Juan E. Gilbert, Ph.D.
Andrew Banks Family Preeminence Endowed Chair
Associate Chair of Research
Computer & Information Science & Engineering Department
University of Florida
http://www.cise.ufl.edu

juan@juangilbert.com
Twitter: @DrJuanGilbert
http://www.JuanGilbert.com/
http://www.HumanCenteredComputing.org/
Demonstration/Training Research  
•	  Demonstration/training conducted in 6 states coordinated by the State AT Program 
•	  AVS demo/training was on machine that participant voter would use at their polling place
•	  Demo/training was done by AT specialists with experience in conducting AT demos and familiarity with the AVS 
•	 506 demo/trainings conducted – 
–	vision – 64%, motor – 27%, intellectual – 16%,  	hearing/speech/other – 8% to 4%
–	seniors – 47%, middle aged – 36%, young adults – 17%
Data Results   
•	Demo/training time needed for voter to become independent using access features ranged from 1-2 minutes to 25+ minutes or never independent
–	51% independent in 1-4 minutes
–	34% independent in 5 – 14 minutes
–	15% took 15+ minutes or no independence
•	Self rating of comfort using the AVS on 1 to 10 scale before and after demo
–	Pre-demo mean = 4.47 (not very comfortable) 
–	Post-demo mean = 8.02 (very comfortable); almost 4 point increase 
Data Results Analysis    
Demo/training is viable strategy to improve use of AVS.
AVS are not intuitive or “easy” for all voters to learn -- some require extended time to learn to use AVS 
Cannot expect poll workers to provide demo/training during busy election day to help voters learn to use AVS – need to provide opportunities to learn AVS outside of voting day. 
Voters with disabilities take more time to complete their ballot using the AVS – thus expanded early voting is helpful.   

AVS Improvements Recommended by Demo/Training Participants
•	 Larger text display – AVS “large text” is not nearly large enough.  Further research suggests mean large text size needed is 17mm (not 6.3-9 mm of VVSG)
•	 Larger touchscreen strike areas and adjustable sensitivity 
•	 Improve audio navigation and general instructions 
•	 Improve switch input navigation 

Cognitive Disabilities
•	"a disability that impacts an individual's ability to access, process, or remember information" 

•	Guidelines:

•	Speak directly to the voter,
•	Use words voters understand, 
•	Write in an active voice to help voters use the information,  
•	Avoid, or explain, election terminology

*	Absentee ballot
*	Canvassing board
*	Contests
*	Legislation
*	MVA
*	Primary election
*	Provisional ballot
*	Ranked choice voting

*	Remedial
*	Unaffiliated
*	Voter notification  card
*	Affiliate with a  party
*	Designate an agent
*	Change parties
*	Close of  registrations
*	Request deadline

Paraquad Poll Worker Training
Goal: Develop Improved Poll Worker Training to Better Meet Needs of Disability Community

Research Phase:
•	Voter Experience Surveys
–	Phone Survey of 1,200 voters with disabilities in Missouri and Tennessee

•	County Clerk Interviews
–	Face to Face meetings with 10 Missouri County Clerks 
–	Understand challenges and needs for administrators 

General Findings
•	Poll workers find it helpful to have variety of training methodology

•	Election Day Picture Guide was well received and used by poll workers
–	51% Used Picture Guide
–	90% Guide was Helpful

•	Picture Guide Uses
–	Voting Machines: 47%
–	Polling Place Set-Up: 36%
–	Curbside Voting: 13%
–	Other: 4%

2012 post-election survey	
The Election Assistance Commission provided funds through Research Alliance for Accessible Voting (RAAV) for a nationally representative household survey on voting experiences following 2012 elections

•	Total sample of 3,022 adult citizens, stratified to include 2,000 with disabilities and 1,022 without disabilities
•	Survey was conducted by professional survey firm, with basic voting questions based on U.S. Census

Key results from survey
•	30% of voters with disabilities reported some type of difficulty in voting at a polling place in 2012, compared to 8% of voters without disabilities

•	Most common problems were difficulty in reading or seeing the ballot, understanding how to vote or use voting equipment, and long lines

•	People with disabilities were just as likely as those without disabilities to say they were treated respectfully by election officials
 
•	Among people with disabilities who voted by mail, about one-tenth reported difficulties and the need for assistance in filling out or sending the ballot.
 
•	Asked about alternative voting methods for the next election, majorities of people both with and without disabilities say they would prefer voting in person in a polling place.  
Potential solutions/best practices
•	Increased accessibility of polling places and voting equipment, including accessibility audits
•	Mobile voting
•	Poll worker training
•	Voter outreach and education
•	Permanent no-excuse mail voting
EAC funded 
Research Alliance for Accessible Voting 

Research on Accessible Voting 
Ted Selker & Dan Gillette  
subcontract performed at CMU and Berkeley 
6/2011 to 6/2014

•	Ted.selker@gmail.com
•	Dan@gillettedesign.com
Research on Accessible Voting Projects
Ted Selker & Dan Gillette  
EAC funded subcontract performed at CMU and Berkeley 6/2011 to 6/2014
•	Illuminated freestanding magnifiers for optical ballot marking
–	We  have begun  testing  them with researchers and poll workers.
•	Improved audio ballot techniques
–	Published, one Japanese company implementing ideas
•	Improved Low Error Voting  GUI systems support ballot overview, focus and redundant feedback
–	Elements Being used in 
•	PrimeIII
•	In MD overseas voting system
–	Anywhere ballot implementation
•	Created web-based interactive polling-place design and management system
–	Being evaluated for testing in LA county and Missouri
•	Created Scrim, a visual-structuring overlay web browser extension
–	Being evaluated by election officials
•	Created a website  font and color analysis tool
–	Being evaluated by election officials 

Research on Accessible Voting 
Ted Selker & Dan Gillette  
EAC funded subcontract performed at CMU and Berkeley 6/2011 to 6/2014
•	Illuminated freestanding magnifiers for paper ballot marking
–	Magnification and illumination to help ameliorate slight vision impairment 
–	Free standing feature designed to help people 
•	Reduce physical problems (tremor, missing limbs,  etc.)
•	Reduce complexity and loss of place in ballot  especially helpful  for people with cognitive impairments.

