Turning Competency Assessment Results Into Actionable Advancement Plans

15 November 2026

Competency evaluation only earns its keep when it alters practice. That is the genuine test. A stack of completed kinds, a spreadsheet of scores, or a neat control panel might satisfy a procedure requirement, but none of that improves client care, group self-confidence, or functional dependability unless the outcomes lead to particular development decisions.

That space appears frequently in health care. Teams total yearly evaluations, confirm selected skills, and file involvement, yet months later the very same weak points resurface. A high threat treatment still produces doubt. A policy modification still develops irregular practice. A repeating problem still arrive at the unit educator's desk. The concern is hardly ever effort alone. More often, the problem is translation. Leaders collect competency assessment results, however they do not transform https://cristianyoad597.yousher.com/proficiency-evaluation-in-healthcare-donna-wright-viewpoints-on-high-risk-practice https://cristianyoad597.yousher.com/proficiency-evaluation-in-healthcare-donna-wright-viewpoints-on-high-risk-practice them into strategies that are targeted, sensible, and linked to the actual work.

This is where the Donna Wright Competency Evaluation Design works, not simply as a technique for identifying proficiency needs, however as a useful frame for deciding what to do next. The model, developed by Donna Wright and used in healthcare settings for more than 30 years, is widely acknowledged for making competency evaluation more tactical and more outcomes driven. It emphasizes partnership in between staff and leadership, centers the learner in the recognition procedure, and concentrates on the competencies that really matter in a provided role or unit.

Those functions matter since development plans fail when they are generic. They succeed when they show risk, change, and lived work.
Start with what the outcomes are in fact telling you
A competency report can tempt leaders to sort staff into basic categories: qualified, needs enhancement, total, insufficient. That is administratively neat, however professionally shallow. In practice, results typically contain numerous various stories at once.

One nurse may demonstrate strong understanding in a case study yet struggle with speed and sequencing during a return demonstration. Another might perform a treatment properly in everyday work however show weak understanding of why a current policy modification matters. A third may have no problem with technical actions at all, but may need assistance with prioritization under pressure. If all three get the same advancement strategy, the assessment has actually lost its value.

The very first move is analysis, not intervention. Before assigning education, ask what kind of gap the outcome shows. Is it a knowledge space, a skill execution gap, a change adoption space, or a consistency gap in daily practice? Those distinctions shape the response.

The Donna Wright approach helps here since it does not lower competency to a single test event. Sources explaining the model point to numerous validation methods, consisting of directed practice, evidence of daily work, peer review, case studies, and return presentations. That matters for action planning. If the evidence originated from numerous angles, then the advancement response can be more exact. You are not responding to one unstable minute. You are seeing a fuller image of performance.
Use the four-question lens before composing any plan
One of the most practical aspects of competency assessment in health care Donna Wright promoted is using 4 questions to identify what should have attention: what is new, what is changing, what is high risk, and what is problematic. Those concerns are typically used to identify yearly proficiency priorities, however they are just as useful after the evaluation is complete.

They keep leaders from overreacting to noise and underreacting to real exposure. A nurse who misses out on a detail on a hardly ever utilized low consequence job may not need an extensive strategy. A clinician who shows unpredictability in a high danger medication process almost certainly does. An unit that performs well on tradition practices however inconsistently uses a revised policy requires a various intervention than a system handling a new gadget rollout.

When I have actually seen development plans work best, they were anchored to one or more of those 4 classifications. The language of the strategy ended up being sharper. Rather of stating, "evaluation main line care," the plan became, "demonstrate consistent application of the revised main line maintenance treatment introduced this quarter." Instead of stating, "enhance emergency action understanding," the plan became, "verify function clarity and sequencing for high risk quick reaction occasions using assisted practice and case review."

That difference sounds little on paper. In operation, it changes whatever. Personnel understand what they are aiming for. Managers understand what to observe. Educators know what assistance to design.
Separate unit-level patterns from private needs
A common error is to treat every competency result as a specific removal concern. Sometimes that is exactly best. Frequently it is not.

If ten individuals on the very same unit reveal the same confusion around a new piece of equipment, the problem is most likely not ten separate efficiency shortages. It may be a rollout problem, an access problem, a workflow issue, or an inequality in between the education method and the real task environment. If a peer evaluation process exposes variation in how staff record the same procedure, that may indicate absence of clearness in expectations rather than separated underperformance.

That is one reason the donna wright proficiency assessment model stays so relevant. It motivates leaders and personnel to identify which competencies matter for that function or system, rather than defaulting to a one size fits all list. When you evaluate competency evaluation results, search for patterns in groups before you appoint strategies to people. Ask whether the result points to a system need, a group practice requirement, or a person specific need.

