Magnet ® Consulting Guide to ANCC Magnet Charges

24 August 2026

When leaders begin preparing for Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® work, the first budgeting discussion normally starts with a basic concern and turns complicated extremely rapidly: what, exactly, are we paying for?

That question matters because Magnet is not a single billing. It is an official acknowledgment program administered by the American Nurses Credentialing Center, and the budget plan picture extends beyond one payment date. ANCC posts present Magnet application and appraisal fee schedules, consisting of an online application fee and appraisal evaluation costs that are due at the time of written file submission. Those are the direct program charges individuals typically imply when they inquire about "ANCC Magnet fees."

Yet anybody who has endured a Magnet cycle understands the official fees are only one part of the financial story. The deeper preparation challenge is sequencing the spend, aligning it with the company's readiness, and choosing just how much assistance to build around the work. That is where Magnet ® Consulting frequently becomes part of the discussion, not as a substitute for ownership, however as a method to reduce waste, sharpen task management, and prevent costly rework.
What ANCC Magnet costs really cover
At one of the most standard level, ANCC's Magnet fee structure shows the phases of the acknowledgment procedure. ANCC provides different schedules for application and appraisal. The online application cost gets an organization into the procedure. Later on, appraisal evaluation charges are due when the composed documentation is submitted.

That sequence is worth stopping briefly on since many companies spending plan too narrowly at the front end. They account for the application charge, reveal the launch, and after that discover that the more significant invest is connected to the written document stage, which gets here after months, and often years, of internal preparation. Already, finance leaders desire certainty, nursing leaders want momentum, and the project group is trying to transform a big body of evidence into a submission that withstands appraisal.

The cost timing itself sends out a helpful signal. Magnet is not developed around a fast application followed by a casual review. It is a structured appraisal procedure rooted in evidence requirements tied to the Application Handbook. Organizations are expected to send written documents lined up to Sources of Proof and the present evidence expectations. That is why the appraisal review fee is attached to record submission. The document is not a rule, it is a main part of the work.

ANCC likewise distinguishes between designation and redesignation. A company that currently holds Magnet Acknowledgment does not simply continue forever under the old award. It needs to pursue redesignation to continue being acknowledged. From a budget plan perspective, that means experienced Magnet companies still require an active monetary plan. The truth that a health center has actually "done Magnet before" does not get rid of future fees or future internal workload.
Why the fee conversation typically gets distorted
The expression "Magnet charges" can produce the impression that the budget is generally a purchasing choice. In practice, the more consequential choices are managerial.

One health system executive when told me, half-joking and half-weary, "The line item was never the real issue. The real issue was everything we forgot to attach to it." That is generally true. The main ANCC fees are visible and inescapable. The covert expenses are quieter: staff time, leadership evaluation cycles, composing assistance, information organization, governance approvals, and the hours invested going after evidence that must have been curated months earlier.

That does not imply Magnet is financially unclear. It suggests responsible budgeting has to separate direct program charges from internal delivery expenses. Organizations that blur those two classifications either underfund the work or overstate what the ANCC billing itself represents.

This distinction matters much more for boards and finance groups. If the primary nursing officer says, "We need spending plan for Magnet," various stakeholders might hear really different things. Someone hears application and appraisal charges. Another hears consultant support. Another hears travel or education. Another hears protected time for nurse leaders and authors. Clarity at the start avoids preventable friction later.
The acknowledgment behind the fees
Magnet status is awarded by ANCC to organizations that satisfy Magnet standards and are acknowledged for nursing quality. ANCC describes the program as a roadmap to nursing excellence. That framing is not marketing fluff. It assists describe why the costs exist in the very first place.

The Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® outgrew a 1983 study of hospitals that achieved success in attracting and maintaining nurses, and the program name formally altered to Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® in 2002. The existing framework is organized around five elements of the empirical design: Transformational Leadership; Structural Empowerment; Exemplary Professional Practice; New Knowledge, Innovations, & & Improvements; and Empirical Results. That design developed from the earlier 14 Forces of Magnetism after statistical analysis caused the 2008 conceptual model.

