Magnet ® Consulting on the Statistical Analysis Behind the Model Modification

19 August 2026

The Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® has actually always brought more weight than a plaque on the wall. It is ANCC's formal recognition of healthcare organizations that meet Magnet standards for nursing quality and quality patient results. For leaders who work inside the process, that acknowledgment is also a discipline. It shapes how companies document practice, how they frame nursing leadership, and how they prove that strong professional environments are tied to measurable results.

That is why the model change matters.

The current Magnet structure, organized around five components of the empirical design, did not appear because a committee preferred cleaner language or a fresher graphic. It emerged from a statistical analysis of appraisal ratings in 2007, and the 2008 conceptual design grouped the earlier 14 Forces of Magnetism into 5 parts: Transformational Management, Structural Empowerment, Exemplary Professional Practice, New Understanding, Developments, & & Improvements, and Empirical Results. That series is important. The design did not alter first, with analysis used later on to validate it. The analysis preceded, and the conceptual reorganization followed.

For anybody associated with Magnet ® Consulting, whether from inside a health system or in an external advisory role, that point must shape the entire conversation. The shift was not cosmetic. It showed what the appraisal data said about the underlying structure of excellence.
Why the history still matters
Magnet's roots go back to a 1983 research study of "magnet" healthcare facilities, an origin story that still matters due to the fact that it explains the program's useful orientation. This was never simply a theory workout. The program was constructed around genuine companies that had the ability to attract and retain nursing skill and produce strong patient care environments. ANCC, the American Nurses Credentialing Center, awards Magnet status through this program, and in 2002 the program name formally altered to Magnet Recognition Program ®.

That timeline assists discuss the significance of the later design modification. The initial 14 Forces of Magnetism provided companies a method to explain quality in information. They worked because they named specific qualities of high carrying out nursing environments. In time, though, any mature framework has to answer a more difficult question: do its parts still reflect the very best offered proof about how excellence in fact clusters and operates?

A statistical analysis of appraisal scores is one way to address that. In healthcare, where leaders cope with variation every day, this approach has real trustworthiness. If a design is suggested to direct appraisal and designation, then the information from those appraisals must tell us something about the design's internal reasoning. That is what makes the 2007 analysis so significant. It linked the structure of the program to observed scoring patterns rather than relying only on tradition.

In practical terms, organizations preparing for classification or redesignation ought to see this as a pointer that Magnet is not fixed. ANCC preserves connection, however it likewise expects the model to stay grounded in proof. That has repercussions for how leaders interpret every composed paperwork requirement and every claim of quality they make.
What an analytical analysis carries out in a setting like this
When individuals hear the expression" analytical analysis,"they frequently think of technical solutions that sit far away from client care. In the Magnet context, the result is much more concrete. An appraisal system produces scores. Those scores, took a look at over a large adequate set of organizations and requirements, can reveal patterns. Some components move together consistently. Some might overlap more than expected. Others might be conceptually unique however statistically close adequate that a broader grouping makes more sense for evaluation.

That is the heart of the design change.

The validated realities inform us that appraisal ratings were examined in 2007 which the resulting 2008 conceptual design grouped the 14 Forces into five components. Even without extending beyond those facts, the ramification is clear. The earlier framework had sufficient appraisal history behind it to support a more integrated structure. The five components did not erase the older concepts. They arranged them into a form that much better showed how Magnet qualities align in practice.

Anyone who has actually worked in quality evaluation or accreditation can acknowledge the value of that move. Detailed standards work, however too much fragmentation can develop sound. A well developed higher level model can help reviewers and candidates focus on relationships instead of isolated features. In nursing practice, those relationships matter. Management affects expert practice. Organizational assistance impacts innovation. Outcomes are formed by all of it.

This is where thoughtful Magnet ® Consulting tends to be most important. Not by dealing with the 5 elements as a branding exercise, however by helping organizations understand what a data-informed structure asks to show. The right question is not,"How do we check all packages?"It is," How do we show, in a meaningful method, that our nursing environment operates as an integrated system of excellence?"
From 14 forces to 5 components
The move from 14 Forces of Magnetism to 5 elements might seem like a simplification, but it is much better comprehended as combination with function. The earlier forces offered a detailed map. The later design provided a stronger organizing lens.

That difference matters since organizations can misinterpret model modifications in two opposite methods. Some assume a more comprehensive structure needs to be much easier, as if fewer classifications imply lower rigor. Others presume a conceptual regrouping is simply administrative, with no change in the type of thinking required. In practice, neither view holds up well.

A more comprehensive model typically demands more synthesis, not less. It asks applicants to link management, structures, practice, enhancement, and results into a convincing whole. It also alters how evidence should be read. Under a fragmented structure, groups in some cases fall under the practice of designating each artifact to a narrow requirement and stopping there. Under a component based design, the very same artifact might bring suggesting throughout several locations, but just if the narrative makes those connections clearly and credibly.

