Engaging New Voters: The Impact of Nonprofit Voter Outreach on Client and Community Turnout

Similar documents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.

ENGAGING NEW VOTERS. The Impact of Nonprofit Voter Outreach on Client and Community Turnout.

Voter Turnout by Income 2012

ELECTION PROTECTION 2012: WHAT VOTERS FACE & HOW WE CAN HELP

CIRCLE The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement


ST. ANTHONY PARISH TAUNTON, MA EVALUATION OF THE 2006 ELECTIONS

THE 2004 YOUTH VOTE MEDIA COVERAGE. Select Newspaper Reports and Commentary

PORTUGUESE SOCIAL CLUB PAWTUCKET, RHODE ISLAND EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS February 25, 2010

THE PORTUGUESE-AMERICAN FORUM SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CA EVALUATION OF THE 2006 ELECTIONS

IMMACULATE CONCEPTION PARISH NEW BEDFORD, MA EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

ST. FRANCIS XAVIER PARISH EAST PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

PORTUGUESE SOCIAL CLUB PAWTUCKET, RHODE ISLAND EVALUATION OF THE 2006 ELECTIONS July 23, 2007

ST. ANTHONY PARISH TAUNTON, MA EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

ST. ANTHONY PARISH PAWTUCKET, RHODE ISLAND EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

THE PORTUGUESE ORGANIZATION FOR SOCIAL SERVICES AND OPPORTUNITIES SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

Get Out the Vote! How Community Members and Organizations Can Organize GOTV Drives.

AMIGOS DE TERCEIRA STATE OF RHODE ISLAND EVALUATION OF THE 2006 ELECTIONS

Building Coalitions for Voter Engagement. LWV-TX Convention March 12, 2016 #lwvtx2016.

The Latino Electorate in 2010: More Voters, More Non-Voters

The Rising American Electorate

ESPIRITO SANTO PARISH FALL RIVER, MA. EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

The Impact of Building Grassroots #scg2016 #BeTheChange

2014 VOTERIZATION Plan

A New America A New Majority A New Challenge

Who Votes for America s Mayors?

UNIAO PORTUGUESA DO ESTADO DE CALIFORNIA STANISLAUS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA EVALUATION OF THE 2008 ELECTIONS

SOCIEDADE ESPIRITO SANTO CORP. SANTA CLARA, CA EVALUATION OF THE 2006 ELECTIONS

2016 Appointed Boards and Commissions Diversity Survey Report

Civic Engagement for Community Change

Harnessing the Power of Your Food Bank to Get Out The Vote! Shanti Prasad and Keisha Nzewi Alameda County Community Food Bank

Data Models. 1. Data REGISTRATION STATUS VOTING HISTORY

Civic Engagement for Community Change

Elements of a Successful GOTV Program

A SPECIAL REPORT ON STUDENT VOTING HABITS FROM 2012 AND 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

NONPROFITS, VOTING ELECTIONS

Voter s Edge 2016 assessment and learnings. May 18, 2017

Preparing Every Young Voter. The Future of California Elections Los Angeles, California March 8, 2018 By Kei Kawashima-Ginsberg

POLL MUST BE SOURCED: NPR/Marist Poll

Civic Engagement Action Plan

DNC SCORES IN VOTEBUILDER. VA 5th District Democratic Committee

A Glance at THE LATINO VOTE IN Clarissa Martinez De Castro

Inside the 2012 Latino Electorate

Building the Base: Voter Registration of Low Income Renters and Their Allies

Analyzing Absentee Ballots Cast In San Diego Mayoral Special Election

Iowa Voting Series, Paper 6: An Examination of Iowa Absentee Voting Since 2000

The Youth Vote in 2008 By Emily Hoban Kirby and Kei Kawashima-Ginsberg 1 Updated August 17, 2009

Democratic Engagement Plan

Advocacy 101 Megaphone for Your Mission

The Effect of North Carolina s New Electoral Reforms on Young People of Color

2008 Voter Turnout Brief

Case Study: Get out the Vote

Texas Voting & Elections (Chapter 04) Dr. Michael Sullivan. Texas State Government GOVT 2306 Houston Community College

2012 National PTA. Election Guide

Base Building and Voter Engagement

You Don t Need a Home to Vote! Election Year Activities for HCH Projects. April 26, We will begin promptly at 2:00pm, EDT

What to Expect from California s New Motor Voter Law

States of Change. Demographic Change, Representation Gaps, and Challenges to Democracy,

NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION DAY. September 26, 2017

An Assessment of Ranked-Choice Voting in the San Francisco 2005 Election. Final Report. July 2006

MORE SPANISH- SURNAMED VOTERS PARTICIPATED IN THE 2016 ELECTION THAN EVER IN THE 3RD LARGEST COUNTY IN THE NATION

December 12, City of Oxnard Consideration of By-District Elections

Voting Matters: How to Increase Voter Engagement Among Low-Income Housing Residents

POLITICAL LEADERSHIP AND THE LATINO VOTE By NALEO Educational Fund

@MsPrairieRose

Nonvoters in America 2012

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Hunger. Arts. Jobs. Immigration. Advocacy. Child care Education. Citizenship. Youth. Families Environment. A Voter Participation Starter Kit

Election-Year Advocacy & Civic Engagement

D A T A D I C T I O N A R Y D2 D A T A D I C T I O N A R Y

The California Civic Engagement Project Issue Brief

REPORT ON POLITICAL ATTITUDES & ENGAGEMENT

PART I I : CASE STUDIES

2016 California State PTA Convention 1 E10 PTA & Elections

Leading Community Change

NORTHEAST OHIO NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH. Serving Democracy: Nonprofits Promote Voter Engagement in by George Pillsbury, MPA

1: HOW DID YOUTH VOTER TURNOUT DIFFER FROM THE REST OF THE 2012 ELECTORATE?

Campaign and Research Strategies

Colorado 2014: Comparisons of Predicted and Actual Turnout

Staying Nonpartisan: 5 Permissible Activities Checklist for 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Organizations

Testing New Technologies in Mobilizing Voters of Color

LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF TEXAS EDUCATION FUND. What to Say. Effective Get-Out-the-Vote Conversations

An analysis and presentation of the APIAVote & Asian Americans Advancing Justice AAJC 2014 Voter Survey

Nonprofit Advocacy- Advancing Your Mission

AMERICA Goes to the Polls 2010 A Report on Voter Turnout in the 2010 Election Prepared by

Californians. population issues. february in collaboration with The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation

COMMUNICATIONS H TOOLKIT H NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION DAY. A Partner Communications Toolkit for Traditional and Social Media

Summary Overview of Upcoming Joint Report Lining Up: Ensuring Equal Access to the Right to Vote

National Survey Examines Marriage, Family, Immigration, Health care and Technology in the Age of Trump

How the Rising Share of Latino Voters Will Impact the 2016 Elections. By Anna Chu and Charles Posner December

Election 2016: Do s and Don ts for your 501(c)(3) Nona Randois Southern California Director February 4, 2016

Case 1:12-cv RMC-DST-RLW Document Filed 05/21/12 Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT 10

Get Out The VOTE! Overview Materials Duration Teacher Preparation Procedure Voter Turnout

We have analyzed the likely impact on voter turnout should Hawaii adopt Election Day Registration

California Civic Engagement Project

25% Percent of General Voters 20% 15% 10%

EMBARGOED UNTIL SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 15 AT 9:00 A.M.

1 Year into the Trump Administration: Tools for the Resistance. 11:45-1:00 & 2:40-4:00, Room 320 Nathan Phillips, Nathaniel Stinnett

Supporting Information for Differential Registration Bias in Voter File Data: A Sensitivity Analysis Approach

December 12, City of Oxnard Consideration of By-District Elections

Transcription:

Engaging New : The Impact of Voter Outreach on Client and Community Turnout www.nonprofitvote.org Executive Summary In the lead up to the 2014 general election, VOTE and its partners conducted a study on the effects of voter outreach carried out by nonprofit service providers and community-based organizations on their clients and constituents likelihood to vote. 1 The study found that those who, with the assistance of nonprofit staff or volunteers, either registered to vote or signed a pledge to vote in the 2014 general election turned out to vote at higher rates than other registered voters in the states and counties where the study was conducted, across all demographic groupings. Reaching Missed by Conventional Campaigns In addition, the study showed that nonprofits reached precisely the people most in need of assistance and encouragement to vote: populations with a history of lower turnout who are frequently neglected by traditional political campaigns and parties. engaged by nonprofits were markedly younger, more diverse, and lower-income than other registered voters in the study states. They were almost twice as likely to be under the age of 30, more than three times as likely to be Latino or black, and nearly four times as likely to have a household income under $25,000. More than half the voters engaged were identified, prior to the election, as low propensity voters, i.e. voters not expected to vote in the 2014 midterm. 2 1 The study tracked 28,881 individuals who registered to vote or signed a pledge to vote at 129 nonprofits in nine states. Using demographic and voting history data, we were able to determine whom the nonprofits reached and at what rate those contacted turned out to vote in the 2014 election, as compared to all registered voters in the states and counties where the study took place. 2 Low propensity here is defined as having a Catalist propensity score under 50, the cutoff that many campaigns used in targeting GOTV activities for the midterm election.