Why bring the design into a charges discussion? Due to the fact that it discusses why budgeting based upon an easy compliance mindset typically backfires. Hospitals are not paying to fill out a static application. They are getting in an appraisal procedure built around a recognized structure for nursing quality and results. If an organization is weak in proof generation, shared governance maturity, or outcome storytelling, those spaces eventually appear as cost pressure. Often the pressure appears in speaking with spend. Often it appears in postponed timelines. Often it appears in the pricey form of executive disappointment when a document cycle has to be repeated.
Designation and redesignation are different budgeting exercises
The finance logic for a first-time candidate is not the like the logic for a redesignating organization.

A novice Magnet candidate is often constructing facilities while building the submission. The written paperwork effort can expose procedure variation, data disparity, or governance structures that look stronger on paper than they function in truth. In those settings, leaders are not only paying ANCC fees. They are investing in the systems and practices that make the organization appraisable.

A redesignating organization begins with a more powerful base, but that produces its own trap. Familiarity can make individuals underestimate the amount of evidence curation and disciplined writing needed for the next cycle. Teams remember the prior success and assume the course will be smoother than it is. Then they confront altered internal management, restructured service lines, or years of quality work that were never ever archived with Magnet in mind.

Experienced organizations usually move much faster in some locations and stall in others. They understand the language of the program, however they might require to work more difficult to demonstrate continual empirical outcomes and continued development rather than easy upkeep. That truth needs to form budget preparation. Redesignation is not a renewal notice. It is a fresh demonstration of standards.
Where Magnet ® Consulting fits, and where it does not
Magnet ® Consulting is typically misconstrued as a luxury add-on or, at the other extreme, as a rescue service. It can be either of those in the wrong hands. Utilized well, it is neither.

A capable consultant does not "do Magnet" for the organization. ANCC is acknowledging the organization's nursing excellence, not the consultant's composing ability. The internal team should own the strategy, proof, and cultural work. What outside proficiency can do is speed up judgment. It can assist leaders decide whether they are really ready to apply, how to series proof development, how to prevent composing into weak locations, and how to structure the internal evaluation process so the document develops efficiently.

The greatest consulting engagements tend to conserve cash indirectly, even when they add an in advance line product. They minimize incorrect starts. They help the team distinguish between a nice story and an appraisable example. They keep leaders from overproducing product that does not address the actual proof requirement. They typically improve timeline realism, which is among the least attractive and most valuable forms of expense control.

That said, not every company needs the very same level of assistance. An extremely skilled Magnet workplace with steady management and mature internal writers may require only targeted evaluation. A newbie applicant with an extended nursing leadership team may require more hands-on structure. The key is matching assistance to the organization's internal capacity instead of buying a generic bundle because "that's what other healthcare facilities do."
Budgeting beyond the ANCC invoice
This is the part lots of groups prevent because it feels less concrete than a posted cost schedule. It must be the center of the conversation.

The direct ANCC charges are fixed by the program schedule in location at the time of application and submission. The surrounding costs are identified by organizational truth. A health center with strong evidence management practices can frequently take in the work more efficiently than a healthcare facility where every example needs to be reconstructed from e-mails, committee minutes, and private memory.

The most reliable method to frame the wider spending plan is to believe in workstreams rather than items. The organization requires to prepare proof, compose and evaluate the document, coordinate leadership approvals, and maintain sufficient task discipline to stay aligned with the Application Manual requirements. If any of those workstreams are under-resourced, the expense surface areas somewhere else.

The most typical budget plan classifications around Magnet work generally include the following:
ANCC application and appraisal fees Internal staff time for job management, writing, and evidence collection Education or preparation resources connected to the process Optional external consulting or file review support Operational time for leaders, councils, and subject experts
None of those categories is speculative. Every organization will feel them, even if not every category looks like a new money cost. Staff time in specific is frequently dealt with as free due to the fact that it is already on payroll. It is not complimentary. If a director invests considerable time on Magnet evidence, that time is no longer offered for other leadership work. Wise budgeting acknowledges that trade-off, even when it does not develop a separate invoice.
Timing is often more pricey than fees
There https://chcm.com/solutions/magnet-consulting/ is a particular kind of waste that rarely appears in pre-project price quotes: beginning before the organization is ready.

