Quick Count: Accurate, Trusted,
Ready for 2015.
Using the Quick Count methodology, citizen observers collected systematic information on the 2011 presidential election. This data was used to verify the official results and to assess the quality of the process.
In advance of the 2011 presidential elections, many Nigerians expressed concern that the official results announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) would not reflect the votes cast at polling units. A Quick Count by citizen observers provided, for the first time, independent verification of the accuracy of the official presidential results.
- PVT Estimates
- Margin of Error
- INEC Results
For example, the PVT estimated range for CPC was between 28.8% and 33.6% (31.2%; +/- 2.4%); while the PVT estimated range for PDP was between 56.6% and 61.6% (59.11%; +/-2.5%).
Note: 95% confidence level
- INEC tallied results for the presidential election from all ~120,000 polling units.
- After observing the entire process, Quick Count observers recorded officially posted results at a scientific sample of ~1,500 polling units.
- The Quick Count produced estimates with a degree of precision. The true result should fall within the PVT estimated range.
- The official results fell within the Quick Count estimated ranges indicating INEC's results reflected the votes cast at polling units.
“Given the absence of widespread deficiencies in the process and the independent verification of the official results by our non-partisan citizen observers, political contestants, their supporters as well as the general public should have confidence in the presidential results as declared by INEC as an accurate reflection of how Nigerians voted on April 16th.”Project 2011 Swift Count 18-4-2011
Quality of the 2011 Presidential Election
The Quick Count methodology offers more than verification of election results; it also provides the most accurate systematic nationwide information on the conduct of Election Day processes. PVT quantifies the degree to which procedures were followed or problems occurred. This allows for a precise description of the conduct of an election, the ability to show variation across zones and states, and serve as a baseline for assessing improvement over time.
“Based on Quick Count data, citizen observers released detailed information about the conduct of the 2011 presidential election and confidently conclude that the election was “not without problems – in particular, isolated incidents of intimidation, violence, and illegal voting. But these incidents did not undermine the overall credibility of the process.”Project 2011 Swift Count 17-4-2011