Magnet ® Consulting and the Magnet Recognition Timeline Fundamentals

15 August 2026

Magnet Acknowledgment Program ® brings a specific weight in nursing. It is not a marketing label created by a healthcare facility, and it is not a casual award that can be declared through great intents alone. It is an ANCC program that recognizes healthcare companies for nursing quality and quality client outcomes. That matters since it positions nursing practice, management, structure, innovation, and outcomes under an official standard instead of a vague aspiration.

The history behind the program helps explain why companies treat it with such seriousness. The roots return to a 1983 study of medical facilities that were viewed as especially successful in drawing in and keeping nurses. The name later on developed, and the program officially became the Magnet Recognition Program ® in 2002. Today, Magnet designation is awarded by the American Nurses Credentialing Center, the credentialing body through which the American Nurses Association provides these organizational acknowledgment programs.

For companies considering the journey, the very first practical question is seldom philosophical. It is usually functional: the length of time does this take, who owns the work, and where does Magnet ® Consulting fit? Those are reasonable questions, specifically for health systems balancing staffing realities, competing quality top priorities, and executive expectations.
What Magnet recognition really asks a company to demonstrate
A typical misconception is that Magnet acknowledgment is mostly a file workout. The written submission matters, however the classification itself is about meeting ANCC's Magnet standards. ANCC explains the program as both acknowledgment and a roadmap to nursing quality. That double function is essential. The recognition comes at completion of the process, but the work begins much earlier, when leaders choose whether their existing practices and outcomes can stand up to formal appraisal.

The current Magnet structure is arranged around five parts of the empirical model:
Transformational Leadership Structural Empowerment Exemplary Expert Practice New Understanding, Innovations, & & Improvements Empirical Outcomes
That structure did not appear out of no place. ANCC's design evolved from the earlier 14 Forces of Magnetism after analytical analysis of appraisal scores, and the 2008 conceptual model grouped those forces into the 5 elements utilized today. For leaders trying to make sense of the standards, this matters due to the fact that it advises them that Magnet is not merely about culture statements or separated projects. The structure is broad by design. It asks whether nursing excellence is visible in management, systems, practice, improvement work, and outcomes.

In real functional terms, that indicates organizations must believe beyond slogans. A nursing strategic strategy, for instance, might sound strong in a board discussion, however Magnet recognition anticipates a stronger connection in between stated worths and proof of efficiency. The same is true for shared governance, professional development, innovation, and results reporting. An organization is not just saying, "We value nursing." It is expected to demonstrate what that value appears like in practice.
Where Magnet ® Consulting ends up being useful
Magnet ® Consulting is often most important at the point where interest fulfills complexity. Numerous organizations understand the value of Magnet recognition in concept. Fewer are instantly prepared to equate the standards into a proof strategy, a composing method, and an internal governance structure that can hold up over time.

The consulting role is not to replace nurse leaders or to manufacture a story that does not exist. It is to assist a company interpret the ANCC framework accurately, arrange its work around the required evidence, and reduce preventable confusion. That sounds simple till groups start asking really useful concerns. Which examples best show the standards? How should proof be organized? Who owns each narrative area? What belongs in preparation for composed paperwork, and what belongs in longer-term cultural work?

Those concerns can consume months if no one has a clear technique. In companies with fully grown nursing facilities, the need might be light. A system may generally want external perspective, task discipline, or an independent review of readiness. In companies earlier in the journey, speaking with assistance may be more foundational, helping leaders align expectations before the application work begins.

The worth of outside guidance is not just technical. It is also political, in the healthiest sense of the word. Magnet work spans executives, nursing management, frontline staff, educators, quality groups, and in some cases several schools or entities. When top priorities collide, the procedure can stall. A knowledgeable consulting technique typically assists produce a shared language and sequence. That can keep a deserving task from becoming a collection of disconnected binders, dashboards, and committee updates.
The timeline is not one date, it is a sequence
When individuals request the Magnet timeline, they typically desire a neat response, something like "it takes X months." The more truthful answer is that there are several timelines inside the general process.

One is the readiness timeline. This is the duration before an organization officially uses, when leaders assess whether their nursing structures, proof, and outcomes are established enough to support a trustworthy submission. Some organizations find that they are better than anticipated. Others recognize they need more time to reinforce procedures or collect more powerful result evidence.

Another is the formal ANCC timeline, that includes the online application and later phases connected to appraisal and composed file submission. ANCC posts separate Magnet application and appraisal fee schedules. The online application fee and the appraisal evaluation costs due at written document submission stand out parts of that monetary series. That alone informs leaders something important: the procedure is phased, not a single transaction.

A 3rd timeline is internal and frequently undervalued. Even when the standards are understood, companies still need cycles for preparing, review, modification, executive approval, and information validation. That work can be slowed by turnover, mergers, contending studies, spending plan season, or easy documentation tiredness. The Magnet journey is often as much a workout in disciplined coordination as it remains in nursing excellence.

