to UOCAVA voting, 

but the effort could investigate data fields which could support those goals. 

3.5.3 Past Efforts and Related Work

Past efforts include work on a common data format for exchanging election 

information by OASIS and the IEEE, as described in the Past Efforts and 

Related Work section of Standardized Ballot Delivery Format project.

3.5.4 Role of NIST/TGDC

There is no single, widely accepted common data format used to describe 

ballot styles in the United States. While there are several candidates for a 

common data format, there’s general agreement that any existing format 

would need to be tailored to meet the needs of election officials in the United 

States.

3.5.5 Necessary Partners

Implementation of this pilot project would require the support of 

manufacturers of polling place voting systems that are currently used by the 

states, and of software vendors that will provide UOCAVA voting solutions. 

We would also need help from state and local election officials to identify and 

describe the necessary data fields in the common data format, as well as 

desirable functions for inputting and outputting data. 
Possible UOCAVA Pilot Projects for the 2012 and 2014 Federal Elections

13

4 Summary Table

Evaluation 

Criteria

Pilot Project

E-Ballot 

Delivery

Attended 

Kiosk

Unattended 

Kiosk

Ballot 

Delivery 

Specification

EMS 

Integration

Deployable 

for 

2012/2014

election

High 

probability of 

being ready 

to deploy a 

system in 

2012.

Moderate 

probability of 

being ready 

to deploy a 

system in 

2012.

Moderate-tolow 

probability of 

being ready 

to deploy a 

system in 

2012.

Moderate-tolow 

probability of 

being ready 

to deploy a 

system in 

2012.

Low 

probability of 

being ready 

to deploy a 

system in 

2012.

Improvement 

to UOCAVA 

voting process

Significant 

benefit to 

UOCAVA 

voters over 

mail-based 

absentee 

voting.

Little benefit 

to most 

UOCAVA 

voters due to 

the difficulty 

of setting up 

a large 

number of 

kiosk 

locations 

overseas.

Moderate 

benefit to 

UOCAVA 

voters, as 

kiosks 

locations 

would still be 

limited.

Significant 

benefit to 

UOCAVA 

voters if 

software 

vendors are 

able to build 

innovative 

election 

systems.

Significant 

benefit to 

UOCAVA 

voters if 

software 

vendors are 

able to build 

innovative 

election 

systems.

Use of 

existing, 

widely 

deployed 

technology.

Possible to 

implement 

using only 

widely 

deployed 

technologies.

Kiosks would 

have to be 

deployed to a 

large number 

of locations.

Kiosks could 

use already 

deployed 

computers, 

or COTS 

machines.

Possible to 

implement 

using only 

widely 

deployed 

technologies.

Possible to 

implement 

using only 

widely 

deployed 

technologies.

Learning 

opportunity

Moderate 

learning 

opportunity 

for future 

pilots.

Significant 

learning 

opportunity 

for future 

pilots.

Significant 

learning 

opportunity 

for future 

pilots.

Moderate 

learning 

opportunity 

for future 

pilots.

Moderate 

learning 

opportunity 

for future 

pilots.

Incremental 

step beyond 

previous 

work

Very similar 

to systems 

already used 

in past 

elections.

Small step 

beyond past 

work on 

singlejurisdiction 

kiosks.

Small step 

beyond past 

work on 

singlejurisdiction 

kiosks.

Small, but 

important 

step, beyond 

previous 

work.

Significant 

step beyond 

previous 

work.