Magnet ® Consulting on the Statistical Analysis Behind the Design Change

18 August 2026

The Magnet Recognition Program ® has actually constantly carried more weight than a plaque on the wall. It is ANCC's official recognition of healthcare organizations that fulfill Magnet requirements for nursing quality and quality patient results. For leaders who work inside the procedure, that recognition is also a discipline. It forms how organizations document practice, how they frame nursing leadership, and how they prove that strong expert environments are tied to measurable results.

That is why the model change matters.

The present Magnet structure, organized around five elements of the empirical design, did not appear due to the fact that a committee chosen cleaner language or a fresher graphic. It emerged from an analytical analysis of appraisal scores in 2007, and the 2008 conceptual model grouped the earlier 14 Forces of Magnetism into 5 parts: Transformational Leadership, Structural Empowerment, Exemplary Professional Practice, New Knowledge, Innovations, & & Improvements, and Empirical Outcomes. That sequence is important. The design did not alter initially, with analysis used later on to validate it. The analysis came first, and the conceptual reorganization followed.

For anyone associated with Magnet ® Consulting, whether from inside a health system or in an external advisory role, that point must form the entire discussion. The shift was not cosmetic. It reflected what the appraisal data said about the underlying structure of excellence.
Why the history still matters
Magnet's roots return to a 1983 study of "magnet" healthcare facilities, an origin story that still matters because it discusses the program's useful orientation. This was never simply a theory exercise. The program was developed around real organizations that had the ability to bring in and maintain nursing skill and produce strong client care environments. ANCC, the American Nurses Credentialing Center, awards Magnet status through this program, and in 2002 the program name formally altered to Magnet Acknowledgment Program ®.

That timeline assists explain the significance of the later model change. The original 14 Forces of Magnetism provided organizations a method to explain quality in detail. They worked because they called specific characteristics of high performing nursing environments. Gradually, though, any fully grown framework has to respond to a more difficult question: do its parts still show the very best readily available evidence about how excellence in fact clusters and operates?

An analytical analysis of appraisal ratings is one way to respond to that. In healthcare, where leaders cope with variation every day, this method has real reliability. If a model is indicated to direct appraisal and classification, then the information from those appraisals should inform us something about the model'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 should see this as a pointer that Magnet is not fixed. ANCC preserves continuity, however it also expects the model to stay grounded in evidence. That has effects for how leaders interpret every written documentation requirement and every claim of excellence they make.
What a statistical analysis carries out in a setting like this
When people hear the phrase" analytical analysis,"they typically think of technical solutions that sit far from client care. In the Magnet context, the result is far more concrete. An appraisal system produces scores. Those scores, took a look at over a big enough set of organizations and requirements, can reveal patterns. Some components move together regularly. Some might overlap more than expected. Others might be conceptually unique however statistically close adequate that a wider grouping makes more sense for evaluation.

That is the heart of the design change.

The confirmed facts tell us that appraisal ratings were analyzed in 2007 which the resulting 2008 conceptual design grouped the 14 Forces into five elements. Even without stretching 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 ideas. They organized them into a type that much better showed how Magnet characteristics line up in practice.

Anyone who has worked in quality evaluation or accreditation can acknowledge the worth of that relocation. Comprehensive requirements are useful, however excessive fragmentation can develop sound. A well created greater level model can assist customers and applicants concentrate on relationships rather than separated features. In nursing practice, those relationships matter. Management impacts expert practice. Organizational assistance affects innovation. Results are formed by all of it.

This is where thoughtful Magnet ® Consulting tends to be most valuable. Not by treating the 5 components as a branding workout, but by helping organizations understand what a data-informed framework inquires to prove. The ideal concern is not,"How do we examine all the boxes?"It is," How do we show, in a coherent way, that our nursing environment works as an integrated system of quality?"
From 14 forces to 5 components
The relocation from 14 Forces of Magnetism to five components may sound like a simplification, but it is better understood as debt consolidation with purpose. The earlier forces offered a comprehensive map. The later design supplied a stronger organizing lens.

That distinction matters due to the fact that organizations can misunderstand model changes in two opposite ways. Some presume a broader structure needs to be simpler, as if fewer categories suggest lower rigor. Others presume a conceptual regrouping is simply administrative, with no modification in the kind of thinking needed. In practice, neither view holds up well.

A broader model typically demands more synthesis, not less. It asks candidates to link management, structures, practice, enhancement, and outcomes into a persuasive whole. It likewise changes how proof should read. Under a fragmented framework, teams often fall under the habit of assigning each artifact to a narrow requirement and stopping there. Under an element based design, the exact same artifact might carry indicating throughout several locations, but just if the narrative makes those connections plainly and credibly.

