I'm with Cooper on this one. Very bizarre sort of competition.

Let acts of kindness be rewarded at the time (recognized publicly in class, at home, in the street, etc.) for proper reinforcement. But to have a competition based on teacher/supervisor recommendations smacks of favoritism and to have it based on subjective and rather poorly written recommendations doesn't give true value to the acts and character of the "contestants".
All of the kids who didn't/won't win are therefore not kind enough? Those not nominated are mean?
Kindness is a recognized moral value and considered the antithesis of envy/greed (deadly sin). Kindness is good and should be encouraged but to have a program like this will push some kids to acts of kindness for the wrong reason: to win.
School is a place where children learn all sorts of things, but not where one should learn that kindness is a competition, but only one valuable way of getting along with others.
Competition is valuable and there should be winners and losers but on a pragmatic, rational basis - a level playing field if you will.
Let the kids decide amongst themselves who is the kindest or most popular - its what kids do anyway. Such popularity contests aren't any more fair than this but are part of growing up.
Where is the best mathematician? The best speller? The best grammarian?