Leaders sometimes rush into an application cycle because the aspiration is strong, the executive message sounds best, and there is pressure to move. Aspiration matters, but Magnet is still an evidence-based acknowledgment process. If the infrastructure behind Transformational Leadership, Structural Empowerment, Exemplary Expert Practice, New Knowledge, Developments, & & Improvements, and Empirical Outcomes is not fully grown enough to support persuasive composed documents, the clock begins running before the organization has developed enough substance.

That is not an argument for endless hold-up. It is an argument for disciplined readiness assessment.

A useful readiness discussion ought to respond to a couple of uncomfortable concerns. Can the company produce proof aligned to the Sources of Proof without brave last-minute rushing? Are nurse leaders prepared to defend the story and the results behind it? Is there a repeatable procedure for collecting examples throughout systems and departments? Does the team comprehend the distinction in between a strong effort and a strong Magnet example?

When the answer to those questions is "not yet," a quick duration of readiness work can cost far less than an extended period of messy submission preparation. This is among the clearest locations where experienced Magnet ® Consulting assistance can spend for itself. Not by reducing every timeline immediately, however by identifying where speed is safe and where speed ends up being expensive.
The composed document phase deserves its own financial plan
Because the appraisal evaluation charges are due when the written paperwork is submitted, organizations often focus greatly on the submission date. That is suitable, however it can obscure the larger reality: the written document phase is normally the most labor-intensive part of the process.

ANCC's products explain that candidates send composed paperwork utilizing evidence requirements tied to the Application Handbook. That suggests the quality of the submission depends on proof selection, analysis, and disciplined narrative building. This is not simply compilation. It is appraisal-oriented writing.

Teams that manage this phase well typically establish clear internal rules early. They define who owns each area, who confirms proof, who has last editorial authority, and how conflicting drafts are dealt with. Without that structure, organizations spend months producing text that increases rather than converges. The real cost is not just overtime or expert review. It is executive tiredness. After enough chaotic evaluation cycles, leaders stop providing their best attention to the document because the procedure has actually trained them to expect inefficiency.

There is likewise a quality risk. A disorganized writing phase tends to reward redundancy, duplication, and weak examples dressed up in program language. Appraisers do not require more words. They need trustworthy evidence presented plainly. Organizations that comprehend that early frequently invest less on cleanup later.
Digital tools assist, however they do not replace discipline
ANCC provides digital tools and guides to support the appraisal procedure and interim tracking during designation. That support matters. Good tools develop structure, reduce uncertainty, and provide groups a common procedure frame.

Still, tools do not fix ownership problems. If proof is irregular, if leaders do not evaluate on time, or if nobody is making final decisions about what belongs in the document, the platform will not save the task. This is another place where budgeting choices should be sensible. Software assistance and program tools work, however they provide worth only when the company likewise buys governance and accountability.

I have actually seen groups with modest resources exceed better-funded groups just since they had crisp internal decision-making. They knew who might authorize an example, who could decline one, and when a section was done. Budget plan matters, but operating discipline matters more.
Questions to settle before you dedicate funds
Before the official spending starts, a couple of decisions ought to be made in plain language instead of delegated assumption.
Are we budgeting only for ANCC costs, or for the full organizational effort? Are we pursuing newbie classification or redesignation, and have we accounted for the difference? Do we have internal writing and evidence management capability, or do we require targeted Magnet ® Consulting support? Who owns the timeline, and what authority does that individual really have? What would make us postpone submission instead of force it?
Those questions may sound basic, however they separate organizations that budget strategically from those that spending plan reactively. The strongest teams choose early what type of task they are running. A symbolic Magnet journey is expensive. A governed Magnet journey is requiring, however much more efficient.
What leaders must ask when evaluating the ANCC fee schedule
When ANCC posts the present Magnet application and appraisal charge schedules, leaders need to do more than record the amounts. They should check out the schedule in the context of timing and readiness.

The most helpful board-level conversation is not, "Can we pay for the cost?" It is, "What must be true in the company by the time each cost is due?" The online application charge ought to align with a real launch decision, not a confident placeholder. The appraisal review charge due at written document submission need to align with a submission that has been governed, edited, and tested internally, not simply assembled.

