The Donna Wright Competency Assessment Model ™ for Ongoing Proficiency Evaluation

Competency assessment in healthcare often ends up being a ritual long previously anyone notices the issue. A package heads out, a module gets designated, an ability check is documented, and everyone moves on. The paperwork looks complete, yet the process may have really little to do with real threat, changing practice, or the realities of client care. That gap is exactly why the Donna Wright Competency Evaluation Design ™ continues to resonate with nurse leaders, teachers, and clinical teams.

The design, established by Donna Wright, is widely recognized in nursing and healthcare expert advancement. It has been used for more than thirty years and is consistently referred to as strategic and outcomes-driven. That matters since continuous competency evaluation ought to not be puzzled with annual compliance activity. One is a living process connected to practice. The other is frequently just administrative maintenance.

What differentiates the donna wright competency evaluation design is not just that it asks organizations to validate skills. Lots of systems already do that. Its real contribution is the method it reframes the work. Instead of beginning with a top-down list of everything personnel may potentially require to understand, it asks leaders and staff to collaborate in recognizing what actually matters for a function, an unit, or a point in time. That sounds straightforward, however in practice it is a meaningful shift.
The model begins with focus, not volume
One of the most useful ideas associated with proficiency evaluation in health care Donna Wright is making use of 4 questions to recognize proficiency top priorities. These concerns are frequently summarized as asking what is brand-new, what is altering, what is high-risk, and what is bothersome. In my experience, this is where lots of companies either sharpen their procedure or expose how scattered it has become.

If an unit teacher takes a seat with personnel and asks those four questions truthfully, the conversation changes quickly. Suddenly the focus is no longer on covering every familiar job even if it appeared on in 2015's kind. Instead, the team is pressed to take a look at existing reality. Has a brand-new product been presented? Has a procedure changed? Exists a high-risk part of the job where the margin for mistake is slim? Exists a recurring problem that keeps appearing in practice, workflow, or outcomes?

Those prompts create discipline. They assist groups different habit from priority.

That is particularly valuable in environments where competency programs have grown by accumulation. Numerous annual processes end up being heavier over time since absolutely nothing gets removed. Every occasion, audit finding, brand-new gadget, or near miss out on leaves another needed item. After a number of years, the proficiency packet can end up being bloated enough that staff stop seeing it as meaningful. They treat it like endurance work. Leaders then question why engagement is low.

The Wright model provides a restorative. It asks teams to concentrate on the competencies that are most appropriate now. That does not make the process easier in the shallow sense. It makes it more demanding, due to the fact that now leaders should make choices. They need to focus on, justify, and describe why one area deserves attention while another does not.
Staff are not just receivers, they belong to the assessment process
Another core function of competency donna wright is that the learner or employee is centered in the recognition procedure. This is among the design's most important departures from greatly instructor-driven systems. Personnel are not passive recipients of a test developed somewhere else. They are active individuals in determining requirements and showing competence.

That difference has cultural consequences.

When clinicians feel that competency evaluation is something done to them, resistance increases fast. Even capable, conscientious experts can end up being cynical when asked to repeat low-value demonstrations that do not show their daily work. On the other hand, when they are invited to help determine the competencies that matter, and when the recognition approaches acknowledge real scientific practice, the procedure feels more credible.

Credibility is not a soft additional in healthcare. It is central to whether people engage with the work honestly. If staff believe the proficiency process reflects real client care top priorities, they are most likely to surface area issues, confess unpredictability, and take part in remediation without defensiveness. If they view it as performative, they will typically offer the minimum required energy and protect themselves by stating little.

That is why the model's focus on cooperation in between staff and leadership is so useful. It produces a structure for shared judgment. Leaders still have duty, however they do not need to pretend they alone know what is most pressing in every workflow or every client care situation. Frontline staff often see modifications, friction points, and high-risk work before those issues become noticeable in official reports.
Competency is broader than a checklist
A typical mistake in expert development is treating competency as a yes-or-no occasion. Either the individual passed or stopped working. Either the skill was checked off or it was not. Real practice is seldom that simple.

