Doug

I'm sure you'll get other answers, but here are some reactions.

First, of course, we can repeat the constant call for some sort of comparable metric of policy performance by election officials.  We have performance measures for many aspects of state and local governance, but elections have been lagging.  

This may be because, unlike many areas, there is no agreed upon metric. For instance, if the goal is to deliver a given level of educational services and a given level of expenditure, we can measures outcomes (test scores, graduation rates) against inputs.  In the corrections field, we similarly have generally agreed upon measures of recidivism and, more controversially, crime rates, against spending on public safety, sentencing provisions, prison practices.

For elections, what is the metric?  Costs per vote?  Turnout?  Non-contested election outcomes?  I realize this is redundant to write to this readership, but finding a politically agreed upon metric for this most fundamental of political activities is ... political!  And very hard to do.

Compare the kind of analyses available at the state policy and performance project: http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_category.aspx?id=352

I don't think things are all bad, however.  There are initiatives underway and the data quality in 2011 is far superior to what was available in 2001.  

I think the EAVS (EAC's Election Administration and Voting Survey) is a good starting point.

The Election Center has started a benchmarking task force, and Pew's Elections Initiatives has a Performance Index project underway.  

In terms of existing resources, the CRS, under Erik Fischer's guidance, funded at least two national surveys of elections officials (I am not sure if the data are publicly available).  Pew funded a number of surveys of local election officials (Wisconsin, Georgia, Colorado).   Finally, there is a national survey of election performance conducted by the Voting Technology Project, also under Pew's aegi.

I have had conversations with people about taking advantage of election incidence databases, such as those collected by the Brennan Center.  The issue here is that these rely on self-reporting.  If you browse some of these databases, you'll realize that there is a tremendous number of false negatives--citizens reporting a "problem" that is well within legal bounds.

Hope that gets you started!


---
Paul Gronke                Ph:  503-517-7393
			               Fax: 734-661-0801

Professor, Reed College
Director, Early Voting Information Center 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.
Portland OR 97202

EVIC: http://earlyvoting.net