The following are purely suggestions pharmacists may want to consider when submitting nomination narratives for the USPHS Pharmacist Professional Advisory Awards Committee.
These awards are open to all full-time DHHS pharmacists (commissioned or civil service).
Self-nomination is okay for all the awards, except where expressly prohibited ( (1) George F. Archambault PHS Career Achievement Award in Pharmacy and (2) USPHS Award for Managerial Excellence Improving Pharmacy Service or Public Health).
Pharmacists should take the initiative to prepare bullets demonstrating how they have met the award criteria and work with their supervisor (or another individual) to refine the narrative and get it submitted. Supervisor signatures are only meant as an acknowledgement that the facts included are correct - it is not meant as an expression of the supervisor's opinion.
Facsimile transmissions are acceptable, as are electronic (email) submissions - so long as an original (with signatures) follows!
Consider utilization of the
"STAR" format
S = describe the situation or setting
T = describe the task
A = describe the action
R = describe the result
Be concise and specific - its the quality of the narrative not the quantity;
the 2 pages is a MAXIMUM but that does not mean you must submit 2-pages.
Use the "S" portion of the STAR format, or a separate paragraph if not using STAR, to briefly describe your current job - what you ordinarily do; what your office/program does; etc.
Filler and fluff not necessary - let the actions and result speak for themselves.
Stress your accomplishment - taking care to emphasize your individual actions, not team or organizational efforts.
Have a colleague read the nomination and see if he/she can easily identify the accomplishments and any areas where the nomination might be strengthened.
Descriptions such as planning, organizing or directing do not provide sufficient information to assess an accomplishment. Such actions should be fully described based on criteria outlined above.
Developing a program or activity without the requisite description of impact and value is insufficient.
Significant impact or major improvement statements without accompanying descriptive metrics do not permit an objective evaluation by Board members.
A description of a nominee’s participation in activities without a summary of the impact, methods and value omits critical evaluation factors.