5.3 times more likely to be Latino 2.1 times more likely to be black NONPROFIT VOTERS WERE 3.6 times more likely to have an income under $25K 2.1 times more likely to be under 30 THAN ALL OTHER VOTERS. Increasing Voter Turnout across Demographic Groups Regardless of race or ethnicity, personal contact by nonprofit staff or volunteers resulted in increased turnout rates for those who registered or pledged to vote. Voter turnout of these nonprofit voters compared to the comparable demographic group among all registered voters in the study states was 15% higher for Latino voters, 31% higher for black voters, and 46% higher for Asian American voters. TURNOUT RATE BY RACE/ETHNICITY Asian 48% 33% 46% Black 49% 38% 31% White 59% 52% 14% Latino 35% 31% 15% 2

voters also showed increased turnout compared to other registered voters in the study states across age categories, with the greatest increase seen by voters under 30. voters under 30 saw a 28% increase in turnout, despite being more racially and ethnically diverse and lower-income than other voters. TURNOUT RATE BY AGE 18-29 28% 22% 28% 30-59 54% 46% 17% 60 74% 68% 9% Intervention by a nonprofit had its biggest impact on turnout of the least-likely voters. voters with the lowest for propensity scores (scores under 25) were more than twice as likely to cast ballots compared to their counterparts among all registered voters in the study states. TURNOUT RATE BY PROPENSITY TO VOTE <25 18% 8% 132% 26 50 35% 27% 33% 51 80 65% 57% 14% 81 100 90% 86 % 4% 3

Using Pledge Cards to Increase Turnout Asking voters who were already registered to vote to sign a pledge to vote also proved to be extremely effective in increasing turnout. This was especially true for pledge signers with very low propensity scores. Pledge signers with a propensity score under 25 saw a 144% increase in voter turnout compared to their counterparts among other registered voters in the study states. Signing a pledge is known to impact voting rates even without additional follow up. However many of the nonprofits were able to use the contact information given to mail a reminder postcard or call contacts closer to the election. TURNOUT RATE BY PROPENSITY TO VOTE FOR PLEDGES Who vs. Other <25 19% 8% 144% 26 50 41% 27% 53% 51 80 67% 57% 18% 81 100 90% 86 % 5% These turnout results mirror those of a study VOTE conducted in 2012, 3 which showed that nonprofit outreach resulted in above average turnout rates across all demographics, most strikingly among young and low propensity voters not expected to turn out. Together the two studies show that voter outreach by a trusted nonprofit messenger can be extremely effective in increasing turnout among those nonprofits clients, consumers and constituents. Outreach is especially effective in turning out those who are least likely to vote. 3 VOTE. Can s Increase Voting among Their Clients, Constituents and Community Members. 2013. 4

Best Practices for Voter Outreach To assess best practices, we asked the nonprofits that participated in the study to fill out an in-depth online survey. We also conducted interviews with several of the higher and lower performing nonprofits. High performers had several things in common, including more support from executive leadership; a dedicated staff lead; staff training on how to collect voter registration and pledge cards; an early start, usually in June or July, with activities intensifying as the election approached; use of regularly scheduled tabling for voter registration at their site and at events; strong partnerships with their state lead, local board of election and others; and previous experience with voter engagement or issue advocacy work. To learn more visit www.nonprofitvote.org/engaging-new-votes to download the full report. The report was prepared by Julian Johannesen, Director of Research and Training, George Pillsbury, Senior consultant and Lindsey Hodel, National Field Director. Technical assistance was provided by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tuft s University s Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service. www.nonprofitvote.org 2464 Massachusetts Avenue Suite 210, Cambridge MA 02140 617-357-8683 Founded in 2005, VOTE partners with America s nonprofits to help the people they serve participate and vote. We are the leading source of nonpartisan resources to help nonprofits integrate voter engagement into their ongoing activities and services. 5