That is among the more subtle effects of a statistically informed model. It motivates companies to present nursing excellence as a pattern instead of a filing system.

Consider the names of the five elements. Transformational Management is not just about whether leaders exist or whether organizational charts are existing. It indicates the function of management in shaping instructions and culture. Structural Empowerment recommends that involvement, support, and professional development are constructed into the organization, not treated as periodic favors. Exemplary Expert Practice draws attention to what nurses in fact do and how they do it. New Knowledge, Innovations, & Improvements acknowledges that high performance needs finding out and change. Empirical Outcomes anchors the entire structure in results.

Even the language tells you the model is trying to connect ways and ends. It is difficult to read those 5 parts as isolated silos. They are created to be analyzed together.
Why empirical outcomes could not remain in the background
One of the greatest signals in the present structure is the specific existence of Empirical Outcomes as one of the five components. That calling option brings weight. It tells organizations that quality is not fully established by describing structures, intents, or isolated examples of good work. Results need to become part of the case.

That does not decrease Magnet to a purely numeric workout. ANCC's structure still consists of management, empowerment, expert practice, and innovation. However by raising outcomes within the conceptual model, the program explains that declares about nursing excellence should connect to verifiable results.

This is familiar area for serious nursing leaders. A healthy expert practice environment ought to appear someplace. If governance is strong, if nurses are supported, if innovations are implemented thoughtfully, and if leadership is really transformational, then the company ought to be able to point to results that matter. The specific metrics and documentation requirements are governed by ANCC's manuals and evidence expectations, however the conceptual message is simple: efficiency has to be visible.

In my experience, this is frequently where organizations become more disciplined. Teams can typically inform stories about management rounding, shared decision-making, education, or practice councils. Those narratives matter. What is harder, and more revealing, is demonstrating that these structures led to measurable improvement or sustained excellence over time. A statistically informed design naturally presses applicants because direction.
What the design modification indicates for written documentation
Magnet applicants send composed documents utilizing Sources of Proof and related requirements connected to the Application Handbook. ANCC's crosswalk products explain the handbook's composed documentation proof requirements for candidates. That might sound procedural, but it is precisely where the design modification becomes real.

A conceptual structure shapes what counts as convincing documentation.
https://gunnergbxe448.quantlynix.com/posts/magnet-r-consulting-and-the-roadmap-to-magnet-acknowledgment https://gunnergbxe448.quantlynix.com/posts/magnet-r-consulting-and-the-roadmap-to-magnet-acknowledgment
Under the 5 element model, evidence requires to do more than show that an activity happened. It needs to reveal relevance to the element and, ideally, the broader system of nursing excellence. A policy by itself is hardly ever compelling. A committee charter by itself is hardly ever compelling. A single data point, stripped of context, is rarely engaging. What becomes engaging is the relationship between structure, action, and outcome.

This is where a lot of Magnet ® Consulting work, in the broad sense of advisory thinking around the process, tends to focus. Groups typically need aid moving from accumulation to analysis. Many companies are rich in artifacts and bad in synthesis. They have binders, control panels, satisfying minutes, educational products, and examples from every unit. Yet when they begin drafting narratives, the story pieces. The 5 component design rewards coherence.

A strong submission normally reflects 3 habits.

First, it respects the official evidence requirements instead of improvising around them.

Second, it organizes examples in a way that makes the conceptual logic visible.

Third, it avoids overstating what the information can support.

That last point deserves focus. Magnet paperwork need to be persuasive, however it needs to also be defensible. ANCC's requirements have credibility since they are rooted in disciplined review. If a company suggests causal certainty where only correlation is evident, or provides a narrow regional success as a system broad result without support, the narrative compromises. Expert restraint often checks out as strength.
The model change also affects redesignation thinking
Designation and redesignation stand out in the Magnet Recognition Program ®. ANCC is clear that organizations that currently made Magnet Acknowledgment ought to pursue redesignation to continue being acknowledged. That difference matters because redesignation is where numerous companies confront the model most honestly.

At first classification, there is frequently momentum from the construct. New structures are developed, leaders are lined up, and groups are energized by the work of proving preparedness. Redesignation is different. It asks whether the model has been operationalized deeply enough to endure. It tests whether excellence has been sustained, not staged.

A statistically grounded conceptual design is specifically beneficial here due to the fact that it dissuades shallow upkeep. If the 5 components reflect how quality clusters in real appraisal information, then redesignation must expose whether those clusters exist in lived organizational practice. A healthcare facility can not rely on separated bright spots permanently. With time, reviewers and candidates alike require to see durable relationships among leadership, empowerment, practice, development, and outcomes.

