Designing ballot cure forms that invite voters to act

Hundreds of thousands of mail-in ballots can be rejected because of mistakes, such as mismatched or missing signatures. Voters are often notified by their local elections office, but are they actually taking action?

This is a report on research led by Maria Di Paolo that tested a variety of cure forms with voters to learn what motivated them to take action.

The cure process needs some attention

Before the 2020 General Election, 17 states already had a process for voters to fix problems on their mail-in ballots. Many more have added one as so many people switched to voting by mail during the pandemic. But even in states with where voters have the opportunity, too many ballots are rejected for missing signatures or other information on the envelope. 

We wanted to know why. 

Each state has its own laws about what is allowed and how voters can update their ballot envelope so it can be counted. Voters can be informed by a phone call, a letter, or a text in some cases. Options for taking action include mailing, faxing, or emailing a form back to the election office, or coming to the office in person. 

Is taking advantage of this opportunity simply an inconvenience? Is it because the voters most likely to make a mistake are already less engaged? Or do the letters and forms not help voters understand their options?

We decided to see what works and what doesn’t work with the current cure letters and forms. We tested a variety of form types with different communication and design styles, we began to see how voters perceive these forms and learn what motivated them to take action.

Here are 4 important things we learned.

Make it trustworthy

The first action a voter takes is to identify whether the communication 1) came from the election office and 2) is authentic. Adding a few universally recognizable elements to the form helps voters can know it is coming from a trusted, legitimate source. Including contact information for the election office also allowed for the form to feel more official.

“The form should have a [seal] on it to make it look more official. To me ‘official’ means having a [seal], letterhead, or something that identifies it with the BOE.”

Make it clear, avoiding jargon.

In addition to making the form trustworthy, voters have to understand what it tells them. Participants in our testing had strong, negative reactions to the word ‘cure,’ saying they had a hard time understanding how that concept applied to their ballots. When a word is interpreted with a negative meaning, it can be demotivating, as though voters are being told their ballot is sick.

“‘Cure’ is an interesting word choice. I assume it means to make it complete or countable. The connotation of it is usually medical.”

This also comes into play with phrases that are out of the everyday lexicon or understanding. Be as clear as possible to avoid confusion.

“I have no idea what they mean when they say ‘when the election is certified’. That is really vague.” (former poll worker)

Make it have a clear call to action

Finally, the letter and form need to provide a clear call-to-action to encourage voters to take the steps to cure their ballot. 

Provide urgency in your opening statement without making them feel like they’re in trouble or they did something wrong. As an example, participants reacted well to “Help us count your ballot”.

Digital curing options, like email and mobile, will also allow more voters to access and feel motivated to fix their ballot, especially when deadlines are tight and for younger voters.

“[With the mobile option,] I’d be more inclined to act. I don’t need to leave my couch.”

Make the dates transparent.

Tight deadlines can make the curing process hard or impossible, which can frustrate voters. Consider adding a date stamp on the form, not only help the voter but, to provide accountability for the election office. In addition, give them clear, attainable deadlines so they feel they have a realistic time to act.

This became quite apparent when participants considered the third testing scenario, receiving the form two days after the election – on Nov 5.

“[In this scenario,] I would be upset. The deadline to return is literally the day I received it. If I don’t get it on by that time, who’s responsible? Was it me? Was it the USPS? Was it the Board of Election?

Putting it all together

Based on what we learned, we created a simple mockup based on the aspects that the participants said were important. Use this as a checklist for your form to provide information voters need and, in turn, increase the overall response rate.

Use the header to make it trustworthy

• State or county seal or election logo (in color)
• Contact information
• Include phone #, email, website
• Point of contact name
  (in header or closing)
• Date sent

Explain the problem clearly

• Friendly, yet urgent first sentence 
• Specific reason for receiving form
• Voter personalized address
• Clear, feasible deadlines

Tell them how to take action

• Multiple convenient options for ‘curing’
• Include mobile and email
• Bullet points or Steps
• Provide office address and hour

Show them where to sign 

• Legal statement when necessary
• Area for signature, marked with an ‘x’
• Clear areas for dates or other information

Full research presentation

Designing ballot cure forms that invite voters to act from Center for Civic Design

About this research

We spoke with 8 participants from all over the US. We created three scenarios for different time frames in which a voter might receive a cure notice:

• Scenario 1: Let’s say you voted by mail three weeks early. One week later, you received something like this in the mail. 
• Scenario 2: Say you still voted by mail about a week before the election but you received something like this in the mail a few days later on Thu, Oct 29.
• Scenario 3: Say you still voted by mail, but you received something like this in the mail on Thu Nov 5, two days after the election.

For each scenario, participants viewed a packet of different variations of cure forms, with pages in randomized order.

The forms were based on a sample of real election materials using different styles. We replaced all identifying information with a fictitious location to prevent any inherent participant bias towards different places.

Resources

An invitation to certainty, in an uncertain time – Communication tips for helping voters cure a problem with their write-in or absentee ballot.

Download a sample of a letter or email, phone script, or text message to customize

Toolkit for resources for scaling-up vote by mail 

Field Guide Vol. 05 – Choosing how to communicate with voters

Field Guide Vol. 09 – Creating forms that help voters take action