Since 1990, Colorado has maintained a state-operated judicial performance evaluation (JPE) program for appellate and trial court judges. The program is generally designed to serve four purposes: (1) providing voters in retention elections with information about the judges seeking retention; (2) educating the public about qualities and levels of performance expected of judges; (3) recognizing and highlighting the individual and collective strengths of judges; and (4) providing information to sitting judges to help them improve their performance on the bench. While there is widespread agreement that JPE advances these goals, that agreement is based primarily on anecdotal information and informal observation. By contrast, there has been very little empirical analysis of whether (and to what extent) JPE is informing and educating the public, or usefully demonstrating professional strengths and weaknesses to judges. This survey is the first part of a multi-stage study concerning the effectiveness of JPE in Colorado. It was designed to elicit feedback from sitting Colorado judges regarding the extent to which JPE provides them with useful feedback that can be used for professional self-improvement, and to determine whether the existence of JPE has had any effect on judicial independence and accountability.