That is also why interim tracking and digital support tools from ANCC matter. They reflect the reality that designation is not the endpoint of the work. Organizations need continuous structure to monitor progress during the classification period. A design constructed on empirical reasoning works best when organizations treat it as a management framework, not just a submission framework.
Where companies typically misread the change
The most common misreading is to deal with the 5 components as broad themes that permit looser evidence. In practice, the opposite is typically real. Wider styles require more powerful judgment. If everything might fit everywhere, then absolutely nothing is being analyzed with precision.

Another frequent error is to separate results from the remainder of the model up until late at the same time. Teams collect stories for months, then rush to bolt on empirical outcomes near submission. That typically produces uncomfortable documentation since the organization has not been believing in element logic all along. Outcomes wind up provided as an appendix to excellence instead of proof of it.

A more grounded method starts earlier. When a shared governance initiative launches, somebody should currently be asking how its result will be seen. When a leadership structure changes, someone ought to currently be asking how that choice connects to expert practice or measurable enhancement. When a nursing development is introduced, someone needs to currently be asking what success will look like and how it will be tracked.

The 2007 statistical analysis, followed by the 2008 conceptual design, sends out a peaceful but firm message: the greatest evidence of quality is patterned proof. Not a stack of detached wins, but a system that acts consistently.
Practical implications for Magnet ® Consulting conversations
The expression Magnet ® Consulting can imply lots of things in the field, from internal executive training to external job assistance. Whatever form it takes, the most beneficial consulting stance is interpretive instead of theatrical. Organizations do not require inflated language. They need assistance checking out the design correctly.

That generally means decreasing and asking much better questions.

When a nursing leader states,"We have a strong expert advancement program, "the follow up question should be,"How does it operate as structural empowerment, and what evidence shows its impact?"When a group highlights a quality enhancement project, the next question should be,"Is this finest framed under innovation and improvement, under professional practice, or as an example that links a number of elements?"When a file is selected for submission, the question should be,"Does this artifact simply exist, or does it assist prove the conceptual case?"

Those are not scholastic differences. They identify whether written documentation feels organized by proof or by optimism.

A beneficial working discipline is to see each element as both a category and a relationship. Transformational Leadership is about leaders, but likewise about what management enables. Structural Empowerment has to do with mechanisms, however also about how those mechanisms shape participation and growth. Excellent Expert Practice is about care delivery, however also about the environment that sustains it. New Understanding, Developments, & Improvements has to do with modification, but likewise about organizational knowing. Empirical Outcomes is about outcomes, but likewise about whether the remainder of the design is really working.

Seen that way, 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 fees, timelines, and procedural reality
ANCC posts different Magnet application and appraisal charge schedules, including an online application cost and appraisal evaluation costs due at composed file submission. On paper, that may look like an administrative detail. In practice, it has a tactical impact on how organizations approach the work.

When review expenses are tied to official submission points, there is extremely little worth in romanticizing the journey. The trademarked phrase Journey to Magnet Excellence ® records the long arc of the process, but journeys still need budgeting, timing, governance, and disciplined execution. Teams have to be ready when they send. A weak conceptual grasp of the model ends up being expensive really quickly, not just in direct charges however in staff time, spirits, and opportunity cost.

That is another factor the analytical basis for the model change should have careful attention. It provides organizations a sharper interpretive structure before they commit considerable effort to written documentation. If the team understands from the start that ANCC's model is empirically organized, then the submission method improves. Proof gathering ends up being more deliberate. Narrative development ends up being more meaningful. Internal evaluation becomes less about gathering everything and more about proving what matters.
Reading the 5 elements as a mature framework
A fully grown recognition model usually does 2 things well. It protects the worths that made the program trustworthy in the first place, and it adapts its structure when proof supports a better company of those values. The Magnet Recognition Program ® appears to have actually done exactly that in the transition from the 14 Forces of Magnetism to the 5 component empirical model.

The values did not vanish. Nursing excellence, professional practice, strong management, organizational support, development, and results remain central. What changed was the architecture. The 2007 statistical analysis of appraisal scores provided ANCC a basis for grouping the forces into a more integrated design, which appeared in 2008. That is the kind of change specialists ought to invite. It shows that the program is willing to let proof fine-tune how excellence is comprehended and assessed.

For healthcare facility leaders, nursing executives, and anybody took part in Magnet ® Consulting, the lesson is not merely historic. It is functional. Check out the design as something made through analysis. Treat the parts as interconnected. Construct paperwork that demonstrates pattern, not simply activity. Respect the distinction between classification and redesignation. And keep in mind that Magnet status, awarded by ANCC, is recognition for conference standards, not simply taking part in a process.

When companies understand that, the design modification stops being a chapter in Magnet history and ends up being a useful guide for how to believe, write, and lead within the program now.

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

Creative Health Care Management is a health care consulting organization founded in 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/ partners with health care organizations transform 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>