In most states, county governments play a key role in administrating federal, state and local elections. While specific laws and ways of administering elections vary from state to state, county officials rely on assistance from state, federal and nonprofit partners to ensure elections are secure and voters can cast their ballots with ease.  

The following resource hub is intended to connect county officials with toolkits, grant opportunities and other resources on election administration; address Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to election administration; and highlight county best practices.

Section 1

Election Administration Resource Library for Counties

Federal Partners

U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC)

The EAC is a bipartisan, independent federal commission that was established to help officials meet election administration guidelines set forth by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA). Comprised of 4 commissioners (2 from each political party), the EAC provides counties and the public with election-related topics, develops voluntary voting system guidelines, and acts as the national clearinghouse for election administration information.

The EAC is also the main source of federal grants for election administration activities as authorized by HAVA. Currently, election security grants are the primary form of funding available to counties under the law. More information on election security grants in your state can be found on the County Explorer tool.

  • Election Security Grants are the main source of federal funding to improve election administration, technology and security 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is responsible for our nation’s public security, including anti-terrorism effots, cybersecurity and disaster prevention. DHS houses the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) that works with both public and private partners to ensure cybersecurity and physical security of critical infrastructure, including election infrastructure. In recent years, CISA has also provided resources on election security and disinformation and misinformation.

DHS provides some federal funding for election security through the Homeland Security Preparedness Grants.

  • Homeland Security Preparedness Grants (HSPG) provides funding for state, local and tribal governments to prevent and respond to terrorism and other emergencies. Counties must apply for HSPG funds through their State Administrative Agency, the primary recipients of these funds. A minimum amount of grant funding must be dedicated toward six national priority areas.
    • “Enhancing election security” has been considered a national priority area since federal Fiscal Year 2023, and as such, 3% of a state’s award must go towards election security.

Most DHS resources for elections come from CISA, which provides cybersecurity and infrastructure protection. PLEASE NOTE: On March 11, CISA announced a $10 million funding cut to the Center for Internet Security (CIS), which is no longer supporting election security initiatives in partnership with the Election Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC).

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)

The U.S. Department of Justice oversees the enforcement of federal laws and the administration of justice, including enforcing election laws and partnering with state and local law enforcement officials to prosecute election crimes. Some DOJ state and local assistance grant funds can be used on election worker protection activities.  

  • The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, which is primarily focused on criminal justice funding, was expanded in 2022 to include protecting election workers
  • An FBI Election Threats Task Force was established and led by the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section to address violence and threats against election workers. The current status of the task force is unknown.
    • Note: U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi disbanded the foreign influence task force, which was created following the 2016 election and Russian hack into the DNC email system, to “free resources to address more pressing priorities”
U.S. Postal Service

The U.S. Postal Service plays a critical role in elections by handling election mail.

U.S. Congress

The Election Observer Program sends designated election observers to monitor congressional elections, particularly those with tight races and potential to be contested. The program is codified by the Congressional Observer Access Act of 2024, or HR 6513.

Election observer laws vary by state, view each state’s policies here.

External/Non-Federal Partners

NASS is a membership organization for secretaries of state. One of the most vital roles that secretaries of state (and lieutenant governors) play is that of chief election official. 

The membership organization for state election directors offers several election resources.

The center is a membership organization for individuals who work in election administration

A membership organization for local government clerks, election officials, recorders and treasurers. Learn more.

 

The membership organization represents state legislatures.

This is a coalition of election officials and law enforcement officials focused on protecting election workers and voters from threats or violence.

The group works with local and state election offices and nonprofits on advancing election administration.

  • The Election Communications Plan is a 60-day plan that includes templates, tips and PSAs
  • Chain of Custody is a guide on how to mitigate, identify and solve breaches in ballot security
  • The Communications Resource Desk provides free to low-cost help on communications-related work, from graphic design to crisis communication
  • De-escalation Resources include a pocket guide and posters with tips and reminders for dealing with situations that may arise at voting places
  • The Elections Group offers other resources that include templates, guides and workbooks, case studies, and articles on election-related materials

Section 2

Frequently Asked Questions on the County Role in Elections

Who is responsible for the administration of elections at the county level? 

