Federal Voting Assistance Program Technology Programs and

2012 Cycle Initiativesy

Technical G idelines De elopment CommitteeTechnical Guidelines Development CommitteeEAC-NIST

January 13, 2011

FVAP 2010 Key Initiatives From an Agency to a Portal

• Serve as the liaison between the voter and the State• Make the process easy quick intuitive and seamlessMake the process easy, quick, intuitive and seamless• Reduce the reliance on Voting Assistance Officers• Avoid running elections

Expanded Assistance for Election Officials• Incubate the development of new online tools for registration, absentee ballot

application, ballot delivery, marking, and trackingT l th t t ill d St t ill d t• Tools that voters will use and States will adopt

• Greater control by States and LEOs - Grants• Not directly supporting electronic transmission of VOTED ballots• Assist States in complianceAssist States in compliance

Transparency and Data-Driven Operations• Improve Post-Election Surveys to correct incorrect policies based on poor dataImprove Post Election Surveys to correct incorrect policies based on poor data• Post all data and methodology online• Combine data collection with EAC

2

Agency to Portal

3

State Specific Guidance

4

Steer Voter to State Systems

5

Online Registration Tool

6

Pre-Filled Output

7

Online FWAB Wizard

8

2010 FPCA and FWAB Wizard UtilizationUtilization

FPCA Wizard downloads:• National: 91,56591 452100,000

FPCA Wizard UtilizationFPCA Download Running Balance

National: 91,565

49,63054,435

61,708

71,70778,405

86,73291,452

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

,

wnl

aode

d

2 955 6,298

17,87524,743

30,86838,710

10 000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

FPC

As

Dow

25,000 d

FWAB Wizard UtilizationFWAB Download Running Balance

2,955

0

10,000

Week Ending On...10,740

13,490

16,263

20,418

15,000

20,000

ownl

oade

d

FWAB Wizard downloads:• National: 20,536 32 97 216 368 695 906

1,098 2,226

7,010

-

5,000

10,000

FWA

Bs D

o

9

Week Ending On...

2010 FWAB Wizard Utilization

Uniformed Services FWABs Downloaded

Total Overseas Citizen FWAB Downloads

PAOHAKVASC

572 554 537 516

427

TXMANJ

OHCO

267 235 232 226

211

FLCATXMI

NCPA

2 209 1,337

897 744

711 572

CAFL

NCVANYTX

1,015 440

332 322

289 267

Overseas Indefinitely

4%

- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

FL 2,209

- 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200

CA 1,015

4%Overseas

Temporarily25%

10

Uniformed Services Member

71%

FVAP Website Utilization

• Total Accesses: Up 86%• Military Accesses: Up 95%

FVAP.gov Website Use2010 vs 2006 Military Accesses: Up 95%

3 000 000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 5,000,000

4,760,205

2,556,788

2010

2006

Online Form Usage at FVAP.gov-500,000

1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000

1,479,091

759,988

120 000 140,000 160,000

156,481

112,471

2010 vs 2006

2010

2006

YTD total accesses

YTD Total Military Accesses

-20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000

100,000 120,000

31,338 10,206

• FPCAs: Up 40%• FWABs: Up 207%

YTD FPCAs downloaded

YTD FWABs downloaded

11

Steer Voter to State Systems

12

Integration of State Systems

Future:Future:

Planning a federal grant structuredstructured program for states andand localities

13

Online Ballot Wizards

WAMT

WAWAMTMT

• DE sent out ½ of all ballots

ID

NV UTNE

NYIDID

NVNV UTUTNENE

NY

MNMN

MIMI

ILILMDMD

RIRI

of all ballots using online wizard

WV l h 5NV UT

NM

KS MOCO

TN

OHOH

GA

VAWVDE

AL

UTUT

NMNM

KSKS MOMOCOCO

TNTN

ININ

VAVAWVWVDEDE

DCDC

AZAZ

ILIL

KYKY

• WV also has 5 Counties with full internet voting

Failed to

submit state reqs

Failed to

submit state reqs

GAALMIMSMS

TXTX

ALAL GAGAg

• WA, CO also had additional, non FVAP

WVWV

FVAP Sponsored Online Ballot Delivery and Marking System

non-FVAP, systems

14

State’s own Online Ballot Delivery System

KYKY

EVSW Metrics

$70,000 $80,000 $90,000

Cos

t

Correlation of Initial Contract Award Cost to Total # of Participating Jurisdictions in State

$70 000 $80,000 $90,000

Correlation of Total # of Ballot Styles to Initial Contract Award Cost

y = 27.248x + 62911R² = 0.0073

$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000

Tota

l Con

tract

C

y = 0.404x + 62627R² = 0.0438

$20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000

$-$ 0,000

‐ 20  40  60  80  100 $-

$10,000

‐ 5,000  10,000  15,000  20,000 

$60 000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000

Valu

e

Correlation of Total Estimated UOCAVA Voters in State to Initial Award Cost

$$70,000 $80,000 $90,000

Corrlation of Initial Contrct Award Cost per UOCAVA Voterto Initial Contract Award Cost

y = 0.0094x + 63324R² = 0.0069

$20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000

Con

tract

aw

ard

V

y = 1075.9x + 62364R² = 0.014

$10 000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000

15

$-$10,000

‐ 100,000  200,000  300,000 

C

$-$10,000

$0.00  $1.00  $2.00  $3.00  $4.00  $5.00 

EVSW Lessons

$1,200.00

Correlation of Total # Ballot Stylesto Initial Award Cost Per Ballot Style

• No correlation between contract cost and:

$1,033.02

$800 00

$1,000.00

• # of ballot styles• # of election

jurisdictions• # of voters

y = 59589x-0.991

R² = 0.9915$600.00

$800.00

• Average baseline cost about $65,000

$442.72

$184.97 y = -0.0241x + 277

R² = 0.1575$200.00

$400.00 • Marginal cost of additional ballot style is almost zero.

