Awards Information FAQs
Award regulations are very general in nature and allow for a great deal of
agency innovation. Here are some frequently asked questions regarding
what might be permitted under the awards authority:
?
|
Since
it is getting harder and harder to have access to
cash and get checks cut, what can an agency use
instead of cash or a check to give money as an
award? |
Significant
constraints on getting checks issued make it
difficult to present prompt "same as
cash" recognition. Also, the increased use
of electronic fund transfers and
"non-cash" transactions is widely
anticipated and even mandated by law. These have
raised the question of what alternatives are
available to deliver cash awards. The Office of
Personnel Management has concluded that cash
surrogates are an appropriate option for
delivering cash awards, subject to all the
limitations and requirements that apply to cash
awards. Current examples of cash surrogates are
"award vouchers" created by the agency
itself that can be exchanged for currency through
its imprest fund and "gift cheques"
that are purchased through a vendor and that are
easily and widely redeemable for cash, not
merchandise. Recipients of cash surrogates must
have the same freedom and control over how that
award may be used as they would have over any
currency or U.S. Treasury check they might
otherwise receive as a cash award, including the
option of saving the money or turning it over to
any third party (e.g., a charity or other
individual). Consequently, cash surrogates must
meet the following criteria:
- They are subject to all the limitations
and requirements that apply to cash
awards.
- They must be easily and immediately
convertible to cash.
- They must not be limited to be redeemed
only where purchased, at a few selected
sites outside the agency, or through
specific vendors.
- If purchased from a vendor or financial
institution, they are subject to all
relevant procurement regulations.
Cash surrogates should not be confused with
merchant gift certificates.
|
 
?
|
Can
an agency provide training or purchase equipment
as a form of award? |
| Technically, yes,
although it is important to recognize the
intersection of several administrative
authorities in such a situation. The decision to
reward an employee or group of employees with
training or equipment may be very reasonable
within a recognition program that contemplates
such forms of recognition. In that instance,
under the definition of "award" at
section 451.102 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, the "award" would be
considered an "action taken." The
action itself would be the procurement of the
training or equipment. As such, it would be
subject to all relevant training and procurement
regulations, limitations, and requirements. It
would not be unreasonable to deduct the costs of
such training or equipment from the relevant
awards budget, although technically that is not
required. Some agencies partition their funding
very specifically across object classes such as
awards, training, equipment, etc., and special
funding arrangements and transfers may be
required. |
?
|
What
is meant by the regulation at section 451.106(c)
of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, that
agencies shall "provide for communicating
with employees and supervisors about the relevant
parts of their award program(s)"? |
| The regulations
recognize that many means of communication are
available to agencies to help employees
understand their award program(s), including
formal training. The Office of Personnel
Management anticipates that in some agencies
more than one program may be in place for
different employees working within the agency,
and, therefore, the employees' greatest need is
to understand the program(s) that pertains to
them. |
?
|
What
is meant by "forced distribution" and
how can it be applied to awards? |
| The term has no
precise definition in policy or practice, but
"forced distribution" generally is
associated with the idea of limiting awards to a
certain number or percentage of employees.
Relative comparisons among individuals or groups,
such as rank ordering or categorizing employees,
can be used for making decisions about
distributing awards. For example, agencies may
limit awards to the top three producers or teams,
or limit awards to those individuals or groups
that exceeded certain goals. Agencies can also
establish criteria for categories of awards that
are given only to a selected number of recipients
who best fit the criteria, although the criteria
might have been met by more than one person or
team. |
?
|
What is meant by the regulatory
language, "an agency shall assure that a program does not
conflict with or violate any other law or Government-wide
regulation?" (5 CFR 451.106(a)) |
| In designing their award programs,
agencies have a responsibility to look beyond the award regulations
themselves and make sure that the specific reward and incentive programs
that are being proposed do not conflict with other laws or regulations.
Examples of other rules that can be directly related to incentive/reward
schemes are procurement, travel, Fair Labor Standards Act, and tax withholding. These compliance
issues surface most often when we are asked to review an agency's
proposal for an innovative award scheme. Often, the issue has less to
do with the proposal's forms of recognition, than with the nature of the
contribution that would be recognized. (An extreme example is an instance
where the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) was asked to review an
incentive proposal that would have violated the criminal code since the
award would have constituted an illegal "kickback"!) OPM does not wish
to stifle creativity, but the integrity of the Government-wide award
program must be protected. |
|
