2020 Colorado Voter Knowledge Assessment
Voter Poll Report — 2020 Retention Election
About this report
The report was prepared by the research team at Market Decisions Research of Portland, Maine. This research was conducted on behalf of the Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation (OJPE) to gather information on the knowledge and perception of Colorado voters about the Judicial Performance Evaluation Process.
Key Findings
Awareness of Judicial Evaluations
A strong plurality of Colorado voters (45%) who participated in the recent election report being aware of judicial evaluations conducted by the Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance. Among those who have heard of the commissions, 24% say the goal of the commissions is to rate/grade a judge's performance.
The Colorado Blue Book (among voters aware of commission evaluations or recommendations)
Almost all (94%) recall receiving a copy of the Colorado Blue Book in the mail and 82% used the book to review judicial performance evaluations. 87% say the Blue Book was helpful in assisting them to be better informed when voting on justices and judges in the recent November election.
The Website (among voters aware of commission evaluations or recommendations)
20% visited the commissions' website to review the evaluations of the judges, up from 14% in 2018. 76% of visitors say the information was helpful in assisting them to be better informed when voting on justices and judges, compared to 67% in 2018.
Judicial Information Needed
70% of voters say they feel most voters do not have enough information to make informed decisions during retention elections, up from 49% in 2018. Voters would like better descriptions of performance, to know a judge's stance on a particular issue, and to have more biographical information.
Performance & Credibility of the Commissions
Among those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations: when asked to rate the importance of the commissions' goal to improve the performance of each judge, 76% say the commissions' goals are very important or important. A similar figure (77%) say the commissions' goal to provide voters with information about the performance of each judge on the ballot for retention election is also very important or important.
More than half (54%) say the commissions are doing an excellent or good job in getting voters information about the performance of Colorado's judges and justices that are on the ballot for retention. This is an increase from 47% in 2018.
Three-in-five (61%) say they relied on the information from the commissions (a score of 4 or 5) to decide whether to retain judges, comparable to 2018.
Among all Colorado voters: when asked to evaluate the credibility of the commissions' evaluations, more than one-third (34%) say they feel the commissions' evaluations are trustworthy (a score of 4 or 5) with 20% saying the commissions' evaluations are very trustworthy. Both percentages are lower than in 2018. The percent that are unsure increased from 21% in 2018 to 35% in 2020.
Methodology
Background
The Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation (OJPE) periodically polls Colorado voters to gather information on their knowledge and perception about the Judicial Performance Evaluation Process. In 2020, the OJPE contracted Market Decisions Research (MDR) of Portland, Maine to field a survey to Colorado voters and then provide OJPE with this detailed report.
Sample
The sample for this survey was composed of listed telephone numbers of registered Colorado voters. This sample included both landline and cellular telephone numbers.
Data Collection
Data collection took place from November 27 to December 10 and was conducted from the facilities of MDR's data collection partner, Portable Insights, in Warwick, Rhode Island.
Survey Instrument
The survey instrument for this survey was designed by the Colorado Office of Judicial Performance Evaluation.
Completed Surveys
Over the course of data collection, a total of 400 surveys were completed via telephone. Of these, 200 were completed via landline telephones and 200 were completed via cellular telephones.
Limitations
It is important to keep in mind that the survey results presented in this report are of the unweighted sample. Given the nature of the survey questions, and in some cases, the small sample sizes for certain sub-groups, one should use caution when drawing conclusions from the results. They may only represent the opinions of those who completed the survey and not the larger population of Coloradans.
Sampling Error
The overall sampling error for a sample of 400 is ±5% at the 95% confidence level. This means that given a percentage response, say 45%, there is a 95% chance that the actual percentage is between 40% and 50% if everyone in the population were surveyed. Sub samples of groups of respondents will have higher margins of error: ±6% for 300, ±7% for 200, ±8% for 150, and ±10% for 100.
Detailed Findings
Awareness of Judicial Evaluations (Q3)
Q3: Have you ever heard of judicial evaluations conducted by the Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance?
Near half (45%) of Coloradans who participated in the recent election report being aware of judicial evaluations conducted by the Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance, down from 53% in 2018. College graduates (61%) are significantly more likely to be aware of judicial evaluations conducted by the Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance.
| Response | 2018 (n=400) | 2020 (n=400) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 53% | 45% |
| No / Don't Know | 47% | 55% |
Perceived Goals or Missions of the Commissions (Q4)
Q4: Do you happen to know what are any of the goals of the Commissions on Judicial Performance?