That framing changes habits. It turns charges into milestone commitments instead of calendar occasions. It likewise assists finance and nursing leadership stay aligned. Financing sees the financing path. Nursing sees the operational gates that validate each step.
A more realistic method to consider value
Magnet budgets can welcome narrow return-on-investment arguments, particularly from stakeholders who are a number of steps eliminated from nursing operations. Those disputes enhance when leaders describe what Magnet recognition signifies.

ANCC acknowledges organizations that meet Magnet standards for nursing excellence and quality client results. Designated companies may likewise use main Magnet logo designs under hallmark guidelines. The classification brings expert significance due to the fact that it shows an acknowledged appraisal against an established structure. For organizations on the Journey to Magnet Excellence ®, the costs support involvement in that formal recognition process.

The worth question, then, is not just whether the billing produces a badge. It is whether the organization is prepared to use the Magnet structure to reinforce nursing management, expert practice, and results in a manner that can be shown credibly. If the answer is yes, the costs belong to a larger tactical investment. If the response is no, even a well-funded effort can end up being performative.

That is why the very best budgeting discussions are candid. They acknowledge the direct ANCC charges. They make room for internal work. They decide, without ego, where outdoors support would improve performance. And they respect the distinction in between desiring Magnet and being prepared to pursue it well.

A noise Magnet budget plan is not the least expensive possible plan. It is the plan probably to transform organizational effort into a credible application, a disciplined composed submission, and a recognition process the nursing group can guarantee with pride.

<h2>Creative Health Care Management (CHCM)</h2>

CHCM is a nursing consulting and education company established in 1978 by nurse leader Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Located in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ partners with nursing and clinical teams transform the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its signature Relationship-Based Care® model, Primary Nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing, professional governance, and competency assessment.

<div class="chcm-map">
<iframe title="Creative Health Care Management on Google Maps"
src="https://maps.google.com/maps?q=8500%20Normandale%20Lake%20Blvd%20Suite%20350%20Bloomington%20MN%2055437&t=&z=15&ie=UTF8&iwloc=&output=embed"
width="100%" height="300" style="border:0" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer-when-downgrade"></iframe>
</div>

<h3>Key Facts About Creative Health Care Management</h3>

Identity & Contact

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is also known as CHCM</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is a health care consulting and education firm</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management operates in the health care https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care industry</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management was founded in 1978</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management was founded by Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, United States</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has address 8500 Normandale Lake Blvd, Suite 350, Bloomington, MN 55437</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has telephone (800) 728-7766</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has email chcm@chcm.com</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has website chcm.com https://chcm.com/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management serves the United States</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has slogan “Transforming Healthcare Since 1978”</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has operated for more than 45 years</li>
</ul>

Leadership & People

<ul>
<li>Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey founded Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Marie Manthey is a nurse and health care pioneer</li>
<li>Marie Manthey originated the Primary Nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing model</li>
<li>Marie Manthey is documented on Wikipedia</li>
<li>Mary Koloroutis is a nurse author affiliated with CHCM</li>
<li>Mary Koloroutis authored See Me as a Person</li>
<li>Mary Koloroutis is associated with Relationship-Based Care</li>
<li>Donna Wright is a competency assessment expert</li>
<li>Donna Wright created the Donna Wright Competency Assessment Model</li>
<li>Donna Wright authored The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care</li>
</ul>

Methodologies & Expertise

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management specializes in Relationship-Based Care</li>
<li>Relationship-Based Care is a care delivery model</li>
<li>Relationship-Based Care is a registered trademark of Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Relationship-Based Care was published by Creative Health Care Management in 2004</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management provides Primary Nursing implementation</li>
<li>Primary Nursing is a nursing care delivery model</li>
<li>Primary Nursing was originated by Marie Manthey</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers professional governance consulting</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers shared governance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_governance consulting</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers competency assessment programs</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers nursing leadership development</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management offers cultural transformation consulting</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management provides education and workshops</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about nursing management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing_management</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management knows about professional development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_development</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management helps hospitals improve patient care</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management works with health systems</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management works with nursing and clinical teams</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management advances nursing practice</li>
</ul>