The Donna Wright Proficiency Evaluation Model ™ is related to several recognition methods, and descriptions of the design note that organizations might pick from approaches such as directed practice, evidence of daily work, peer evaluation, case studies, and return demonstrations. Some sources describe Wright as using 11 recognition approaches. Even without listing every technique, the broader message is clear: skills can be demonstrated in more than one way.

That is a serious strength.

A return presentation may make good sense for a procedural skill, especially when the stakes are high and the sequence matters. But not every skills is best determined by a physical presentation in a class or simulation space. Some areas are more properly examined through the person's real daily work, their reasoning in a case study, or feedback from peers who observe practice gradually. A model that permits method selection can better match the evaluation to the competency itself.

This flexibility is one factor the model has actually been adopted for continuous competency assessment across health systems and scholastic programs, including nurse residency and yearly competency programs. Continuous evaluation needs range. New finishes, experienced nurses, teachers, and leaders do not all need the exact same validation approach, even when the underlying goal is consistent.

A stiff one-size-fits-all procedure usually develops one of two problems. It ends up being too shallow to be useful, or too burdensome to sustain. The Wright technique offers companies another path. It preserves responsibility while leaving room for judgment.
Why leaders matter a lot in this model
The Wright structure is not just about types, tools, or recognition techniques. It likewise rests on a management concept: leaders produce a culture of success that supports both favorable staff member habits and the organization's mission.

That idea is easy to skim past, however it is worthy of attention. Proficiency systems fail as often through culture as through design.

A well-constructed competency worksheet implies little if the regional culture punishes concerns, deals with remediation as embarrassment, or worths conclusion over learning. In those environments, staff rapidly find out how to look compliant rather than how to grow. The records might be clean. The practice may not be.

By contrast, leaders who produce a culture of success make it possible for proficiency assessment to function as planned. They frame the procedure as a regular part of expert practice. They identify responsibility from shame. They try to find trends. They assist staff link competency work to mission and patient care, rather of providing it as another separated requirement.

This is where knowledgeable leaders often make the difference in between a design that remains theoretical and one that in fact alters behavior. They understand when to promote stronger validation in a high-risk area. They likewise know when over-testing is wearing down trust and losing time.
The 4 questions that hone the work
The best-known screening mechanism within the model is easy enough to remember and strong enough to avoid drift. When groups use it well, it helps them decide what belongs in the current proficiency cycle and what does not.
What is new? What is changing? What is high-risk? What is problematic?
The power of those questions lies in their functionality. "New" might point to items, equipment, policies, or workflows that personnel have not yet integrated into routine care. "Changing" records the reality that familiar work can still end up being risky when a step, requirement, or expectation shifts. "High-risk" directs attention to jobs where damage can take place rapidly or effects are significant. "Problematic" provides the company consent to confront recurring trouble spots instead of pretending they are separated incidents.

A helpful donna wright proficiency worksheet often grows from this sort of conversation, not from a fixed yearly design template recycled without reflection. Even when companies utilize standardized documents, the underlying options should come from existing practice conditions.
What thoughtful competency evaluation results really look like
Many teams focus intensely on the front end of proficiency assessment and after that rush through the analysis. They gather forms, complete recognitions, and file records, but spend insufficient time asking what the competency assessment outcomes are telling them.

Results must do more than recognize who has actually completed an activity. They ought to help leaders observe patterns. Are numerous employee having problem with the very same change in practice? Did a supposedly routine rollout require even more support than expected? Is a high-risk process really comprehended, or are individuals performing well only in a regulated presentation? Exist systems where proof of day-to-day work is stronger than formal screening recommends, or weaker?

This is where talk about competency assessment can end up being especially useful. Brief narrative remarks, when particular and professional, typically expose what a basic finished box can not. They can catch confidence, inconsistency, context, and follow-up requirements. A checkbox may state a return presentation was successful. A thoughtful comment may keep in mind that the staff member performed the sequence correctly but needed prompting on one choice point, or revealed strong judgment in adapting the procedure properly to client circumstances.

Those are meaningful distinctions.