It varies state by state, but most states have an elected constitutional/row officer, such as a county clerk or recorder, while others have election directors that are appointed by the county’s chief executive official or legislative board. All counties employ teams made up of hired staff and/or seasonal workers and volunteers to administer elections in their communities. Fifteen states use a single election official model where election administrations are managed by one individual, either appointed or elected. In seven states, a county board is responsible for election administration and acts as the chief county election authority. Twenty-six states use a mixture of local board of elections and two or more individuals. Counties oversee election administration in 36 states, six states have a shared county and municipality responsibility, four states have no county role in elections and two states implement a different system. Alaska has state oversight, and Delaware is state managed, county implemented.

How are elections funded?

It is a mix of federal, state and local funds. In some cases, philanthropic grant funding is also utilized, although 27 states have prohibited, limited or regulated this form of funding as of the end of 2023. Counties often pay for county-level races, while states cover state and federal races. Election administration costs are covered by both county and state funds in 21 states; by either the state, municipality or county in 13 states; by county and municipality in 9 states; by municipality and the state in three states; and by state-only funds in two states.  

What federal funds are available to assist counties with election administration responsibilities?

Help America Vote Act (HAVA) grant programs are the main source of federal funding. States must submit a request with a proposed budget and description of how funds will be used. The grants available: the Election Security Grant, which provides funding to improve election administration, election security and election technology; Section 251 Requirement Payments, which provides funding for states to carry out HAVA requirements; and the Homeland Security Grant Program, which is available for improving election infrastructure -- both physical security and cybersecurity ($1.008 billion was allocated for fiscal year 2024). Since 2022, the Department of Justice has also allowed funds from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, which supports law enforcement and criminal justice initiatives, to be used to protect election workers from violence and threats.

Are private grants allowed to assist in election administration?

No. There may be cases in which a polling place has WiFi accessibility, but this does not mean that voting machines or systems are connected to the internet. Some counties allow ballot scanners to be connected to private networks; however, in most states it is against the law for voting machines to be connected to the internet. 

What measures do counties have in place to ensure the physical security and integrity of our elections?

Security measures vary based on state law and specific voting systems. Counties ensure election security by upholding voter ID requirements and following common best practices such as the use of security cameras, locks, audits and cybersecurity testing for voting machines. There is a strict chain-of-custody procedure to ensure ballot security, including limiting the number of individuals who can access ballots and secure storage of them to allow for audits or recounts. Cybersecurity measures are increasingly important in ensuring election integrity. These include encryption, multifactor authentication and monitoring systems for suspicious activity. Cybersecurity testing for voting machines is not required, but many counties have several cybersecurity measures in place and 48 states have a post-election audit to ensure the equipment worked correctly during voting. 

Is critical election equipment, such as voting machines and poll books, connected to the internet?

No. There may be cases in which a polling place has WiFi accessibility, but this does not mean that voting machines or systems are connected to the internet. Some counties allow ballot scanners to be connected to private networks; however, in most states it is against the law for voting machines to be connected to the internet. 

How do county election offices prevent voter fraud, such as an individual voting more than once or in the name of a deceased person?

County election offices have a multifaceted process in place to prevent voter fraud that varies by each state. Generally, counties ensure that current and accurate voter rolls are maintained, which includes collaborating with other states to compare and update registration and voting records. In most states, voting more than once is a felony. In instances where voter eligibility cannot be verified, they may be allowed to vote by a provisional ballot, which will only be processed and counted should the voter’s eligibility be verified. 

How can I learn more about election administration or participate in the process within my community?

There are many ways to learn about election administration, including online resources provided by NACo, the Election Assistance Commission and other organizations. Local elections offices will have county-specific information. The Election Center also offers a CERA Certification course on election administration training and information. Participating in workshops, webinars and community events hosted by local and national nonprofits may be a great way to both learn about and participate in the process. Becoming a poll watcher or worker is another way to be involved.

Why does it take some counties longer to report election results than others?

This varies by jurisdiction, but is largely due to several factors: (1) state laws prohibiting the processing/tabulation of ballots until after the polls close on election night; (2) lack of resources to help expedite the processing/tabulation of ballots, such as ballot tabulators; or (3) mail ballots casted closer to Election Day may arrive days after polls close on election night.   

Are the results on election night “official”?

