KINGSTON, R.I. – Oct. 22, 2024 – The heated upcoming 2024 presidential election is sure to bring many voters to the polls this November. One of the most important rights of American citizens is the right to vote. But while polls show an incredibly tight presidential race, they can’t tell us how many voters will show up to cast their ballot.

According to a Pew Research report, 2018, 2020, and 2022 elections were three of the highest-turnout U.S. elections of their respective types in decades. About two-thirds of the voting-eligible population turned out for the 2020 presidential election – 154.6 million voters – the highest rate for any national election since 1900. The last presidential election also turned out to be a record use of nontraditional voting methods, according to the Voting and Registration in the Election of November 2020 report.

“At the Engineering for Democracy Institute, we believe that through applied engineering methods and tools, we can directly support election officials in their uniquely complex current and future challenges,” said University of Rhode Island associate professor Gretchen Macht.

Macht and her team has been studying the voting systems process since 2017, when then Rhode Island Secretary of State Nellie M. Gorbea created a task force to help improve voting processes across the state by solving challenges that arose in previous elections.

There are many factors that affect election processes, such as population growth, challenges in security, limited space at some precincts, and the possibility of equipment failure. Macht and her team of engineers were able to streamline the Rhode Island 2018 midterm election by increasing or decreasing the amount of voting equipment at each polling location, increasing the number of optical scanners for check-out, and changing the physical layout of voting queues.

The success of this collaboration led to Macht being awarded several grants to conduct research and recommend steps to help polling locations across the state with her team, then named URI Voter OperaTions and Election Systems (VOTES). Macht’s work has been funded by the Rhode Island Board of Elections, Democracy Fund, Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project, National Science Foundation, Partnership for Large Election Jurisdictions, Elections Trust Initiative, and the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission. That success then led other state officials to request assistance to analyze their voting processes.

“We did five elections during Covid and hundreds of layout models for spaces all over the country. We recognized that we could make a real impact and were the only engineers doing this type of data collection,” said Macht.

From State Level to National 

Macht’s team – renamed The Engineering for Democracy Institute – is now working nationally. Recent funding from the STEM for Election Network brings additional skill sets to the cause.

The team has expanded to include experts in other fields, such as a long-time collaborator, political science associate professor Bridgett A. King from the University of Kentucky; as well as faculty in other fields such as political and computational social science professor Michael Alvarez from the California Institute of Technology; associate professor Noah Daniels, assistant professor Shaun Wallace, and assistant professor Sarah Brown, all from URI’s department of computer science and statistics; architectural engineering associate professor Jennifer I. Lather from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln; and psychology professors Phillip Kortum and Michael Byrne at Rice University.

“Here’s the thing; no one likes someone that comes into your space and tells you what to do. We at EDI think it’s more valuable to work in tandem with experts across multiple disciplines and election officials to make sure the solutions that we propose are appropriate and, if needed, collaborative. Our unique viewpoint and skills help us support the questions or concerns that election officials have and need answers to,” said Macht.

Ever Changing Factors to the System

Voting policies vary from state to state, jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and even polling location to polling location. “Every state has its own regulations, and many other factors need to be considered on an individual basis when assessing locations and ways to improve the process at each, such as accessibility,” Macht said. A small-town polling location is going to have different needs than a county like Los Angeles, which is home to over 9 million people. Having a diverse group of consultants weigh in on each evaluation helps find the best path forward. They work closely with election administrators to find the best possible solutions to challenges.

“Election administrators everywhere want to make sure their system works,” said Macht. “Everyone that I work with, in multiple locations, is devoted to making sure challenges are addressed and the process goes smoothly.”

At every location, the team gathers information regarding accessibility, technology, population, voter behavior, layout, and other factors that can predict the necessary requirements for a smooth voting process. Models can help predict issues such as unexpected equipment failure, poll worker shortages, and other challenges that can pose possible problems at voting locations. They work with the election officials at each location to ensure any issues or concerns are addressed, and everything meets the standards of that jurisdiction.

In preparation for the 2024 election, the Engineering for Democracy Institute has been coordinating with various counties and government offices to assess voting processes, provide recommendations and facility diagrams, or identify resource needs, as well as collaborate with organizations to exchange expertise and solve election planning challenges throughout the United States. They have so far helped 9,639,575 million voters in Contra Costa County, California; Athens-Clarke County, Georgia; Multnomah County, Oregon; Los Angeles County, California; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; as well as having worked with the Rhode Island Board of Elections and Colorado Sectary of State’s Office.

The team continues to receive funding to investigate voting behaviors and how to improve optimization. The group is developing a web-hosted tool that will allow election administrators to input characteristics and data about polling locations and output information regarding voter wait times, identify bottleneck resources, and provide recommended resource allocations.

They are also creating an interactive calculator that estimates the duration necessary to hand-tally ballots. In addition, last year, they created professional educational videos through simulation modeling Election Day scenarios to assist in facilitating the United States Election Assistance Commission’s immersive learning platform.

Election Day Expectations

The tickers counting the votes on live news on election night are only projections. Often it is overlooked that a lot of data from polling locations all over the nation, in various time zones, needs to be collected to tally votes. At the same time, humans may be hand-counting ballots, which also takes time.

“Processes require time to be accurate, and multiple inputs from different types of voting, like in-person, early, Election Day, and vote-by-mail, will take time,” said Macht. “Everyone, please be patient as your election officials have been preparing for this election and are going to do their best to get you accurate results as fast as possible.”

“Participating in democracy should be a moment of pride and a positive experience. Our aim is to ensure everyone has that,” she added.

This press release was written by Krysta Murray, a writer with the URI College of Engineering.