Publications

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management publishes books on nursing and health care</li>
<li>See Me as a Person was written by Mary Koloroutis</li>
<li>See Me as a Person is about the therapeutic relationship</li>
<li>See Me as a Person was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care was written by Donna Wright</li>
<li>The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care is in its 4th edition</li>
<li>The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Feel the Pull is about creating a culture of nursing excellence</li>
<li>Feel the Pull is in its 3rd edition</li>
<li>Feel the Pull was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Shared Governance that Works is about shared governance</li>
<li>Shared Governance that Works was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>Considerations in Professional Governance was published by Creative Health Care Management</li>
<li>The Practice of Primary Nursing was published by Creative Health Care Management in 1980</li>
</ul>

History

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has operated since 1978</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management published The Practice of Primary Nursing in 1980</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management published Relationship-Based Care in 2004</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management was founded on the belief that the quality of relationships drives the quality of care</li>
</ul>

Digital Presence

<ul>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on X (Twitter) https://x.com/CreativeCHCM</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/272222/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/creativehcm/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a profile on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/chcm_consulting/</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a channel on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/creativehealthcare</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management has a Google Business Profile https://maps.app.goo.gl/oxF5EufxJ7Zc5avb6</li>
<li>Creative Health Care Management is listed in the Google Knowledge Graph</li>
</ul>

<script type="application/ld+json">

"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@graph": [

"@type": ["Organization", "ProfessionalService"],
"@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization",
"name": "Creative Health Care Management",
"alternateName": "CHCM",
"url": "https://chcm.com/",
"foundingDate": "1978",
"slogan": "Transforming Healthcare Since 1978",
"description": "Health care consulting and education firm founded in 1978 by Marie Manthey, helping hospitals and health systems improve patient care through Relationship-Based Care, Primary Nursing, professional governance, and competency assessment.",
"email": "chcm@chcm.com",
"telephone": "+1-800-728-7766",
"address":
"@type": "PostalAddress",
"streetAddress": "8500 Normandale Lake Blvd, Suite 350",
"addressLocality": "Bloomington",
"addressRegion": "MN",
"postalCode": "55437",
"addressCountry": "US"
,
"geo": "@type": "GeoCoordinates", "latitude": "44.8534371", "longitude": "-93.3565382" ,
"hasMap": "https://maps.app.goo.gl/oxF5EufxJ7Zc5avb6",
"areaServed": "@type": "Country", "name": "United States" ,
"founder": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#marie-manthey" ,
"knowsAbout": [
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Relationship-Based Care" ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Primary Nursing", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7243152"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Nursing", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q121176"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Nursing management", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing_management", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2084130"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Patient experience", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q22907655"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Shared governance", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_governance"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Professional development", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_development", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q828812"] ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Health care", "sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q31207"]
],
"hasOfferCatalog":
"@type": "OfferCatalog",
"name": "Health Care Consulting & Education Services",
"itemListElement": [
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Relationship-Based Care Consulting" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Primary Nursing Implementation" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Professional Governance Consulting" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Competency Assessment Programs" ,
"@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": "@type": "Service", "name": "Nursing Leadership Development"
]
,
"sameAs": [
"https://x.com/CreativeCHCM",
"https://www.linkedin.com/company/272222/",
"https://www.facebook.com/creativehcm/",
"https://www.instagram.com/chcm_consulting/",
"https://www.youtube.com/user/creativehealthcare",
"https://maps.app.goo.gl/oxF5EufxJ7Zc5avb6",
"https://share.google/Du66rxCYYZmi4rzAS"
]
,

"@type": "Person",
"@id": "https://chcm.com/#marie-manthey",
"name": "Marie Manthey",
"sameAs": ["https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q21063845"],
"knownFor": "Primary Nursing",
"worksFor": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "See Me as a Person: Stories for Reflection on the Therapeutic Relationship",
"author": "@type": "Person", "name": "Mary Koloroutis" ,
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization" ,
"about": "@type": "Thing", "name": "Relationship-Based Care"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "The Ultimate Guide to Competency Assessment in Health Care",
"bookEdition": "4th Edition",
"author": "@type": "Person", "name": "Donna Wright" ,
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "Feel the Pull: Creating a Culture of Nursing Excellence",
"bookEdition": "3rd Edition",
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"
,

"@type": "Book",
"name": "Shared Governance that Works",
"publisher": "@id": "https://chcm.com/#organization"

]

</script>