Ultimately, the initial results posted on election night are unofficial and are typically reported as ballots are processed and tabulated. In some states, early and mail-in votes are already processed and tabulated by Election Day and reported as soon as polls close. However, state laws and resource constraints may require counties days to complete ballot processing and tabulating. In these cases, reported results may not be final for several days following Election Day. In total, each of these circumstances may lead to instances where results reported on election night do not reflect the final outcome of a race. Only election officials issuing election certification can provide official results.

Section 3

County Best Practices in Election Administration

The following county-level best practices have been curated from past NACo Achievement Award and EAC Clearinghouse Award winners.

Snohomish County, Wash.

Snohomish County, Wash.
Distinguished Voter Education and Communications Initiatives, 2023 U.S. EAC Clearinghouse Award

Unleashing the Storytelling Power of Comic Book Art to Engage and Inform Voters: The county created a comic book series for voter education, covering topics from voter registration to tabulating results. Using visuals and comic book-style art can simplify complex information. This style was further incorporated into all communications, allowing voters to recognize which materials were from Snohomish County Elections.

Maricopa County, Ariz.

Maricopa County, Ariz.
Best in Civic Education and Public Information, 2023 NACo Achievement Award Winner

The county formed an Elections Command Center that was made up of six elected officials and a team of elections professionals to serve as the central source for election-related information. The center held 16 press conferences, over 600 reporter interviews and responded to more than 500 media outlets.

Hamilton County, Ohio

Hamilton County, Ohio
Outstanding Innovations in Elections, 2022 EAC Clearinghouse Award

The county was recognized for its Behind the Ballot Tours, where tours of the Board of Elections office and warehouse were given to show election administration processes, such as conducting audits and testing voter equipment accuracy. Increased confidence in elections and election integrity were reported after the tour.

Anne Arundel County, Md.

Anne Arundel County, Md
Outstanding Innovation in Election Cybersecurity and Technology, 2022 EAC Clearinghouse Award

The county was recognized for its Mail-in Ballot Sorting, Scanning and Timestamping Project, where a process was developed to sort, scan, time stamp and receive mail-in ballots with the Tritek Sorting machine. The project increased efficiency and ballot security.

Weber County, Utah

Weber County, Utah
Outstanding Innovations in Elections Administration, 2018 EAC Clearinghouse Award

Their “Winning in Weber” program engages the community in elections. Programs include civic lessons at local schools, story hour with children and engaging students at Weber State University in elections.

Related News

Image of Vote-pins.jpg
Advocacy

2024 Clearinghouse Awards: U.S. Election Assistance Commission recognizes county excellence in election administration

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) announced the winners of its 2024 Clearinghouse awards, recognizing 32 counties for their election administration practices during the 2024 election cycle.

THE_County Countdown_working_image-4.png
Advocacy

County Countdown – April 7, 2025

Every other week, NACo's County Countdown reviews top federal policy advocacy items with an eye towards counties and the intergovernmental partnership. This week features a budget reconciliation update, HHS restructuring and more.

Image of Voting Booth3.png
Advocacy

Both the Administration and Congress act on 'noncitizen voting:' What this could mean for counties

The U.S. House will consider the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act this week to require individuals to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote.

Image of edit_GettyImages-832282452_cyber card resized.jpg
Advocacy

Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC) loses federal funding

On March 11, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) announced a $10 million cut in funding for the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC), which provides critical local assistance for cybersecurity threat detection and analysis resources and support.

Amy Cohen, executive director of the National Association of State Election Directors, outlines her peers’ concerns about the future of election administration. Photo by Charlie Ban
County News

Election administrators anticipate continued challenges

The 2024 election was success in the eyes of elections administrators, but several panelists see areas of concern brewing for future years.

Paulina Gutiérrez, executive director of the Milwaukee Election Commission, middle, works on securing the tabulation machines after learning that the doors of the machines at the central counting facility at the Baird Center were not properly sealed on Election Day, Nov. 5, 2024. Joe Timmerman / Wisconsin Watch
County News

Counties overcome challenges on Election Day

In the aftermath of Election Day, county election offices across the country are taking note of the challenges they faced, including bomb threats, technical issues and ballot printing problems that led to extending voting hours and recounting ballots or duplicating them to be properly scanned.

Related Analysis, Reports & Toolkits

Explore the Resource Library for our latest reports, analysis, toolkits and more.