A system need might require modified resources, clearer policy interaction, or better access to directed practice. A team practice need might require shared case conversations or peer evaluation. An individual particular requirement may require concentrated training and repeat recognition. If you collapse those classifications into one action, usually more education, you hang around without getting much safer or better.
Write development prepares that explain a behavior, not an aspiration
Many development plans stop working because they are vague enough to endure any audit and weak sufficient to alter nothing. Phrases like "increase confidence," "evaluation policy," or "continue to enhance" sound sensible however do not produce accountable movement.

An actionable plan must call the practice that should be demonstrated, the context in which it matters, and the method by which progress will be confirmed. That does not need a long template. It needs precision.

Here is the difference in plain terms. "Review wound care" is not a development strategy. "Use assisted practice and evidence of everyday work to validate appropriate application of the upgraded injury care procedure on appointed patients over the next review duration" is an advancement plan. "Improve communication" is not an advancement plan. "Take part in peer evaluation of handoff practice and show consistent addition of high risk issues throughout shift report" is closer to one.

The learner-centered design related to proficiency Donna Wright mentor is particularly essential here. When staff have ownership in the recognition process, strategies are most likely to show the real barrier. A nurse might inform you that the problem is not standard understanding, but an absence of current exposure. A respiratory therapist might explain that the procedure itself is clear, but the workflow around devices setup has actually altered. That sort of information is tough to discover through top down projects alone.
Match the recognition method to the advancement goal
Not every space should be dealt with the very same method. This sounds obvious, yet health care organizations consistently send every problem back through the exact same education channel. If the issue was determined in day-to-day work, a slide deck rarely resolves it. If the concern is judgment under altering conditions, a basic checklist signoff might not inform you enough.

Because the Donna Wright model is related to numerous recognition approaches, leaders have space to be selective. That versatility is one of its useful strengths. You can customize the advancement plan to the type of efficiency that requires to be strengthened.

A short checklist can assist frame that option:
Use assisted practice when staff requirement coached repeating in a genuine or carefully supported setting. Use proof of daily work when consistency in routine practice matters more than a one time performance. Use peer review when shared standards and expert accountability belong to the gap. Use case research studies when judgment, prioritization, or decision making requirements to be surfaced. Use return demonstrations when a technical sequence should be proven and safely.
That does not suggest each plan gets just one method. In fact, a few of the strongest strategies integrate them. A high danger procedure might start with case research study conversation, move into directed practice, and end with evidence from daily work. The point is not range for its own sake. The point is fit.
Turn remarks into usable signals
Many groups underuse narrative feedback. They record talk about proficiency assessment, then move on as if just the pass stop working result matters. That is a missed opportunity.

Comments often expose the specific point where an advancement plan must focus. A broad outcome might say that a nurse satisfied proficiency expectations, while a supervisor's note states the nurse required triggering to recognize the changed action in a revised policy. That is not a failure, but it is meaningful. A peer review note may mention safe technical performance coupled with irregular description to patients. Again, that might not alter the completion status, however it offers texture to the next step.

The trick is to treat comments as information, not decoration. Search for repeating expressions. "Needed triggering." "Not familiar with change." "Precise however slow." "Strong in regular settings." "Reluctant in escalation." None of these needs punishment. Each of them points toward a different development response.

When comments are vague, leaders ought to enhance the way feedback is composed. Specific observations produce better plans than broad impressions. "Evaluated treatment" informs you practically nothing. "Identified proper materials however missed the modified documentation step till prompted" tells you where to intervene.

This is likewise where individuals looking for donna wright proficiency examples frequently get stuck. They desire sample wording, which is reasonable, however copied language rarely fits the unit in front of you. Better than a bank of stock phrases is a habit of observation that captures what really occurred and why it matters.
Keep the strategy proportionate to the risk
One factor personnel disengage from proficiency procedures is that every gap feels like it triggers the same heavy action. That develops fatigue and defensiveness. An efficient strategy appreciates the distinction in between a meaningful vulnerability and a minor issue.

A changed process connected to a high threat clinical task deserves rapid follow up. A lower stakes variation in a task seldom carried out may call for lighter assistance, especially if there is no sign of continuous hazardous practice. Judgment is necessary here. Proficiency assessment must strengthen a culture of success, not create a culture of continuous correction.

That expression, culture of success, matters. Sources explaining the design highlight that leaders produce a culture that supports favorable employee habits and the company's objective. Development strategies must reflect that spirit. The objective is not to catch people failing. The objective is to help personnel carry out confidently in the work that matters most.

