Election Information Standard · v1.2
The standard
Six standards define what an election office's website should do for voters. Each one breaks down into specific, checkable criteria and has its own documentation page with what it requires, why it matters, how to implement it, examples, and copyable snippets.
- 6
- Standards
- 24
- Criteria
- 0–100
- Score
Official status and authenticity
Voters can tell at a glance that the site is run by the election office, and can verify it.
- Official domain or verified ownership
- Secure connection
- Office identity and contact
- Guidance on look-alike sites
Voter information clarity
The essentials of registering and voting are complete, dated, and written for a first-time voter.
- Registration deadlines and methods
- Polling place and ballot lookup
- ID requirements in plain language
- Mail ballot timeline and tracking
- Sample ballot before early voting
Accessibility and language access
Voters with disabilities and voters who read other languages get the same information, in forms they can use.
- Accessibility statement
- Required language versions
- Accessible voting options
- Usable on mobile and without PDFs
Results and process transparency
The public can see how results are reported, checked, and certified, and who may watch.
- Results schedule and labeling
- Canvass and certification timeline
- Post-election audit procedure
- Observer access and chain of custody
Accuracy, updates and corrections
Voters can tell how current a page is, see what changed, and get a straight answer to false claims.
- Last-updated stamps
- Corrections and change notices
- Rumor response page
- Public error-reporting channel
Data and interoperability
Dates, places, and results are published in formats that search engines, voter tools, and researchers can read.
- Structured data for dates and places
- Machine-readable results
- Polling-place feed or API
How scoring works
Simple on purpose, so a reviewer can explain any score in a sentence. Each criterion gets a status, each standard gets a score, and the overall score is a weighted average of the six standards.
The practice is present and complete.
It exists but misses a required element.
Absent or unusable. Flagged when it affects voters directly.
Overall score bands
0 to 100- Emerging0–49
- Meets few criteria. Significant work ahead.
- Developing50–69
- Meets some criteria. Several standards need attention.
- Established70–84
- Meets most criteria. A few areas need work.
- Exemplary85–100
- Meets nearly every criterion. Minor gaps only.
Weights
The six standards don't count equally. Voter information and accessibility carry the most weight because gaps there cost votes. Weights are set in Settings.
Confidence
Every finding carries High, Medium, or Low confidence. Low means the documents said little and the reviewer should check that criterion first. Confidence never changes the score.