Among those who have heard of the Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance's evaluations, nearly one-quarter (24%) say the goals of the commissions is to rate/grade a judge's performance. It is important to note that two-thirds (67%) say they are unsure of the goals of the commissions.
| Response | 2018 (n=212) | 2020 (n=179) |
|---|---|---|
| To rate/grade judges' performance | 21% | 24% |
| Provide voters with information about the performance of each judge who is running for retention | 15% | 11% |
| To improve the performance/skills of judges | 12% | 11% |
| Other | 0% | 6% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 61% | 67% |
Awareness After Aided Description (Q5)
Q5: The Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance evaluate the job performance of Colorado's judges standing for retention and reports their findings to Colorado's voters prior to each election. Are you aware of these Commissions?
Among voters who did not initially say they have heard of the Colorado Commissions on Judicial Performance, slightly over a quarter (25%) say they are aware of the commissions after being aided with a brief description of the commissions' function.
| Response | 2018 (n=188) | 2020 (n=221) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 26% | 25% |
| No / Don't Know | 74% | 75% |
Recall of Judicial Evaluations or Recommendations (Q6)
Q6: Do you recall reading or hearing about any of the judicial evaluations or recommendations that were written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance?
Asked of those aware of the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
Overall, 69% of voters with an awareness of the Commissions on Judicial Performance say they recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations that are written by the commissions. This is a slight increase compared to 64% in 2018.
| Response | 2018 (n=251) | 2020 (n=235) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 64% | 69% |
| No / Don't Know | 36% | 31% |
Recollection of Receiving the Blue Book (Q7)
Q7: Do you recall receiving a copy of the Blue Book in the mail?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
Among those aware of judicial evaluations or recommendations, almost all (94%) recall receiving a copy of the Colorado Blue Book in the mail, comparable to 2018.
| Response | 2018 (n=150) | 2020 (n=162) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 95% | 94% |
| No / Don't Know | 4% | 6% |
Use of the Blue Book to Review Judicial Performance Evaluations (Q8)
Q8: Did you use the voter guide, also known as the Colorado Blue Book, to review judicial performance evaluations?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
Over four-in-five aware of commission evaluations or recommendations (82%) say they used the voter guide, also known as the Colorado Blue Book, to review judicial performance evaluations. This is comparable to the 85% in 2018.
| Response | 2018 (n=126) | 2020 (n=153) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 85% | 82% |
| Somewhat (volunteered) | 4% | 8% |
| No / Don't Know | 0% | 10% |
Blue Book Helpfulness (Q9)
Q9: Was the voter guide that you received helpful in assisting you to be better informed when voting on justices and judges on your ballot in the recent November election?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance and read the Colorado Blue Book.
Nearly nine in ten (87%) of those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations and that read the Colorado Blue Book found the guide helpful, up slightly from 2018.
| Response | 2018 (n=126) | 2020 (n=138) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 83% | 87% |
| No | 14% | 12% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 4% | 1% |
Visited the Commissions' Website (Q10)
Q10: Did you visit the website to review the evaluations of the judges?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
One-in-five (20%) of those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations visited the website to review the evaluation of judges, up from 14% in 2018. 42% of those 18 to 49 visited the website.
| Response | 2018 (n=150) | 2020 (n=162) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 14% | 20% |
| No | 84% | 78% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 2% | 2% |
Website Helpfulness (Q11 and Q12)
Q11: Was the information on the judicial performance website helpful in assisting you to be better informed when voting on justices and judges on your ballot in the recent November election?
Asked of all visiting the website.
Among those who visited the judicial performance website, over three-quarters (76%) say the information was helpful in assisting them to be better informed when voting on justices and judges, an increase from 67% in 2018.
| Response | 2018 (n=21) | 2020 (n=33) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 67% | 76% |
| Somewhat | 5% | 18% |
| No | 10% | 6% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 19% | 0% |
Q12: What in particular did you find helpful?
Among those who visited the judicial performance website, a complete list of judges with recommendations (42%) was the most helpful information they found on the website.
| Response | 2018 (n=21) | 2020 (n=33) |
|---|---|---|
| Complete list of judges with recommendations | — (not asked) | 42% |
| Survey Reports | 19% | 23% |
| Infographics | 14% | 10% |
| Program Information | 33% | 10% |
| Other (Please Specify) | — (not asked) | 61% |
| Don't know / won't say | 33% | 3% |
Media Recall of the Commissions (Q13)
Q13: Do you recall hearing or seeing anything in the newspaper, on television, on the radio, or on social media (Facebook/Twitter) in the last 6 months about the Commissions on Judicial Performance?
