Magnet ® Consulting on the Statistical Analysis Behind the Model Modification

16 August 2026

The Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® has actually always carried more weight than a plaque on the wall. It is ANCC's formal acknowledgment of health care companies that satisfy Magnet requirements for nursing excellence and quality client outcomes. For leaders who work inside the process, that acknowledgment is likewise a discipline. It forms how organizations document practice, how they frame nursing management, and how they prove that strong professional environments are tied to measurable results.

That is why the model modification matters.

The existing Magnet structure, arranged around five components of the empirical design, did not appear because 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 five components: Transformational Management, Structural Empowerment, Exemplary Specialist Practice, New Understanding, Developments, & & Improvements, and Empirical Outcomes. That sequence is essential. The design did not change initially, with analysis utilized later on to justify 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 need to form the whole discussion. 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" hospitals, an origin story that still matters due to the fact that it discusses the program's practical orientation. This was never ever just a theory workout. The program was built around genuine organizations that had the ability to bring in and retain 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 officially changed to Magnet Recognition Program ®.

That timeline helps discuss the significance of the later model change. The original 14 Forces of Magnetism provided organizations a method to describe excellence in detail. They were useful due to the fact that they called particular qualities of high carrying out nursing environments. With time, though, any fully grown structure needs to answer a harder question: do its parts still show the best offered proof about how excellence really clusters and operates?

An analytical analysis of appraisal ratings is one way to respond to that. In health care, where leaders live with variation every day, this technique has real reliability. If a model is implied to assist appraisal and designation, then the data from those appraisals should inform us something about the model's internal reasoning. That is what makes the 2007 analysis so significant. It connected the structure of the program to observed scoring patterns instead of relying just on tradition.

In useful terms, companies preparing for designation or redesignation need to see this as a pointer that Magnet is not fixed. ANCC maintains continuity, but it also anticipates the model to remain grounded in proof. That has repercussions for how leaders interpret every written paperwork requirement and every claim of quality they make.
What an analytical analysis performs in a setting like this
When people hear the expression" analytical analysis,"they typically envision technical solutions that sit far away from patient care. In the Magnet context, the impact is a lot more concrete. An appraisal system produces ratings. Those scores, looked at over a large enough set of organizations and criteria, can reveal patterns. Some components move together consistently. Some might overlap more than expected. Others may 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 confirmed facts inform us that appraisal ratings were evaluated in 2007 and that the resulting 2008 conceptual design organized the 14 Forces into 5 parts. Even without extending beyond those facts, the implication is clear. The earlier framework had adequate appraisal history behind it to support a more integrated structure. The five components did not remove the older ideas. They arranged them into a type that better reflected how Magnet characteristics align in practice.

Anyone who has operated in quality review or accreditation can acknowledge the worth of that move. In-depth requirements are useful, but too much fragmentation can create noise. A well developed greater level model can help reviewers and candidates focus on relationships rather than isolated functions. In nursing practice, those relationships matter. Leadership affects expert practice. Organizational assistance impacts innovation. Outcomes 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 exercise, but by assisting organizations understand what a data-informed framework asks to show. The right concern is not,"How do we inspect all packages?"It is," How do we reveal, in a coherent way, that our nursing environment functions as an integrated system of quality?"
From 14 forces to five components
The relocation from 14 Forces of Magnetism to 5 elements might seem like a simplification, but it is much better understood as debt consolidation with purpose. The earlier forces provided a detailed map. The later design supplied a more powerful organizing lens.

That difference matters because companies can misconstrue model changes in two opposite methods. Some assume a wider framework needs to be much easier, as if fewer classifications indicate lower rigor. Others presume a conceptual regrouping is simply administrative, without any change in the kind of believing required. In practice, neither view holds up well.

A wider design often requires more synthesis, not less. It asks candidates to connect management, structures, practice, improvement, and results into a convincing whole. It likewise alters how proof needs to be read. Under a fragmented framework, teams sometimes fall under the routine of designating each artifact to a narrow requirement and stopping there. Under a component based design, the exact same artifact may bring indicating throughout a number of locations, however just if the story makes those connections clearly and credibly.

That is among the more subtle repercussions of a statistically notified design. It encourages companies to present nursing excellence as a pattern rather than a filing system.

Consider the names of the 5 parts. Transformational Leadership is not almost whether leaders exist or whether organizational charts are current. It indicates the role of management in forming direction and culture. Structural Empowerment recommends that participation, support, and professional development are constructed into the company, not treated as periodic favors. Excellent Professional Practice accentuates what nurses in fact do and how they do it. New Knowledge, Developments, & Improvements recognizes that high efficiency requires finding out and change. Empirical Results anchors the entire structure in results.

