The objectives of the Results Management System section are to:

• provide guidance to organizations responsible for preparing and conducting a results management system; 
• outline principles of "best-practice" for results management process and procedures;
• describe the various methods of vote counting used in a variety of common electoral systems; 
• assist electoral management bodies to maximize the credibility and integrity of the vote counting process, by outlining ways to minimize opportunities for fraud, systemic manipulation, malpractices and ensuring that the public perception of the resulst process is one that enhances the integrity of the electoral process; 
• equip electoral management bodies with strategies to avoid the serious problems encountered in many elections caused by result process deficiencies and insufficient command and control by EMB managment; 
• emphasize the importance of appropriate training and organization of all staff categories involved in the election results process; 
• make provisions for the various types of challenges to unprocedural or unlawful vote counting.

The Importance of Results Management System

In recent times, the requirements and demands on an EMB’s results system have increased considerably. Stakeholders demand results significantly faster than they used to. In addition, they demand transparency during the entire results process and not just the vote count – so- called “end to end transparency”. Concerns over less than accessible transportation of critical count-related material by EMBs, opaque tabulation procedures and tardy release of results have sometimes threatened the integrity of the vote count. As a result, EMBs can no longer solely focus on the vote count. The EMB must now have an integrated results management system incorporating all key aspects from vote counting to the certified results being announced and relevant complaints have been properly adjudicated.

The starting point for a successful EMB is to first take stock of the existing results management system. Based on an honest and exhaustive review it can identify areas of improvements. Naturally, changes to the EMB’s own infrastructure and communications capabilities, as well as the adaptation and availability of external means of communication in the society at large, will guide the review process as changes are identified. However, as developments are rarely linear, EMBs cannot assume that ICT-infrastructure procured and utilized during the previous election are still operational, or that current staff know how to properly operate the equipment. Legal or regulatory changes since the initial introduction of technology may render the old technology unfit for use.

Once the EMB has internally agreed what the necessary improvements are and how these could be achieved a draft operational plan will be developed. The operational plan will not only describe all the processes and steps of the results management system, but also indicate time and resource requirements. Given the result systems importance to election stakeholders, it is important that political parties, candidates, media and election-related NGOs are consulted when developing the result system. If not, the lack of transparency and limited inclusiveness could be construed as a precursor to fraud, systemic manipulation or malpractices by the EMB itself.

A results management system's operational plan often overlooks that it must cater to two distinct yet intertwined processes: tabulation and reporting. Given the intense interest in the election results from political stakeholders, media and the electorate, EMBs realize that they no longer have the luxury of waiting until the legal results forms arrive and results are verified before announcing final results. An EMB’s results system must include mechanisms whereby both provisional and final results are catered for. Most EMBs are therefore cognizant of the importance of releasing timely provisional results, as this will give the election authority sufficient time to process the final results. Equally important, if the release of provisional results is not forthcoming the EMB could soon find itself being accused by some parties and candidates of altering the results. Having said that, it is instrumental that EMBs are not pressured into releasing results prematurely. The EMBs must take sufficient time to properly transmit, tabulate and check results before releasing both interim and final results. In order to manage such expectations, EMBs must clearly and repeatedly reinforce the expected timeline for release of results during the lead-up to Election Day. Thereafter it’s too late.

Given the intense focus on supplying early provisional results, EMBs are sometimes focusing almost exclusively on this process generating interim results at the expense of the final, legally binding, results stream. This could be devastating as in a tight race, the EMB might decide midstream it cannot announce an outright winner, or the need for a second round, before it has verified the provisional results with the actual results forms. Thus, the time lag between provisional and final results should not be excessive. In some countries, a maximum period of time between Election Day and the publication of certified results is dictated by the legal framework. However, if timeliness and accuracy are of the essence for provisional results, accuracy and chain of custody are essential for final results. Not only could the EMB leadership’s own confidence in the results be compromised if the results forms have not always been in the custody of an authorized election official, but chain of custody is instrumental when adjudicating a challenge to the election results. The EMB’s election results management system must therefore include procedures and regulations clearly stating how sensitive election material must be handled to avoid compromising the chain of custody while moving or storing physical evidence. The chain of custody commences when the presiding officer in the voting station signs for the election material until the very same material is presented in a court of law.

If the results management system introduces new ICT solutions for counting, transmission, tabulation or improved command and control capabilities the operational plan must take into consideration any such improvements to amend regulations and procedures. In addition, the operational plan is to allocate sufficient time for procurement, testing, and training on the new technologies introduced. It is common for EMBs to significantly underestimate the time required to properly plan and procure complex technical solutions. Furthermore, to avoid suspicion and increase acceptance, any changes made to the politically sensitive results system must be accompanied by a public information campaign for the broader audiences and face-to- face interactions with key stakeholders.

Common Components of a Results Management System

The election results management system varies from country to country given local infrastructure conditions, available resources, political context, EMB structure and electoral systems. Still, in general, common components of the results system can be identified irrespective of model used.

The common starting point for all results management systems is the development of an operational plan, based on the assessment of system used during previous election, integrity risks identified and controlled, and new requirements. Introduction of any new technologies need to follow established best practices for conducting feasibility studies and introducing ICT-solutions.^[1] The main segments of the electoral process captured in such a plan are:

Appropriate training programs for all categories of staff involved in any part of the results management system:

• Targeted public information campaigns to stakeholders;
• Effective command and control capabilities readily available to EMB managers;
• Counting of the ballot papers at voting station level;
• If counting at a higher administrative level, transport ballot papers and other sensitive election material relevant to the counting process to the next administrative level for counting without jeopardizing chain of custody;
• Transmission of interim results from counting and/or tabulation facility to next administrative level and/or directly to EMB central tabulation center;
• Transportation of legal results forms (for final results) from counting and/or tabulation facility to next administrative level and/or directly to EMB central tabulation center without jeopardizing chain of custody;
• EMB’s central tabulation hub is properly tested and fully operational, including software pre-loaded with triggers for suspicious results;
• Investigative procedures, staff and resources available to swiftly adjudicate accusations of fraud, systemic manipulation and malpractice leveled against the results system;
• Media Results Center operational and servicing key stakeholders with interim results and final results as per a pre-announced schedule;
• Transportation of sensitive election results-related material from relevant tabulation location to storage facility for safe keeping until material can be legally discarded following certification of results and completion of adjudication of complaints. Adherence to strict chain of custody rules.

Designing Vote Counting Procedures

The type of electoral system used will to a certain extent determine the specific measures needed to successfully conclude an election count. (See Electoral Systems and Electoral System and Ballot Type Implications for the Count for more on this topic.)

However, several general principles apply to all electoral systems. Counting procedures should take into account available resources, such as staff, training, premises, transport, logistics, planning, communications, and equipment. For example, a computerized method of counting votes would not be suitable for locations with unreliable power supplies or a shortage of skilled computer operators.

A balance may need to be struck between integrity, accuracy, and speed. Often the more checks and balances there are, the slower the process. However, the accuracy of the count cannot be compromised as it is the foundation upon which a credible results system is built.

There are a variety of ways that counting can take place, including manually, mechanically, or electronically. The counting location may be at the voting station or at counting centres.

More complicated systems may require that the vote counting is conducted at several locations. First-Past-the-Post or majority system aggregation of the results can normally be completed at the electoral district level. In a proportional representation system a final centralized result may be necessary to translate votes into seats, see Electoral System and Ballot Type Implications for the Count.

[1] see IFES’ publication “Electronic Voting & Counting Technologies: A Guide to Conducting Feasibility Studies”.