$7.20 $4.08 $39.43

$-

• Ballot data acquisition was difficult

16

$(200.00) • Federal Contracting Process was cumbersome

2012 Technology Grant Plan• 2010 cycle used federal contracting to purchase systems used in States

− Attempted to incorporate State requirements and input as much as possible− But ultimately, it’s a federal contract and a federal system

• Instead, 2012 cycle plan is grants to States and localities to incubate technological efforts to serve UOCAVA voters

• Focus Programs: − Online Registration− Online Absentee Ballot Request− Online and Expedited Blank Ballot DeliveryOnline and Expedited Blank Ballot Delivery− Online Voted Ballot Tracking

• Key Grant Considerations:− # of Voters Assisted# of Voters Assisted− Projected Improvement in UOCAVA Voting Success− ROI and length of system availability

• More details of the grant program at pre-NASED meeting on 2/9/11• More details of the grant program at pre-NASED meeting on 2/9/11

Wounded Warriors

Research Testing & EvaluationComprehensive assessment of combat-related disabilities and associated voting challenges in Wounded Warriors• EAC grant with ITIC/OBF• FVAP contract with CALIBRE

Independent VSTL testing of the EAC Requirements• Full test on one manned kiosk system• Security section testing for all five Electronic

Voting Support Wizards (EVSW) systems• VSTL result comparisonFVAP contract with CALIBRE

• Surveys of WIIVSTL result comparison

Process & Procedures Guide for VAO Wounded Warrior assistance

FVAP direct assistance in care facilities: revisions and additions to FVAP.gov tools and forms

Redesign of voting forms (FPCA/FWAB) for greater usability and accessibility

Focus groups on form design

N ti l L l C b Th t G A l i M k l tiNational Level Cyber-Threat Gap Analysis• Voting systems vulnerabilities • Cyber security measures • Strategies for threat awareness, mitigation and

continual monitoring strategies

Mock election• Assess usability, accessibility, and privacy of

electronic voting systems for Wounded Warriors• National level penetration testing

g g

Demonstration & Pilot Projects

DoD required by law to conduct electronic absentee voting demonstration project 42 USC 1073ff note; 2002 and 2005 NDAAs Mandates

Cast Ballots through electronic voting system Only Uniformed services voters specified States must agree to participate Report afterwards

DoD allowed to wait for EAC certified guidelines EAC establishes guidelines

EAC also certifies it will assist in project Different requirement than MOVE Act

DoD may further delay implementation

19

NIST Proposed Pilot Projects

TGDC WG Proposals Initial ViewElectronic Ballot Delivery Doing and plan to continue

• Attended Kiosk-Based Voting System

Premature?• Overseas Citizen definition study• Geographic concentration of OC

• Unattended Kiosk-Based Voting System

• Geographic concentration of OC voters may indicate kiosk is superior approach

• Standard Ballot Delivery Format

• CDF for EMS Integration

Very interested• EMS, BDF and VRS/Geo data

migration between systems

• FY2011 Final Appropriations and Ongoing DoD Efficiencies Key Variable

CDF for EMS Integration migration between systems• A widget?

Page 20

• FY2011 Final Appropriations and Ongoing DoD Efficiencies Key Variable• Who should run (and therefore pay for) pilot programs in support of the

EAC developed electronic absentee voting guidelines?

How Electronic Standards Development Should Be Framed

GAO Guidance Risk = % x impact FVAP & EAC need detailed plans

Necessary plan elements: results-oriented action plan

Acceptable risk level policy decision already made It IS the current voting system Accepts 1/3 of absentee ballots never results oriented action plan

goals, tasks, milestones, time frames, and contingencies

FVAP-EAC Memorandum of

returned

We should accept equivalent risk in new UOCAVA systems May have different probability or impact

Understanding

EAC-NIST Interagency Agreement

May have different probability or impact Can reduce probability and/or mitigate

impact Goal is to keep risk level at least the

same, if not better

MOVE Act also requires EAC to develop detailed timeline for development of electronic absentee ballot guidelines Roadmap

The articulation of risk in the current system would serve as a useful baseline for future electronic bballot guidelines - Roadmap absentee systems

21

Path ForwardArticulate the Current Risk Evaluate the postal mail

Establish Properties What “properties”

Establish Interim Pilots Integrate current

UOCAVA absentee ballot system as the baseline

are necessary for an electronic absentee voting

work

Also examine Find comparable current

system threats to NIST/other identified

system?

To achieve the

national level threat risks

threats

Develop comparable

same level of risk as current system

Develop decision points for iterative development

measures for other voting systems

F T h l i l S it d R li bilit I ith

22

Focus on Technological, Security, and Reliability Issues with Electronic Return of Voted Ballot

F d l V ti A i t PFederal Voting Assistance ProgramDepartment of Defense

Bob Carey, Director

1777 North Kent St., #14003Arlington, VA 22209

Phone: 703-588-8118Fax: 703-696-1352

Email: Bob.Carey@fvap.gov