Scott Hilkert, Managing Principal

NIST Workshop on a Common Data Format for

Electronic Voting Systems. Oct 29 - 30, 2009

Background of Illinois Election Data Collection project.

Primer on Election Systems and Data Paths Between.

Challenges Faced in EDC Project. Inconsistency in Contest Naming Inconsistency in Precinct Naming Suitability of Raw Machine Data for Reporting

Relevance to Common Data Workshop

Sponsored by EAC Grant awarded to 5 states. Objective: Devise a means of automatic

election data reporting for the 2008 General Election

Objective: Report election results data at the precinct level.

Applied to the 2008 General Election Illinois Project Started late, Limited

functionality in place for March 2009 reporting deadline

Grant extended, final software to serve as proof-of-concept for Electronic Canvass.

Focused on Data Paths 1 & 2 on the following slide.

Local Election Management System (EMS) Voter Registration Data Voting Districts Data Voter Precinct

Assignments Voter Eligibility Data Voter Participation History Pre-election / mail ballot

tracking

Vote Tabulation System Ballot style breakdown into

contests and choices Ballot style association

with precincts Vote Counts per contest,

choice, precinct-split, ballot type

Local Candidate Filing System Candidate (Choice) names

per contest Candidate information

Poll Book Printing Process / Electronic Poll Book / Early Voting Check-in.

Electronic Voter Registration Sources (DMV, Online)

Ballot Definition Software Contests per Voting

District / Office Candidate (Choice) names

per contest Precinct/Splits per Voting

Districts

Public Website Functions for Individuals (Am I registered, polling place lookup, sample ballot, candidate guide,Election results)

External Identity Matching Systems (SSN, DMV, NCOA, Death Records, Felony Incarcerations)

State Candidate Filing System

Statewide Voter Registration System / State Election Management System (EMS)

Published Election Results, Statistics, Paid Data Extracts: Media, Interest Groups, Parties &

Campaigns

Paper Ballot Printing,DRE Configuration

Peripheral EMS Functions: Voter Mailings /

Communication Election Worker /

Poling Place Management

Petition / Signature Validation

Provisional Ballot Status Tracking

CORE ELECTION SYSTEMS

PERIPHERAL ELECTION SYSTEMS

An

on

ymo

us

/ Ag

gre

gat

ed D

ata

Iden

tity Driven

Data

12

3

4

4

5

7

6

6

6

66

3

8

9

Vot

ing

Registration

Local Election Management System (EMS) Voter Registration Data Voting Districts Data Voter Precinct

Assignments Voter Eligibility Data Voter Participation History Pre-election / mail ballot

tracking

Vote Tabulation System Ballot style breakdown into

contests and choices Ballot style association

with precincts Vote Counts per contest,

choice, precinct-split, ballot type

Ballot Definition Software Contests per Voting

District / Office Candidate (Choice) names

per contest Precinct/Splits per Voting

Districts

Statewide Voter Registration System / State Election Management System (EMS)

Published Election Results, Statistics, Paid Data Extracts: Media, Interest Groups, Parties &

Campaigns

CORE ELECTION SYSTEMS

An

on

ymo

us

/ Ag

gre

gat

ed D

ata

Iden

tity Driven

Data

12

3

5

6

9

Vot

ing

Registration

1 Data exports from vote tabulation systems. (VTS)All 4 major Vendor systems represented in Illinois

2 Data exported from VR or election management systems (EMS)Typically the Statewide VR System

3 Data used to configure vote tabulation systems for each election.Lack of consistent naming and usage was a challenge

9 EMS / VTS System BoundaryInconsistency across boundary was a challenge

Accepts Standard Export Files from each county tabulation system.

Separate Translaction Plugin developed for each of 4 major vendor systems (Hart, ES&S, Sequoia, Premier)

Accepts Data Export from Statewide Voter Registration System.

In “bottom up” states, Statewide VR data is derived from separate county systems.

Local survey data is also combined. Data must be mapped and merged as it

moves up the reporting hierarchy on following slide

Individual County Election Surveys and Canvass Reports

Precinct level reports from subordinate local jurisdictions to counties designated as “official canvasser”

Individual Statewide Election Surveys and Canvass Reports

Loca

l Ele

ctio

n A

utho

ritie

sS

tate

Ele

ctio

n A

utho

ritie

sE

lect

ion

Ass

ista

nce

Com

mis

sion

(E

AC

)

Data from separate county systems must be correlated and merged.

Requires mapping of contest and choice names to state standard conventions:

For example, Illinois 17th Congressional District spans 12 whole counties and portions of 2 more counties. Example names for this contest: “US House of Representatives” “Representative in the United States Congress,” or simply “Congress.”

Note that none of these identified this as the 17th.

A name mapping feature had to be developed (See screen shot on following slide)

Also required for Party name and Choice names.

This required significant staff hours to manually analyze and configure the data mapping.

Had the naming conventions used to program the systems (Data Flow #3) been standardized, the manual mapping process could have been avoided.

Establish standard codes or short names for major contests (Replace old FIPS codes)

Train and educate local election jurisdictions on VTS programming and usage conventions

Incorporate standards and guidelines into VTS Vendor products and documentation.

Caused by the EMS / VTS system boundary discussed earlier.

Limits ability to correlate voter registration data, ballot request data with votes cast data.

A similar name mapping interface had to be developed.

Very ineffective for 1000’s of Precincts. Remedies similar to that of previous

mentioned challenge.

Small discrepancies encountered between VTS export files and official canvass reports. Provisional and other ballot types added to Canvass

in external process. Date of export uncertain Some adjustments are inevitable.

Remedies?: Establish standard VTS usage guidelines for ballot

types. Encourage use of VTS exports with Official Canvass Data standards must track manual adjustments

separatly from original machine counts.

Small discrepancies encountered between VTS export files and official canvass reports. Provisional and other ballot types added to Canvass

in external process. Date of export uncertain Some adjustments are inevitable.

Remedies?: Establish standard VTS usage guidelines for ballot

types. Encourage use of VTS exports with Official Canvass Data standards must track manual adjustments

separatly from original machine counts.

Inconsistent Data Format between the 4 systems was actually the least of the challenges faced.

Data usage and naming conventions should be promoted along with any emerging data standard.

EAC Sponsored Technology initiatives can help.