ElectSure Learning | Analysis of Post-Training Surveys Across 10 Jurisdictions, 2021–26
The most reliable measure of any training program is not what administrators say about it. It is what learners say after they have used it — and then again after they have worked a full Election Day.
Since 2021, ElectSure has systematically collected post-training survey feedback from poll workers across ten jurisdictions in six states: Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, New Jersey, West Virginia, and New Mexico. Nearly 6,000 responses later, we have something rare in election administration: a longitudinal, multi-jurisdiction dataset on what poll workers actually experience, what they value, what they want improved, and how well the training prepares them for the job.
What that data shows — and what the voices behind it confirm — is the foundation of this piece.
The Numbers at a Glance
Across the full dataset, the aggregate figures are striking.
Satisfaction: Across all jurisdictions using ElectSure-developed content, an average of 86% of poll workers rated the training “Very Satisfied” or “Somewhat Satisfied.” In many jurisdictions, the Very Satisfied rate alone exceeds 70–83%.
Election Day preparedness: This is the number that matters most. Across every ElectSure full-service jurisdiction in the dataset, between 94% and 100% of poll workers who completed the training reported feeling prepared for Election Day. In several November 2024 cohorts, the rate was 99–100%.
Platform recommendation: When asked how likely they were to recommend the online training platform to a fellow poll worker, respondents averaged 9.0–9.4 out of 10 across jurisdictions. This is not a passive score — it reflects active confidence that the training is worth a colleague’s time.
The retention signal: Perhaps the most consequential number in the dataset is this: when asked how likely they were to recommend volunteering as a poll worker to a friend or colleague — as a direct result of their training experience — respondents averaged 8.8–9.3 out of 10. A training experience so positive that it increases the likelihood of future participation is not just a satisfaction metric. It is a workforce retention and recruitment tool at a time when poll worker shortages represent one of the most pressing operational challenges in election administration.
What Poll Workers Say About the System
Compared to other online training they’ve used…
Poll workers are not a naive audience for online learning. Many use training platforms regularly at work, in professional certifications, or in military service. When they describe how the ElectSure experience compares, the assessments are specific and informed.
Compared to online training they’ve used…
The online vs. in-person comparison is nuanced and honest. Poll workers recognize what each format offers. What’s notable is how consistently experienced workers conclude that online is the superior experience for refresher training — while newer workers often value both.
What they value most…
When asked what they liked most about the system, poll workers across every jurisdictionand every survey cycle returned to the same themes: flexibility, the ability to review, self-
pacing, and the relief of not having to travel or take time off work.
Year-over-year improvement — workers notice…
One of the most powerful signals in the dataset is how frequently workers explicitly call out improvement from one election cycle to the next. This is not a static program — and poll workers who return each cycle are the first to notice.
The Feedback That Makes the System Better
Here is what separates a good training program from a continuously improving one:
treating critical feedback as product intelligence, not a complaint log.
The ElectSure survey instrument is designed to capture more than satisfaction. It captures
what workers found confusing, what they wanted more of, what they discovered on Election Day that the training hadn’t prepared them for, and what they wished they’d known going in. Across nearly 6,000 responses, the specificity of that feedback is itself a
signal of high engagement — disengaged learners don’t write paragraphs.
Some of the most actionable feedback in the dataset…
These are not complaints — they are an engaged workforce trying to make the tool work
better for themselves and for their colleagues. That kind of feedback loop, collected consistently after every election cycle, is how training programs evolve from adequate to excellent.
What This Data Tells Election Officials
Completion is preparation. The 94–100% Election Day readiness rates across jurisdictions
are not accidental. They reflect content designed specifically for the job, delivered in a format that works for adult learners who are balancing this training with full lives and careers. A training program that poll workers describe as “top drawer” and “the best online
training I have ever taken” produces workers who show up ready.
The training experience shapes the workforce. A 9.0+ out-of-10 recommendation score
for volunteering as a poll worker — driven by the training experience — is one of the most underappreciated findings in this dataset. Every jurisdiction in this analysis faces the challenge of attracting and retaining poll workers. A training program that leaves workers more enthusiastic about the role than when they started is a recruitment asset, not just a compliance mechanism.
Feedback at scale reveals what individual conversations miss. No post-election debrief
captures what a structured, consistent survey instrument collects from hundreds of
workers across dozens of polling locations. The dataset flags content gaps, technical
friction, procedural confusion, and unmet needs — all actionable, all specific to the jurisdiction that collected them.
Programs that improve outperform programs that don’t. The multi-year data makes this plain. Workers who return across multiple election cycles notice the changes, name them specifically, and respond with higher satisfaction and engagement. That improvement is not automatic — it requires a vendor relationship committed to updating content, acting on feedback, and treating the training library as a living asset rather than a delivered product.
Why Content Built for the Learner Makes All the Difference
The numbers in this dataset are ultimately a story about what happens when training is
designed around the people who have to take it.
Poll workers are a specific kind of adult learner. Many are experienced professionals
returning for a refresher before each election cycle. Others are first-timers trying to absorb a complex, high-stakes process in a short window of time. Almost all are volunteers — they have given their time willingly, and what they get in return for that time shapes whether they come back. Generic training content, even when delivered on a capable platform, doesn’t account for that profile. It treats poll workers the way enterprise onboarding treats
new hires: with material built for compliance, not comprehension.
What the satisfaction and preparedness scores in this dataset reflect is what happens when the opposite approach is taken. Courses designed around how election officials actually learn — built on adult learning principles, structured around real job tasks, using scenario-based quizzes tied directly to what workers will encounter on Election Day — produce workers who describe their training as “the best online training I have ever taken” and “top drawer.” More importantly, they produce workers who feel prepared when it matters.
The investment in purpose-built content pays forward in ways that extend well beyond a
single election cycle. Workers who feel genuinely prepared are more confident on Election
Day and less likely to make procedural errors. Workers who feel the training respected their time and intelligence are more likely to return — and more likely to bring
others with them. The 9.0+ recommendation scores for volunteering as a poll worker that appear through out this dataset are a direct expression of that return on investment.
Content built for the user isn’t a premium feature. It is what makes the difference between a training pro gram that poll workers merely complete and one they describe, unprompted, as better than anything else they’ve used.
A Note on Honest Feedback
Not every response in this dataset was positive. Some workers prefer in-person training and said so clearly. Some found specific sections too long, quizzes too simple, or wanted more depth on edge cases like provisional ballots, poll watcher rules, or closing procedures. A few had login or technical issues that frustrated them. Those responses are part of the record.
What the aggregate data shows is that constructive feedback from the minority doesn’t diminish the experience of the majority — it improves it. The features workers most value today are, in meaningful part, a direct response to what earlier cohorts asked for. The
workers who noted improvement from cycle to cycle are the evidence of that.
Survey Data at a Glance
Metric
- Very/Somewhat Satisfied
- Felt Prepared for Election Day
- Recommend Platform (avg , out of 10)
- Recommend Volunteering (avg , out of 10)
- Total responses analyzed
- Jurisdictions
- Survey period
Range Across Full-Service Jurisdictions
- 83–99%
- 94–100%
- 8.8–9.4
- 8.8–9.3
- ~5,900
- 10 across P A, V A, NC, NJ, WV, NM
- May 2021 – May 2026
ElectSure Learning collects post-training survey data after every election cycle to measure satisfaction, document learner experience, and drive continuous improvement. If your jurisdiction is interested in building a training program that gets better with every election, we’d welcome a conversation.