At the exact same time, comments should not become vague filler. Everybody has seen documents that states "terrific task," "met expectations," or "finished effectively" without adding any useful value. Talk about proficiency assessment work best when they clarify what was observed, what requirement was fulfilled, and whether any assistance is still needed.
Examples that fit the model without forcing it
Donna Wright competency examples are most useful when they show the logic of the design rather than just embellish it. Considering that the structure stresses selecting competencies based on present importance, one group may pick to evaluate a just recently presented tool because it is brand-new. Another may concentrate on a modified procedure since it is altering. A third may focus on a medication-related procedure because it is high-risk. Yet another might zero in on a repeating handoff problem because it is problematic.

The key is not that every company picks the exact same topics. The key is that the subjects are picked intentionally.

That distinction can eliminate among the most significant points of friction in yearly competency preparation. Leaders often feel pressure to produce a consistent bundle that covers everything. Personnel often feel overwhelmed by content that is just marginally appropriate to present practice. The Wright model helps both sides by producing a reasoning for focus.

It also leaves space for variation across settings. A nurse residency program might utilize the design in a different way from a knowledgeable inpatient unit, and both uses can still be faithful to the underlying principles. A residency program may need more structured support and more visible coaching. A recognized unit might put higher weight on proof of everyday work or peer-informed validation. The point is not similar execution. The point is strategic, outcomes-driven proficiency assessment.
Where organizations get tripped up
For all its practical strengths, the design still requires discipline to implement well. The first challenge is dealing with the four questions as a slogan instead of a decision tool. If every issue is identified brand-new, changing, high-risk, and troublesome at the same time, the procedure loses focus. Groups need enough restraint to state no, postpone lower-priority products, and secure the stability of the present cycle.

A 2nd obstacle is overcorrecting away from top-down systems without protecting responsibility. Focusing the learner does not indicate lowering standards or making recognition optional. It suggests involving personnel in https://caidendjpa385.nexorafield.com/posts/donna-wright-competency-examples-for-high-risk-areas-of-practice https://caidendjpa385.nexorafield.com/posts/donna-wright-competency-examples-for-high-risk-areas-of-practice a significant procedure while still anticipating sound proof of competence.

A 3rd problem appears when organizations accept multiple validation approaches in name only. They may say they use diverse techniques, however in practice nearly everything defaults to the same method due to the fact that it recognizes or easier to document. That compromises one of the model's significant benefits. Method choice ought to show the proficiency, not administrative convenience alone.

A fourth obstacle is management disparity. Due to the fact that culture is so central, the model can grow in one department and flatten out in another within the exact same institution. If one leader deals with competency as developmental and another treats it as punitive, personnel experience the system very in a different way. The framework does not eliminate the requirement for leader ability. If anything, it makes that capability more visible.
Turning a worksheet into a real practice tool
The expression donna wright proficiency worksheet frequently brings to mind a kind, and kinds do matter. They make the process noticeable and transferable. However the worksheet is just useful if it tapes believing that has already happened.

A strong worksheet must show concerns picked through partnership between personnel and management. It needs to reveal why a proficiency belongs in the assessment cycle and how it will be validated. It ought to make good sense to someone reviewing it later, not just to the person who filled it out on a hectic afternoon.

In well-run programs, the worksheet becomes less of a bureaucratic artifact and more of a map. It reveals the course from identified requirement to chosen recognition approach to proficiency assessment outcomes. It likewise supports connection. When leadership modifications, educators rotate, or a program broadens, a clear worksheet assists preserve the reasoning behind earlier decisions.

The opposite is likewise real. When worksheets are jumbled with legacy content or disconnected from real practice, they become evidence of drift. Personnel notice that disconnect immediately.
Why this design stays relevant
The healthcare environment continues to alter, however the underlying pressures around proficiency assessment recognize. Time is limited. Threat is unevenly dispersed. New procedures show up faster than old ones disappear. Leaders are asked to demonstrate oversight without exhausting personnel. Educators require systems that are robust sufficient to matter and practical adequate to sustain.

The Donna Wright Competency Evaluation Design ™ stays pertinent due to the fact that it resolves those tensions straight. It does not pretend that more content is constantly better. It does not assume one recognition method fits every requirement. It does not place the entire problem on leadership while neglecting frontline insight. And it does not minimize competence to a single annual event.