The vast majority of voters (86%) say they do not recall hearing or seeing anything in the last 6 months about the Commissions on Judicial Performance. Newspaper (7%) and television (4%) were the most common place for those who recall hearing or seeing something about the commissions.
| Response | 2018 (n=400) | 2020 (n=400) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes, newspaper | 7% | 7% |
| Yes, television | 7% | 4% |
| Yes, Facebook | 3% | 2% |
| Yes, radio | 1% | 1% |
| Yes, Twitter | 1% | 1% |
| Other | — | 3% |
| No / Don't Know / Won't Say | 84% | 86% |
Importance of Goal — Improving Judge Performance (Q14)
Q14: Overall, how would you rate the importance of the Commissions' goal to improve the performance of each judge?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
When rating the importance of the commissions' goal to improve the performance of each judge, 76% of those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations say the commissions' goal is very important or important; 56% say this goal is very important. In 2018, 85% rated the commission's goal to improve performance as very important or important.
| Rating | 2018 (n=150) | 2020 (n=162) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 — Very Important | 55% | 56% |
| 4 | 30% | 20% |
| 3 | 7% | 10% |
| 2 | 1% | 4% |
| 1 — Not Important at All | 3% | 5% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 0% | 4% |
Importance of Goal — Informing Voters (Q15)
Q15: Overall, how would you rate the importance of the Commissions' goal to provide voters with information about the performance of each judge on the ballot for retention election?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
When rating the importance of the commissions' goal to provide voters with information about the performance of each judge on the ballot for retention election, 77% of those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations indicate the goal is very important or important, 65% indicate the goal is very important. This compares to 90% rating as very important or important in 2018.
| Rating | 2018 (n=150) | 2020 (n=162) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 — Very Important | 66% | 65% |
| 4 | 24% | 12% |
| 3 | 5% | 13% |
| 2 | 3% | 1% |
| 1 — Not Important at All | 2% | 6% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 3% | 4% |
How Well the Commissions Are Getting Information to Voters (Q16)
Q16: Overall, how well are the Commissions doing in getting voters information regarding the performance of Colorado's judges and justices on the ballot for retention?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
When rating how well the commissions are doing in getting information to voters about the performance of Colorado's judges and justices on the ballot for retention, more than half (54%) of those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations say the commissions are doing an excellent or good job (a score of 4 or 5); 23% say the commissions are doing an excellent job getting information to voters. This is an increase from 47% in 2018 that indicated the commissions are doing an excellent or good job getting voters information.
| Rating | 2018 (n=150) | 2020 (n=162) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 — Excellent | 20% | 23% |
| 4 | 27% | 31% |
| 3 | 27% | 28% |
| 2 | 10% | 8% |
| 1 — Very Poor | 10% | 7% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 6% | 3% |
Level of Reliance on Commissions' Information (Q17)
Q17: How much did you rely on this information for making your decisions whether or not to retain judges?
Asked of all that recall reading or hearing about judicial evaluations or recommendations written by the Commissions on Judicial Performance.
Three-in-five (61%) of those aware of commission evaluations or recommendations say they relied on the information from the commissions (a score of 4 or 5) to decide whether to retain judges, 42% say they relied very much on the information provided by the commissions. This is comparable to 63% in 2018.
| Rating | 2018 (n=150) | 2020 (n=162) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 — Relied very much | 47% | 42% |
| 4 | 16% | 19% |
| 3 | 16% | 18% |
| 2 | 4% | 7% |
| 1 — Did not rely on at all | 13% | 13% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 4% | 1% |
Trustworthiness / Credibility of the Commissions' Evaluations (Q18)
Q18: How trustworthy or credible do you find the Commissions' evaluations?
When evaluating the credibility of the commissions' evaluations, more than one-third (35%) of Colorado voters say the commissions' evaluations are trustworthy (a score of 4 or 5) with 20% saying the commissions' evaluations are very trustworthy. This is down from 46% finding the information very trustworthy or trustworthy in 2018. Voters with a graduate degree (37%) were significantly more likely to say the commissions' evaluations are very trustworthy. It is important to note that more than a third (35%) said they don't know whether the commissions' evaluations are trustworthy.
| Rating | 2018 (n=400) | 2020 (n=400) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 — Very Trustworthy | 26% | 20% |
| 4 | 20% | 15% |
| 3 | 22% | 16% |
| 2 | 5% | 7% |
| 1 — Not Trustworthy at All | 7% | 9% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 20% | 35% |
Do Most Voters Have Enough Information? (Q19)
Q19: Generally, do you feel most voters have enough information to make informed decisions about which judges should be retained and which judges should not?