Research on Accessible Voting 
Ted Selker & Dan Gillette  
EAC funded subcontract performed at CMU and Berkeley 6/2011 to 6/2014
•	Improved audio ballot techniques
–	Audio lag and key inactivation while audio speaking is currently a huge problem
–	Reduced size and number of buttons can help increase speed and reduce errors
–	Structuring the audio experience can reduce errors in noisy environment
–	Improving Write-in Candidate Text Entry For Audio-Only Voting Interfaces, Dan Gillette, Shama Hoque, Ted Selker, 29th Annual International Technology and Persons With disabilities Conference, San Diego, Mar 2014

Research on Accessible Voting 
Ted Selker & Dan Gillette  
EAC funded subcontract performed at CMU and Berkeley 6/2011 to 6/2014
•	Improved Low Error Voting  GUI systems support ballot overview, 
      focus and redundant feedback
–	Being used by the Prime III voting system, 
–	State of Maryland’s overseas voting prototypes; 
–	Available as a platform for developers and researchers to experiment with.
–	https://www.dropbox.com/s/kycnbytbjx4f5qj/LEVIhtml5.mp4  (2 minutes)

Research on Accessible Voting 
Ted Selker & Dan Gillette  
EAC funded subcontract performed at CMU and Berkeley 6/2011 to 6/2014
•	Created web-based interactive polling-place design and management system. 
–	analysis and preparation of polling place layouts prior to an election, 
–	Procedural support for opening polls 
–	Procedural support for closing the polls
–	Facilitating communication about problems and solutions during Election Day
–	https://www.dropbox.com/s/rz9ns7byvutkpui/pollingplacesimulator_x264.mp4  (1.3 minutues)

Tennessee Disability Coalition

•	Conducted 3 Voter Experience Pilots in Year 1
1. Voter Experience Surveys
•	Over 500 voters with disabilities surveyed via phone. 
•	Were poll workers knowledgeable about accessible voting machines? 87% Yes
•	Were poll workers knowledgeable about accommodations available? 44% Yes 
2. Exit Pollers
•	250 Surveys filled out by exit pollers
•	Low incidence of disability
•	Overwhelmingly good reports, no perceived problems from voters
3. Poll Watchers
•	Poll watchers were asked to complete surveys and write reports based on their findings. There was again a low incidence of disability and most issues reported or found were access problems

Tennessee Disability Coalition
•	Year 2: Material Development and Self Study Pilot	
•	Materials Developed: 
–	Poll Worker Tip Sheets
•	Step by step picture guides on voting technology and access features used by poll workers and voters
–	Poll Worker Training Guide (Already developed by the Disability Law and Advocacy Center of TN)
–	Video (Year 3) 
•	A self-study for poll workers was completed in March 2013. A test group of 8 poll workers were given materials developed and additional training methods. A control group of 8 poll workers only received training by a county election commission
•	Pilot didn’t yield conclusive scientific results due to extremely low turnout. Poll workers were given no chance to implement perceived new skills.  However they have provided some positive feedback.  
–	High satisfaction rates from election administrators, poll workers, and advocates. 
–	The picture guide developed is being widely used throughout the state by most county election commissions

Tennessee Disability Coalition
Findings and Recommendations

•	Poll workers need more training time. 
–	This was the main complaint from administrators and voting rights advocates. 
•	Training needs to be offered through different mediums. 
–	(i.e. in person, self-studies, online trainings, job aides)
–	These help poll workers to learn scenarios that are not typically learned during the required state training. 
–	Poll workers have the option to take materials home with them to learn in their own time. 
–	Election administrators typically spend time on access and etiquette relating to people with disabilities, rather than accessible voting machines. 
•	Administrators should consider partnering with disability advocacy organizations to troubleshoot budget friendly and time efficient ways to train poll workers. Advocacy organizations in Tennessee have developed an accessibility training manual used widely in election trainings. 
•	Barriers the polling place are not always visible. Poll workers needs to offer assistance to every voter than enters a polling place to ensure each voter can privately and independently cast his ballot. Election Administrators should consider hiring more poll workers with disabilities to help troubleshoot election day problems. 

RAAV Projects 
Accessible Voting Technologies

Pilots
•	NSBE Election (2008 - 2014)

•	State of Oregon (May 2012)
Pilots
•	Self Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE 2012)
–	Ballot contained photos of the candidates

•	Clemson Elementary School (2012)

Pilot Election
Pilot Challenges
•	Election Officials
–	In many cases, unwilling to participate
–	It takes a lot of work to convince some of them

•	Vendors
–	It took a lot of time to communicate that we are not vendors

•	Participants
–	Getting a diverse group to participate
Questions???
http://www.AccessibleVoting.org
Juan E. Gilbert, Ph.D.
Andrew Banks Family Preeminence Endowed Chair
Associate Chair of Research
Computer & Information Science & Engineering Department
University of Florida

juan@ufl.edu
Twitter: @DrJuanGilbert
http://www.JuanGilbert.com/
http://www.HumanCenteredComputing.org/