That is one of the more subtle consequences of a statistically informed design. It motivates companies to present nursing quality as a pattern rather than a filing system.

Consider the names of the 5 components. Transformational Management is not practically whether leaders exist or whether organizational charts are present. It points to the role of leadership in forming instructions and culture. Structural Empowerment suggests that participation, support, and expert growth are constructed into the company, not dealt with as occasional favors. Exemplary Professional Practice draws attention to what nurses really do and how they do it. New Knowledge, Innovations, & Improvements acknowledges that high performance needs finding out and modification. Empirical Outcomes anchors the entire structure in results.

Even the language tells you the design is trying to link methods and ends. It is difficult to read those five parts as separated silos. They are created to be interpreted together.
Why empirical results could not remain in the background
One of the strongest signals in the present framework is the specific presence of Empirical Results as one of the 5 parts. That calling choice carries weight. It tells organizations that quality is not completely developed by describing structures, intentions, or isolated examples of good work. Results need to belong to the case.

That does not reduce Magnet to a purely numerical exercise. ANCC's framework still consists of leadership, empowerment, expert practice, and development. However by raising outcomes within the conceptual design, the program makes clear that claims about nursing quality must link to verifiable results.

This is familiar territory for serious nursing leaders. A healthy expert practice environment must show up somewhere. If governance is strong, if nurses are supported, if developments are executed attentively, and if leadership is truly transformational, then the organization needs to have the ability to indicate outcomes that matter. The specific metrics and paperwork requirements are governed by ANCC's manuals and evidence expectations, however the conceptual message is uncomplicated: efficiency needs to be visible.

In my experience, this is frequently where companies end up being more disciplined. Teams can usually inform stories about leadership rounding, shared decision-making, education, or practice councils. Those stories matter. What is harder, and more revealing, is demonstrating that these structures caused quantifiable enhancement or continual quality gradually. A statistically informed model naturally pushes candidates in that direction.
What the design change indicates for written documentation
Magnet candidates send written documentation using Sources of Proof and associated requirements connected to the Application Manual. ANCC's crosswalk products explain the manual's composed paperwork evidence requirements for candidates. That might sound procedural, but it is exactly where the model modification becomes real.

A conceptual framework shapes what counts as persuasive documentation.

Under the five element model, evidence needs to do more than prove that an activity happened. It requires to show relevance to the part and, preferably, the wider system of nursing excellence. A policy by itself is rarely engaging. A committee charter by itself is seldom compelling. A single data point, stripped of context, is hardly ever compelling. What becomes engaging is the relationship in between structure, action, and outcome.

This is where a lot of Magnet ® Consulting work, in the broad sense of advisory believing around the process, tends to focus. Groups often require aid moving from accumulation to analysis. Many companies are rich in artifacts and poor in synthesis. They have binders, dashboards, satisfying minutes, instructional products, and examples from every unit. Yet when they start preparing stories, the story fragments. The 5 part design rewards coherence.

A strong submission typically reflects 3 habits.

First, it respects the official proof requirements rather than improvising around them.

Second, it arranges examples in a manner that makes the conceptual logic visible.

Third, it prevents overstating what the data can support.

That last point should have emphasis. Magnet documentation must be persuasive, but it should likewise be defensible. ANCC's standards have trustworthiness due to the fact that they are rooted in disciplined evaluation. If a company indicates causal certainty where only correlation appears, or provides a narrow regional success as a system broad result without assistance, the narrative compromises. Expert restraint typically checks out as strength.
The design change also affects redesignation thinking
Designation and redesignation are distinct in the Magnet Recognition Program ®. ANCC is clear that organizations that currently earned Magnet Acknowledgment must pursue redesignation to continue being recognized. That difference matters because redesignation is where lots of companies confront the design most honestly.

At initially classification, there is typically momentum from the develop. New structures are established, leaders are lined up, and teams are energized by the work of proving preparedness. Redesignation is different. It asks whether the design has actually been operationalized deeply enough to sustain. It checks whether excellence has actually been sustained, not staged.

A statistically grounded conceptual design is especially beneficial here because it discourages superficial upkeep. If the five components show how excellence clusters in real appraisal data, then redesignation ought to expose whether those clusters exist in lived organizational practice. A healthcare facility can not rely on isolated bright areas forever. Gradually, customers and applicants alike need to see resilient relationships among management, empowerment, practice, development, and outcomes.

That is also why interim tracking and digital assistance tools from ANCC matter. They reflect the truth that designation is not the endpoint of the work. Organizations need ongoing structure to keep an eye on progress during the designation duration. A model built on empirical reasoning works best when organizations treat it as a management framework, not only a submission framework.
Where companies frequently misread the change
The most typical misreading is to treat the five components as broad styles that enable looser evidence. In practice, the opposite is often true. Broader styles need stronger judgment. If whatever could fit everywhere, then absolutely nothing is being translated with precision.