Even the language tells you the model is trying to link ways and ends. It is difficult to check out those five components as separated silos. They are developed to be interpreted together.
Why empirical outcomes could not stay in the background
One of the strongest signals in the existing framework is the explicit presence of Empirical Outcomes as one of the five parts. That naming option brings weight. It tells companies that quality is not totally established by describing structures, objectives, or separated examples of great. Results must be part of the case.

That does not lower Magnet to a purely numeric workout. ANCC's framework still includes management, empowerment, expert practice, and development. However by elevating outcomes within the conceptual model, the program makes clear that claims about nursing excellence need to link to verifiable results.

This recognizes territory for major nursing leaders. A healthy expert practice environment need to appear someplace. If governance is strong, if nurses are supported, if innovations are executed thoughtfully, and if leadership is genuinely transformational, then the organization must have the ability to point to outcomes that matter. The exact metrics and documents requirements are governed by ANCC's handbooks and proof expectations, however the conceptual message is uncomplicated: efficiency needs to be visible.

In my experience, this is frequently where organizations become more disciplined. Teams can generally inform stories about leadership rounding, shared decision-making, education, or practice councils. Those stories matter. What is harder, and more revealing, is showing that these structures resulted in measurable enhancement or sustained excellence over time. A statistically notified design naturally presses candidates because direction.
What the model change suggests for composed documentation
Magnet candidates submit written paperwork using Sources of Proof and related requirements connected to the Application Handbook. ANCC's crosswalk products describe the handbook's composed documentation proof requirements for applicants. That might sound procedural, but it is exactly where the model change becomes real.

A conceptual structure shapes what counts as persuasive documentation.

Under the five component design, proof needs to do more than show that an activity took place. It requires to show significance to the element and, ideally, the more comprehensive system of nursing excellence. A policy by itself is seldom compelling. A committee charter by itself is seldom compelling. A single data point, removed of context, is hardly ever engaging. What becomes engaging is the relationship in between structure, action, and outcome.

This is where a great deal of Magnet ® Consulting work, in the broad sense of advisory believing around the procedure, tends to focus. Teams typically require help moving from accumulation to interpretation. Lots of companies are rich in artifacts and poor in synthesis. They have binders, control panels, satisfying minutes, academic materials, and examples from every system. Yet when they begin drafting stories, the story fragments. The five element model rewards coherence.

A strong submission generally shows 3 habits.

First, it appreciates the formal proof requirements rather than improvising around them.

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

Third, it prevents overemphasizing what the data can support.

That last point should have focus. Magnet documentation ought to be persuasive, however it ought to also be defensible. ANCC's requirements have credibility because they are rooted in disciplined review. If an organization indicates causal certainty where only connection is evident, or presents a narrow local success as a system broad result without assistance, the narrative damages. Professional restraint often reads as strength.
The model modification also impacts redesignation thinking
Designation and redesignation are distinct in the Magnet Acknowledgment Program ®. ANCC is clear that companies that currently earned Magnet Recognition must pursue redesignation to continue being recognized. That difference matters due to the fact that redesignation is where lots of organizations challenge the model most honestly.

At initially classification, there is frequently momentum from the construct. New structures are developed, leaders are lined up, and teams are energized by the work of showing readiness. Redesignation is different. It asks whether the model has actually been operationalized deeply enough to sustain. It evaluates whether quality has been sustained, not staged.

A statistically grounded conceptual design is particularly helpful here since it prevents superficial maintenance. If the five components reflect how excellence clusters in real appraisal information, then redesignation must expose whether those clusters exist in lived organizational practice. A medical facility can not depend on separated brilliant areas permanently. Over time, reviewers and candidates alike need to see durable relationships amongst leadership, empowerment, practice, development, and outcomes.

That is also why interim tracking and digital assistance tools from ANCC matter. They show the reality that classification is not the endpoint of the work. Organizations require ongoing structure to monitor development during the classification period. A model built on empirical logic works best when organizations treat it as a management structure, not only a submission framework.
Where companies typically misread the change
The most typical misreading is to treat the 5 parts as broad themes that enable looser proof. In practice, the reverse is often true. Broader themes require stronger judgment. If whatever might fit everywhere, then absolutely nothing is being translated with precision.

Another regular mistake is to separate outcomes from the remainder of the model till late in the process. Teams gather stories for months, then scramble to bolt on empirical outcomes near submission. That typically produces uncomfortable paperwork due to the fact that the company has not been believing in component logic the whole time. Outcomes end up presented as an appendix to excellence instead of proof of it.

