For eligibility requirements click here.

Any current member of the campus community, i.e. faculty, staff or student, may nominate a staff employee who meets the eligibility requirements. Individuals are able to nominate themselves as well.

In the event of multiple nominations submitted for one employee, nominators will be contacted and asked to review all of the nominations for that individual, determining which will go forward as the ‘official’ nomination. 

Those wishing to nominate an employee for this award can do so by using this link. The nomination form must be submitted by the published deadline. If there are questions, please contact email ihr-cseaward@illinois.edu or Cheryl Hahn at (217) 333-3101.

The Nomination form must address the four criteria listed below and specify the nominee’s functional category. Nominees will be evaluated against others within the same category.  The functional categories are:

1. Administrative & Public Engagement
2. Clerical/Administrative Support
3. Crafts & Trades
4. Education/Extension
5. Information Technology
6. Research
7. Service/Maintenance
8. Student Services

IHR reserves the right to change the functional group if the title/description does not fit into the selected group.

To view a list and description of the CSEA functional categories click here.

Required Information:

• Statements to address each of the four nomination criteria (note there is a 500 word limit for each statement which is equal to one written page).
• The name, department, functional category, and e-mail address for the nominee.
• The nominator’s name, department, and e-mail address.

Nominators will receive an e-mail acknowledging receipt of their nomination.

After the first screening, if the nominee is chosen as a  semi-finalist, nominators will be contacted to secure and then submit at least one, but no more than three, letters of support. Each letter of support should be no more than one page in length. A minimum of one of the letters must come from the nominee’s current employing unit head or his/her designee.

The nomination form should include descriptions of how the nominee meets four criteria listed on the nomination form.

Examples are given under each criterion, which can be found here, to assist nominators in determining where specific examples or qualities are included within criteria. Provide at least two specific examples under each criterion for support in addition to a general description of the nominee's characteristics on this criterion.

Nominees will be placed in functional categories and will be judged in comparison to their peers in the same functional category. Examples and achievements will only be considered if they are related to work in the department and/or at the university. There will be two rounds in the evaluation process. In the first round, each committee member will use a point scale to rate the nominees on the four criteria which were addressed. These ratings will be totaled to get a total score, which is then compared to others in the award category. The committee will determine thirty-two semi-finalists, 2 from each category. After letters of recommendation are gathered, round two will begin. For round two, a ranking system will be used. All committee members will rank finalists in each award category. The two nominees with the highest total sum of rankings will win in the award in their category.

In addition to selecting finalists for the awards, the selection committee will be responsible for conducting an annual evaluation of the program in order that needed improvements be considered on an annual basis. The committee will also consider ways to encourage stronger participation from deans, directors, department heads, and across all units.

Describe how the nominee meets the four criteria listed below. (note there is a 500 word limit for each statement which is equal to one written page)

Demonstrates Excellence in Overall Work Performance

- Accepts responsibilities and performs duties above and beyond what is normally expected
- Works diligently to help complete a critical work project
- Demonstrates extensive knowledge and competence in a wide array of work-related topics
- Uses knowledge and expertise to quickly troubleshoot/solve problems
- Handles a large workload in an effective and timely fashion
- Completes tasks with little description, direction, or supervision
- Exhibits a high degree of professionalism and serves as a checkpoint for quality control

Puts Forth an Effort to Improve Self as Well as to Develop and Recognize Others

- Acts as a mentor for others by providing advice, guidance, feedback, and encouragement
- Helps to integrate new employees or supervisors into the work environment
- Shares personal knowledge and skills with others in an effort to train them
- Serves as a positive role model for others
- Recognizes others' special events and/or accomplishments, either publicly or privately
- Takes the initiative to improve individual skills and knowledge

Exhibits Initiative and Creativity Resulting in Improved Operating Efficiency of the Department and/or the University

- Suggests and/or develops new work methods that increase productivity and save time and money
- Reorganizes work to increase effectiveness
- Eliminates unnecessary steps or actions for delivering services
- Identifies and addresses work problems and helps to resolve them

Enhances the Image of the Department and/or the University

- Serves on university-related committees that promote the department/university and its staff, students, and clients
- Works with groups outside the department/university to promote the welfare of staff, students, and clients
- Performs work that brings attention and distinction to the department/university
- Develops processes or programs that are imitated in other departments/universities

Use the link below to nominate an academic professional or civil service staff employee for this award.

Nominations have closed