Steps for Successful Commissioned Corps Awards Nominations

2015 Alaska Area Commissioned Corps Board 1

Goals & Objectives

 GOAL: To improve the success & timeliness of officer recognition  OBJECTIVES  Review type of awards & associated criteria  Focus on preparing successful nominations  Gain better understanding of overall process to form realistic expectations 2

Awards…

 Designed to provide formal recognition for outstanding accomplishments and performance to the mission of the PHS or other programs  Officers DO NOT compete against each other  There are no minimum or maximum number of nominations  Open to all officers on active duty (Regular Corps and All Categories and Grades) 3

Why Are Awards Important?

 Demonstrate advancement of the mission of PHS  Officer career development & progression  Promotion/Category benchmarks  Officer morale  Recruitment and retention 4

CC Awards Program (COAP)

CC Issuance updated Aug 2007

 Replaced previous, dated 2000  Includes clarification & timelines  Incorporates FMRB, Deployment Service Awards, Recruiter badge & ribbon  Limitations: unit award & individual award cannot overlap unless notable difference effort from group.

5

Purpose of COAP

 Encourage maximum performance  Formal recognition of outstanding accomplishments or achievements  Improve esprit de corps among officers 6

COAP

 Limited to scope of officer’s employment with the Corps  Non-competitive  No award progression or order  Award assessed upon comparison of criteria 7

Award Types

Reference CCPM P67

Individual Honor Awards*

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Distinguished Service Medal (DSM) Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) Outstanding Service Medal (OSM) Commendation Medal (CM) Achievement Medal (AM) PHS Citation (CIT)

*for which officers are nominated in decreasing order of level of impact

Unit Honor Awards

1.

2.

Outstanding Unit Citation (OUC) Unit Commendation (UC) • • Nomination should include non-CO & inter-agency team members Cover sheet, Part 1, Comment section: mention non-COs to be recognized through civilian awards

Service Awards

    Crisis Response Foreign Duty Global Response Hazardous Duty     Isolated Hardship Recruitment Service Response Service Special Assignment Require a statement from supervisor (or appropriate person) regarding completion of required criteria 11

Eligibility

 Officer must be in compliance with professional licensure or certification  Officer in “good standing”  Most recent COER must be on file  COERs on file for period covered  Average rating of C or higher for most recent & those during period covered  No suspensions or adverse actions 12

Nomination

 “Each recommendation must be formally initiated within 13 months” after the end of time period covered   Nominator may be fellow officer, co-worker, superior…but not self.

Follow the chain of command- supervisors should review award before it is submitted to awards board.

13

Writing the Nomination

     Write the nomination 1 st , then determine what level award is warranted Nominee should contribute to (or write) the narrative since they are most knowledgeable about accomplishments and impacts You are in charge of your own career Plan ahead. Recommendation: awards should be in officer’s file by October to meet following year’s promotion board 14

Writing the Nomination

 Not to exceed 2 pages  1 inch margins  Font size at least 12  Courier, Arial or Times New Roman  Use rank abbreviated as LTJG, LT, LCDR or CAPT  Do not use Dr., Ms., Mr., etc  Spell out numbers (1-10) 15

Writing the Nomination

 Avoid technical language. Should be easily understood & followed by those outside your profession, agency  Avoid fluff. Let the facts speak for themselves.

 Define abbreviations on 1 st use  Avoid future tense (“will be”) in impact  Avoid passive language (“has been”) 16

Writing the Nomination

 “Cited for”  Begin with 3-4 lines stating why the officer is being nominated  This citation should match verbatim the “cited for” box on the cover sheet (18- character max) & narrative conclusion  Do not, however, repeat the dates in the cited for on the cover sheet or conclusion  Include appropriate “key words” for level of award (ie, OSM should focus on leadership) 17

Writing the Nomination

 “Background”  Short paragraph describing the conditions that existed prior to the accomplishment  What is the officer’s regular duties?  Why was it important to make a change?

 Don’t make the situation improved appear dismal before intervention 18

Writing the Nomination

 As a rough guideline, when selecting award include at least:  1 significant accomplishment for CIT  2 significant accomplishments for AM  More worthy accomplishments for CM & above 19

Writing the Nomination

 “Accomplishments”         What exactly did the officer do? What was the officer’s role?

When? Dates should not be outside the time period covered What obstacles were overcome? How?

Describe how officer’s achievements were above & beyond expectations Be specific Be quantitative (include data, measurements, numbers) Use bullets to improve clarity 20

Writing the Nomination

 “Impact”  So what?  Why is the public health better as a result of the officer’s accomplishments?