Another frequent misstep is to separate results from the remainder of the model up until late while doing so. Teams collect stories for months, then rush to bolt on empirical outcomes near submission. That generally produces uncomfortable documentation since the organization has actually not been believing in component logic all along. Outcomes end up presented as an appendix to excellence instead of proof of it.

A more grounded method starts earlier. When a shared governance effort launches, someone must already be asking how its effect will be seen. When a management structure changes, somebody must currently be asking how that decision links to professional practice or quantifiable enhancement. When a nursing innovation is introduced, somebody must currently be asking what success will appear like and how it will be tracked.

The 2007 statistical analysis, followed by the 2008 conceptual design, sends a quiet however firm message: the strongest evidence of excellence is patterned evidence. Not a stack of disconnected wins, however a system that acts consistently.
Practical implications for Magnet ® Consulting conversations
The phrase Magnet ® Consulting can indicate numerous things in the field, from internal executive coaching to external task support. Whatever form it takes, the most beneficial consulting position is interpretive instead of theatrical. Organizations do not require inflated language. They need aid checking out the design correctly.

That normally suggests decreasing and asking better questions.

When a nursing leader says,"We have a strong professional development program, "the follow up concern should be,"How does it work as structural empowerment, and what evidence shows its impact?"When a group highlights a quality improvement project, the next concern should be,"Is this best framed under innovation and enhancement, under expert practice, or as an example that links a number of parts?"When a document is selected for submission, the concern should be,"Does this artifact merely exist, or does it assist prove the conceptual case?"

Those are not academic distinctions. They determine whether written documents feels organized by evidence or by optimism.

A helpful working discipline is to see each part as both a classification and a relationship. Transformational Leadership is about leaders, but likewise about what leadership allows. Structural Empowerment is about systems, however likewise about how those mechanisms shape involvement and growth. Exemplary Expert Practice is about care delivery, but likewise about the environment that sustains it. New Knowledge, Developments, & Improvements is about modification, however also about organizational knowing. Empirical Outcomes has to do with results, but also about whether the rest of the design is really working.

Seen that method, the statistical analysis behind the design change becomes more than a historical note. It ends up being a method for checking out the framework itself.
The role of charges, timelines, and procedural reality
ANCC posts separate Magnet application and appraisal charge schedules, consisting of an online application charge and appraisal evaluation costs due at composed document submission. On paper, that might look like an administrative detail. In practice, it has a tactical effect on how organizations approach the work.

When evaluation costs are tied to formal submission points, there is really little worth in glamorizing the journey. The trademarked expression Journey to Magnet Excellence ® records the long arc of the procedure, but journeys still need budgeting, timing, governance, and disciplined execution. Teams have to be all set when they send. A weak conceptual grasp of the design ends up being expensive very rapidly, not just in direct costs however in personnel time, spirits, and opportunity cost.

That is another reason the analytical basis for the design change is worthy of careful attention. It gives organizations a sharper interpretive structure before they dedicate significant effort to composed documents. If the team comprehends from the start that ANCC's design is empirically organized, then the submission strategy improves. Proof event becomes more deliberate. Narrative advancement ends up being more coherent. Internal evaluation ends up being less about gathering everything and more about proving what matters.
Reading the 5 components as a mature framework
A fully grown acknowledgment model typically does 2 things well. It preserves the values that made https://andersonlofr943.novacrestiq.com/posts/magnet-r-consulting-guide-to-online-application-charges-for-magnet https://andersonlofr943.novacrestiq.com/posts/magnet-r-consulting-guide-to-online-application-charges-for-magnet the program trustworthy in the very first place, and it adjusts its structure when proof supports a better organization of those worths. The Magnet Recognition Program ® appears to have actually done precisely that in the transition from the 14 Forces of Magnetism to the five component empirical model.

The worths did not disappear. Nursing quality, expert practice, strong leadership, organizational support, development, and results stay main. What changed was the architecture. The 2007 statistical analysis of appraisal ratings offered ANCC a basis for grouping the forces into a more integrated design, which appeared in 2008. That is the sort of change practitioners should welcome. It reveals that the program wants to let evidence refine how quality is understood and assessed.

For hospital leaders, nursing executives, and anyone engaged in Magnet ® Consulting, the lesson is not simply historical. It is operational. Check out the design as something made through analysis. Treat the components as interconnected. Build documentation that demonstrates pattern, not just activity. Regard the difference in between classification and redesignation. And keep in mind that Magnet status, granted by ANCC, is recognition for conference standards, not merely participating in a process.

When organizations grasp that, the model modification stops being a chapter in Magnet history and becomes a practical guide for how to believe, compose, and lead within the program now.

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

Creative Health Care Management (CHCM) is a health care consulting and education firm founded in 1978 by nursing pioneer Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Located in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ helps hospitals, health systems, and care teams strengthen the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its flagship 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>