70% of voters say most voters do not have enough information to make informed decisions about which judges should be retained and which judges should not, significantly higher than in 2018 (49%).
| Response | 2018 (n=400) | 2020 (n=400) |
|---|---|---|
| Yes, have enough information | 39% | 24% |
| No, do not have enough information | 49% | 70% |
| Don't know / won't say | 12% | 6% |
Types of Information Voters Want More Of (Q20)
Q20: What types of judicial retention information would you like to have more of?
Nearly a third (32%) of voters say they would like to have better descriptions of performance. This was followed by "a judge's stance on a particular issue" (27%) and more biographical information (24%).
| Response | 2018 (n=197) | 2020 (n=281) |
|---|---|---|
| Better descriptions of performance | 30% | 32% |
| Judges stance on a particular issue | 28% | 27% |
| More biographical information | 12% | 24% |
| Political party affiliation | 6% | 14% |
| Sentencing | 18% | 12% |
| Better survey data | 9% | 9% |
| Liberal / Conservative | 6% | 7% |
| What cases they have had and their rulings / the outcomes of their cases | 7% | 3% |
| Use more media source to provide information | — | 3% |
| Performance grade for each judge | 2% | 2% |
| Pro Defense / Prosecution | — | 1% |
| Use simple terms not legal jargon so people can understand | 2% | 0% |
| All of above | — | 2% |
| Other | 13% | 3% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 23% | 20% |
Overall Self-Reported Knowledge About Judge Retention (Q21)
Q21: How informed do you feel you are about making knowledgeable decisions about which judges should be retained?
Over one quarter (27%) of Colorado voters said they feel informed (a score of 4 or 5) about making knowledgeable decisions about which judges should be retained, with 13% saying very informed. Nearly half (48%) did not feel informed.
| Rating | 2018 (n=400) | 2020 (n=400) |
|---|---|---|
| 5 — Very informed | 18% | 13% |
| 4 | 22% | 14% |
| 3 | 26% | 23% |
| 2 | 13% | 18% |
| 1 — Not Informed at All | 18% | 30% |
| Don't Know / Won't Say | 3% | 2% |
Demographics
Age Categories
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| 18 to 34 years | 11% | 7% |
| 35 to 49 years | 21% | 15% |
| 50 to 64 years | 35% | 30% |
| 65 years or older | 34% | 47% |
| Won't Say | 0% | 1% |
Household Income
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Less than $20,000 | 7% | 7% |
| $20,000 to $39,999 | 13% | 14% |
| $40,000 to $59,999 | 17% | 15% |
| $60,000 to $79,999 | 14% | 13% |
| $80,000 and over | 32% | 32% |
| Won't Say | 18% | 19% |
Ethnicity
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Hispanic | 6% | 6% |
| Anglo / Caucasian | 76% | 80% |
| Black / African-American | 3% | 1% |
| Native American Indian | 2% | 1% |
| Other Descent | 7% | 6% |
| Won't Say | 6% | 6% |
Education Level
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Some high school | 1% | 1% |
| High school graduate | 12% | 11% |
| Some college / Associate degree / Vocational certificate | 29% | 33% |
| College graduate (4 years) | 29% | 27% |
| Graduate work or degree | 28% | 26% |
| Won't Say | 2% | 3% |
Gender
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Male | 50% | 51% |
| Female | 50% | 50% |
Length of Residency
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Less than 8 years | 5% | 7% |
| 8 to 20 years | 16% | 15% |
| More than 20 years | 79% | 78% |
| Won't Say | 1% | 1% |
Political Affiliation
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Democrat | 31% | 34% |
| Republican | 40% | 31% |
| Unaffiliated / Other | 29% | 36% |
Region
| Category | 2018 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| Eastern Plains | 9% | 7% |
| Metro | 40% | 39% |
| North Front Range | 18% | 19% |
| South Front Range | 21% | 22% |
| Western Slope | 12% | 14% |
Appendix — Survey Instrument
The full 2020 survey instrument is reproduced in the source PDF (slides 33–38). It matches the 2018 instrument in most questions and adds a response option to Q12 ("Complete list of judges with recommendations") that was not present in 2018. See the original PDF for the verbatim instrument.