 What were the results of the accomplishments?

 Again, be as quantitative as possible  Most common reason for awards being returned is lack of demonstrable impact 21

Writing the Nomination

 “Conclusion”  Brief summary emphasizing importance of work  Should replicate the “Cited for” fields in the narrative introduction & cover sheet verbatim with the exception of dates.

 Be brief…forget the fluff.

22

Cover Sheet (PHS 6342)

Templates are an excellent tool for correct format http://www.anthc.org/cs/coawards/index.cfm

Part 1

 Rank: this is a letter (Officer) not a number  PHS Professional Category   There are 11 categories Use one of the following: medical, dental, nurse, engineer, scientist, environmental health, veterinary, pharmacy, dietetics, therapy, health services 23

Cover Sheet (PHS 6342)

 Current Organization for AK officers will be: USPHS/IHS/AANHS…  Followed by the officer’s organization…  Such as ANTHC or SCF (not ANMC)  USPHS/IHS/AANHS/SCF…  Followed by officer’s duty station location  USPHS/IHS/AANHS/SCF/Anchorage, AK 24

Cover Sheet (PHS 6342)

   Organization Position Title  Billet title, for example Period Covered  Month & Year (unless activity was very short, such as 1 week)  Do not use “present” Cited for   Not to exceed 180 characters (this includes spaces) Should match narrative introduction & conclusion verbatim 25

Cover Sheet (PHS 6342)

 Nominator & Endorsements  Nominator signature not needed until nomination approved by AK Awards Board  Follow usual administrative line of approval 26

Cover Sheet (PHS 6342)

 Comment Section  Add explanation for any overlapping awards, recognition for civilians & interagency group participants (for unit awards) 27

Submitting Award Nomination

 Submit award package which includes  Coversheet (signature & date should be left blank when submitting)  Completed checklist indicating that each step was given proper attention  Narrative  May be emailed to: [email protected]

28

Improving Timeliness

 Award nominations and cover sheets should be submitted electronically to: [email protected]

 If completed documents are received by the 10 CCAB in same month th of the month, the award will be reviewed by AK 29

Improving Timeliness

 AK CCAB historically has spent significant time revising nominations & cover sheets  Formatting problems  Difficult to understand or follow  Lacking impact  Poor responses from nominator for clarification, strengthening, formatting corrections, etc 30

Improving Timeliness

 Alaska Area Commissioned Officer Awards Booklet  Purpose: to improve the quality of award nominations submitted to the AK CCAB  Improve timeliness of awards process to ensure officers are appropriately recognized in a timely manner  Allow CCAB to work towards improving other processes such as tracking & education 31

Common reasons a nomination may be rejected

 Officer’s role not clearly explained  Weak impact statements (most common mistake)  Nomination is too technical  Quantitative information is omitted  Award level not appropriate  Overlap with previous award 32

Common reasons a nomination may be rejected:

 Outside the 13 month period.

 Failure to adhere to formatting requirements.

 Awards not adhering to these guidelines and/or checklist will not be reviewed by the awards

board.

 Incomplete nominations will not be reviewed.

33

Processing

 DSM, MSM, OUC and those with Valor  OPDIV OCCO CCAB SG OCCO  OSM, CM, UC  OPDIV Awards Board OPDIV Approving Authority OCCO  AM, PHS CIT  OPDIV Approving Authority OCCO 34

Award Follow-Up

“I understand I was approved for an award but have not received it?”  It may take 4-5 months for CIT, AM & UC  Several months for CM & above  Delayed by revisions & requests for additional information Email CCAB at: [email protected]

35

    

Awards Time Frame

AK Awards Board review   May need revision or additional information from nominator Awards returned to nominator/nominee for correction, clarification or rewrite must be resubmitted with 60 days.

After AK CCAB approval, nominator signature Endorsements (min of 3, including the Director AANHS) OCCO ensures documents related to approved awards are posted in officer’s OPF Hardware received by AK CCAB & forwarded 36

Authorization

 Officer is authorized to wear the ribbon once the award is posted in your OPF 37

Questions?

 Thank you for your time & interest  Happy Nominating!

38

      

References

PHS COAP, CC27.1.1, 8/06/07 CCPM P67, 6/98 Alaska Area Commissioned Officer Awards Booklet, 2007 “The Nuts & Bolts of PHS Awards”, R.Etzel

www.cdc.gov/occp/personnel/awards http://coa.spsp.net/webpage/uniforms/ribbon s.html

(for PHS Order of Precedence) http://www.usphs.gov/corpslinks/apaoc/docu ments/CommissionedOfficerAwardsProgram.p

df 39