Instead, it frames proficiency as a strategic, collaborative, ongoing process.

That framing is not simply philosophically appealing. It is operationally useful. Teams can ask what is new, what is changing, what is high-risk, and what is problematic. They can select validation approaches that fit the competency. They can take a look at competency assessment results for patterns, not just conclusion rates. They can utilize comments on competency assessment to include significant context. And leaders can shape the culture so that proficiency work supports both personnel success and organizational mission.

When those pieces come together, competency assessment stops sensation like an obligation removed from care. It starts working as part of professional practice, which is where it belongs.
A practical lens for continuous proficiency assessment
For companies attempting to strengthen ongoing competency evaluation, the appeal of the donna wright proficiency assessment design is not that it uses a faster way. It does not. If anything, it requests more discernment. It asks leaders to prioritize instead of collect. It asks staff to participate instead of merely comply. It asks teachers to match the recognition approach to the competency rather of defaulting to habit.

That takes work, however it is the right sort of work.

Competency assessment in health care ought to be close to practice, responsive to change, and sincere about danger. It needs to create beneficial proof, not just completed records. It should assist clinicians maintain safe, current performance while preserving expert dignity. The Wright model is widely appreciated since it keeps those objectives in view.

For groups examining their yearly procedure, upgrading a residency technique, or trying to make proficiency recognition more meaningful, that perspective is frequently the turning point. Not due to the fact that it adds complexity, however since it removes away the sound and brings the function back into focus.

<!-- ============================================================
CHCM — SEO Neo NAP / BLURB BLOCK (paste as raw HTML)
Structure: (1) heading (2) intro paragraph (3) GBP map (4) triple list (5) JSON-LD
Facts source: projects/premazon/chcm/docs/entity-facts.md (all verified 2026-08-11)
SPIN: only the intro prose uses a. Triple list, NAP facts, and JSON-LD are CONSTANT.
JSON-LD has no "|" chars, so spinners that require a pipe will not touch it.
============================================================ -->

<!-- 1) HEADING -->
<h2>Creative Health Care Management (CHCM)</h2>

<!-- 2) INTRO PARAGRAPH (spun) -->

Creative Health Care Management (CHCM) is a health care consulting organization serving hospitals since 1978 by Primary Nursing pioneer Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Based in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ works alongside health care organizations transform the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its proprietary Relationship-Based Care&reg; model, Primary Nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing, professional governance, and competency assessment.

<!-- 3) GBP MAP EMBED (no API key required) -->
<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>

<!-- 4) SEMANTIC TRIPLE LIST (subject &rarr; predicate &rarr; object) -->
<h3>Key Facts About Creative Health Care Management</h3>

<strong>Identity &amp; Contact</strong>

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

<strong>Leadership &amp; People</strong>

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

<strong>Methodologies &amp; Expertise</strong>

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

<strong>Publications</strong>

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

<strong>History</strong>

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

<strong>Digital Presence</strong>

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

<!-- 5) JSON-LD TRIPLE GRAPH (constant on every placement) -->
<script type="application/ld+json">

"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@graph": &#91;

"@type": &#91;"Organization", "ProfessionalService"&#93;,
"@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": &#91;
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Relationship-Based Care" ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Primary Nursing", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7243152"&#93; ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Nursing", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q121176"&#93; ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Nursing management", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursing_management", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2084130"&#93; ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Patient experience", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q22907655"&#93; ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Shared governance", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_governance"&#93; ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Professional development", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_development", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q828812"&#93; ,
"@type": "Thing", "name": "Health care", "sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q31207"&#93;
&#93;,
"hasOfferCatalog":
"@type": "OfferCatalog",
"name": "Health Care Consulting & Education Services",
"itemListElement": &#91;
"@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"
&#93;
,
"sameAs": &#91;
"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"
&#93;
,

"@type": "Person",
"@id": "https://chcm.com/#marie-manthey",
"name": "Marie Manthey",
"sameAs": &#91;"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey", "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q21063845"&#93;,
"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"

&#93;

</script>