A more grounded technique begins earlier. When a shared governance effort launches, someone needs to currently be asking how its impact will be seen. When a leadership structure modifications, someone should already be asking how that decision links to expert practice or quantifiable improvement. When a nursing innovation is introduced, somebody needs to already be asking what success will appear like and how it will be tracked.

The 2007 analytical analysis, followed by the 2008 conceptual model, sends out a peaceful but firm message: the strongest evidence of quality is patterned proof. Not a pile of disconnected wins, but a system that acts consistently.
Practical ramifications for Magnet ® Consulting conversations
The phrase Magnet ® Consulting can mean numerous things in the field, from internal executive coaching to external project assistance. Whatever form it takes, the most useful consulting position is interpretive rather than theatrical. Organizations do not need inflated language. They need aid reading the design correctly.

That normally suggests slowing down and asking much better questions.

When a nursing leader states,"We have a strong expert advancement program, "the follow up concern should be,"How does it function as structural empowerment, and what proof shows its result?"When a group highlights a quality improvement task, the next concern should be,"Is this finest framed under development and enhancement, under expert practice, or as an example that links a number of parts?"When a document is picked for submission, the concern should be,"Does this artifact simply exist, or does it assist show the conceptual case?"

Those are not scholastic differences. They figure out whether composed paperwork feels arranged by evidence or by optimism.

A helpful working discipline is to see each element as both a classification and a relationship. Transformational Leadership is about leaders, however likewise about what management makes it possible for. Structural Empowerment is about mechanisms, however also about how those mechanisms shape involvement and growth. Excellent Expert Practice has to do with care delivery, but likewise about the environment that sustains it. New Understanding, Developments, & Improvements is about modification, but likewise about organizational knowing. Empirical Results has to do with results, but likewise about whether the rest of the design is in fact working.

Seen that method, the analytical analysis behind the model change becomes more than a historic note. It ends up being a method for reading the structure itself.
The function of fees, timelines, and procedural reality
ANCC posts separate Magnet application and appraisal cost schedules, consisting of an online application fee and appraisal evaluation costs due at composed document submission. On paper, that may look like an administrative information. In practice, it has a strategic result on how companies approach the work.

When evaluation costs are tied to official submission points, there is very little value in glamorizing the journey. The trademarked phrase Journey to Magnet Excellence ® captures the long arc of the process, but journeys still need budgeting, timing, governance, and disciplined execution. Teams need to be ready when they send. A weak conceptual grasp of the model ends up being pricey very quickly, not only in direct fees however in staff time, morale, and opportunity cost.

That is another reason the analytical basis for the design modification deserves mindful attention. It gives organizations a sharper interpretive structure before they commit significant effort to written documents. If the team understands from the start that ANCC's design is empirically arranged, then the submission strategy enhances. Proof event ends up being more deliberate. Narrative development ends up being more meaningful. Internal review becomes less about collecting everything and more about showing what matters.
Reading the 5 parts as a mature framework
A mature recognition design generally does two things well. It preserves the worths that made the program trustworthy in the very first location, and it adjusts its structure when evidence supports a much better company of those values. The Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® appears to have actually done exactly that in the transition from the 14 Forces of Magnetism to the 5 part empirical model.

The values did not disappear. Nursing quality, professional practice, strong management, organizational support, development, and outcomes remain main. What changed was the architecture. The 2007 analytical analysis of appraisal ratings gave ANCC a basis for grouping the forces into a more integrated model, which appeared in https://keeganyfda310.capitaljays.com/posts/magnet-r-consulting-guide-to-interim-keeping-track-of-during-designation https://keeganyfda310.capitaljays.com/posts/magnet-r-consulting-guide-to-interim-keeping-track-of-during-designation 2008. That is the type of modification professionals should welcome. It shows that the program wants to let evidence refine how quality is understood and assessed.

For healthcare facility leaders, nursing executives, and anybody engaged in Magnet ® Consulting, the lesson is not merely historic. It is operational. Read the model as something earned through analysis. Deal with the components as interconnected. Build documentation that demonstrates pattern, not simply activity. Respect the difference between designation and redesignation. And keep in mind that Magnet status, awarded by ANCC, is recognition for conference standards, not merely taking part in a process.

When organizations comprehend 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 (CHCM) is a nursing consulting and education company founded in 1978 by Primary Nursing pioneer Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Headquartered in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ partners with health care organizations strengthen the patient experience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_experience through its signature Relationship-Based Care® model, Primary Nursing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_nursing, professional governance, and competency assessment.

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

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

Identity & Contact

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

Leadership & People

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

Methodologies & Expertise

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

Publications

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

History

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

Digital Presence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

]

</script>