In useful terms, proportionate planning typically means being selective about strength, timing, and documents. Some requirements call for instant assisted validation. Others necessitate support at the next group finding out touchpoint. Some need supervisor observation. Others are best dealt with through peer support. If every concern becomes an official removal event, you train people to conceal uncertainty instead of address it.
Build timelines around work, not around paperwork
The best advancement plans are possible to carry out in the actual speed of the unit. This sounds simple, however it is often where plans disintegrate. A supervisor writes a thoughtful plan, the teacher concurs, the staff member signs it, and then medical reality intervenes. No one has safeguarded time. The validating observer is not available. The equipment is bound. The policy update has not been strengthened in huddles. Three months later on, the strategy is still "in development."

A convenient timeline is not just a due date. It consists of when and where the advancement activity will occur and who will support it. In a busy health care setting, that may suggest tying guided practice to a predictable part of the shift, utilizing case review throughout an existing meeting, or gathering evidence of everyday work over a defined duration rather than arranging a single high pressure event.

This is where a donna wright proficiency worksheet, if your company uses one, need to function as a tool rather than a filing requirement. The kind should assist record focus, method, timing, and validation, not bury the work under generic boxes. If the worksheet makes every plan look the very same, it is most likely working versus the purpose.
Make staff co-authors of the plan
Ownership modifications outcomes. That is among the clearest lessons in proficiency work. The design associated with Donna Wright is constructed around ownership, empowerment, and responsibility, which mix is not abstract. It changes the quality of development planning.

When personnel aid form the next step, plans become more truthful and more usable. They are most likely to say where they feel least constant. They are most likely to suggest the recognition method that would actually help. They are more likely to follow through since the plan does not feel imposed from outside their practice.

This does not indicate the leader goes back from responsibility. It implies accountability is clearer because the strategy is grounded in shared understanding. A supervisor can still set expectations and timeframes. The distinction is that the staff member can see the reasoning of the plan and the relevance to patient care.

One of the strongest conversations after examining competency evaluation results frequently starts with a simple question: "Where did this feel strong, and where did it feel less automated?" That phrasing opens much better conversation than "Why did you miss this?" It welcomes reflection without lowering standards.
Track movement, not simply completion
A finished advancement activity is not constantly proof of enhanced skills. Someone can participate in an evaluation, end up a case research study, or carry out a single return presentation and still go back to uneven practice later on. That is why action preparation need to consist of some method to verify sustained motion where it matters.

In numerous cases, proof of everyday work is the most meaningful measure due to the fact that it reflects performance under normal conditions. For some issues, peer review might show whether the practice has actually ended up being consistent across shifts or circumstances. For high danger locations, a follow up validation may be suitable after the preliminary intervention. The main point is to avoid complicated administrative closure with professional growth.

A helpful way to think of follow through is this: the advancement plan ends just when the initial concern has actually been addressed in the setting where it actually lives. If the concern was technical execution, look there. If it was policy adoption, check application, not memory alone. If it was judgment, review a practical case, not simply the phrasing of the protocol.

The teams that do this well are not necessarily the groups with the most elaborate systems. They are usually the teams that stay near to practice and are disciplined about focusing on what the results mean.
A practical series for turning outcomes into action
When leaders get stuck, it helps to use a short series that keeps the work focused without making it mechanical.
Interpret the result by determining the actual kind of gap and the context in which it appeared. Test the problem versus the 4 top priority concerns: brand-new, altering, high threat, or problematic. Decide whether the need is private, group based, or system based. Write a strategy with a particular behavior, a suitable validation technique, and a practical timeline. Recheck performance in the setting where the issue matters most.
That sequence is easy enough to utilize consistently and flexible sufficient to fit different roles or systems. It likewise lines up well with the spirit of the donna wright competency evaluation design due to the fact that it keeps the work strategic, collaborative, and centered on significant performance.
Where leaders include the most value
The crucial leadership contribution is not completing the strategy quicker. It is creating the conditions in which proficiency evaluation results in better care rather than more paperwork.

That suggests withstanding the desire to evaluate everything. It implies concentrating on what is brand-new, altering, high risk, and bothersome. It indicates selecting validation approaches that fit the proficiency rather than defaulting to the same annual routine. It implies checking out remarks thoroughly, observing patterns, and reacting proportionately. It suggests dealing with staff as capable partners in the development process.

Healthcare companies often look for the ideal design template, the right donna wright proficiency examples, or the most effective documentation structure. Those tools can help, but they are not the heart of the work. The heart of the work is judgment. What do these competency assessment results reveal about readiness, reliability, and risk? What kind of assistance will produce better everyday practice? What need to take place next, and how will we know it worked?

When those concerns drive the reaction, proficiency evaluation becomes what it should be: a strategic process that hones practice, supports personnel, and secures clients. That is when results turn into action, and action develops into advancement that lasts.

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

CHCM is a health care consulting organization founded in 1978 by nurse leader Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ partners with nursing and clinical teams transform the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its proprietary 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>