Because ANCC likewise differentiates classification from redesignation, the timeline concern changes once again for organizations that already hold Magnet recognition. Redesignation is not simply a celebratory renewal. It is a separate effort to continue being recognized. Teams that have actually already been through one classification cycle frequently know this in theory, however the memory of the initial effort can develop false self-confidence. In practice, redesignation still requires purposeful preparation, fresh proof, and clear ownership.
Written documents is where preparation becomes visible
For most organizations, the composed documents stage is where the abstract concept of Magnet becomes concrete. ANCC requires composed documentation tied to Sources of Proof and the Application Manual's evidence requirements. That expression, "Sources of Evidence," may sound administrative, but it has tactical consequences.

Evidence requirements force a level of discipline that lots of companies do not maintain in regular operations. A team might keep in mind an effective nursing effort, a strong management intervention, or a quality improvement success. That memory is not the same as usable documentation. To support a Magnet story, an organization needs examples that are not just compelling but also appropriately aligned with the needed standards.

This is where timelines frequently extend. The hold-up is not constantly an absence of great. More frequently, the problem is retrieval and positioning. Teams need to locate the right examples, validate that they fit the evidence requirements, gather supporting data, and write in a way that reflects the real standard rather than a general success story. Strong organizations can still struggle here. They may have excellent practices but unequal file control. They might have good results however inconsistent versioning throughout quality reports. They might have strong nurse leader engagement however no single mechanism for combining evidence.

Magnet ® Consulting typically helps most at this phase by imposing order. That might include building a composing calendar, clarifying who reviews each section, recognizing proof gaps early, and preventing drift into unnecessary material. Among the most convenient methods to waste time is to overproduce. Teams often assume that more pages indicate a stronger application. Usually, clarity, importance, and direct positioning serve them better.
Why empirical outcomes alter the conversation
Of the five Magnet parts, Empirical Results tends to sharpen internal conversation fastest. It is one thing to explain leadership or professional structures. It is another to show results. That focus is healthy. It keeps the recognition grounded in what clients, nurses, and companies actually experience.

Outcome-focused expectations also describe why timeline preparation can not be totally compressed. You can assemble committees rapidly. You can designate writers quickly. You can not make a significant pattern of results, and you need to not attempt to dress regular noise as remarkable efficiency. If a hospital or health system is still developing its dashboards, data governance, or nursing-sensitive reporting procedures, that reality impacts readiness.

There is a useful management lesson here. Teams often feel pressure to "opt for Magnet" due to the fact that the designation is appreciated. Affection alone is not a timeline technique. If a company does not have steady proof under the empirical design, the better relocation might be to invest more time strengthening the underlying work before formal submission. That is not delay for its own sake. It is risk management, and more importantly, it respects the purpose of the program.
The distinction in between organized preparation and performative preparation
You can usually tell early whether a company is https://chcm.com/about/ https://chcm.com/about/ building a Magnet procedure or staging one. Organized preparation looks calm on the surface, even when the work is heavy. Individuals understand who owns what. Leaders can discuss where they remain in the series. Writers understand the standards they are attending to. Information customers know what they require to validate.

Performative preparation feels busier. There are numerous conferences, lots of shared drives, many draft files, and often a great deal of language about excellence. But when someone asks a direct question, such as which proof finest supports a particular standard, the answer is fuzzy. Work is taking place, however it is not constantly connected.

This difference matters because the timeline frequently breaks at the seams in between teams. The ANCC structure is coherent. Internal health center structures are not constantly meaningful. Nursing management may be all set, while quality reporting lags. Educators might be organized, while executive signoff lags. System-level branding might be polished, while regional evidence ownership remains unclear. Magnet ® Consulting can be beneficial exactly since it requires those seams into the open before due dates arrive.
Budget, fees, and the reality of sequencing
The financial side of Magnet preparation should have a straightforward discussion. ANCC posts present Magnet application and appraisal fee schedules, consisting of an online application charge and appraisal evaluation costs connected to written document submission. That means organizations need to budget in phases rather than picturing a single all-in expense at the start.

What is often missed is the internal expense of preparation. Even without putting a number on it, any executive sponsor ought to expect substantial personnel time throughout nursing management, composing groups, information teams, and support functions. This is not a reason to prevent the procedure. It is a factor to resource it honestly. Underfunded Magnet work tends to overuse goodwill. For a few months, goodwill can carry a task. For a longer journey, structure matters more.

A useful planning conversation typically benefits from five simple concerns:
Are we evaluating preparedness honestly, or just expressing ambition? Who owns the written documentation process from start to finish? How strong is our evidence organization today? Do leaders understand the distinction in between classification and redesignation? Have we budgeted for both ANCC costs and the internal labor required?
These are not glamorous concerns, however they are the ones that prevent late surprises.
Digital tools assist, however they do not change judgment
ANCC offers digital tools and guides to support the appraisal procedure and interim monitoring during designation. That works, especially for companies trying to maintain consistency over a long timeline. Digital assistance can enhance exposure, standardize tracking, and decrease the possibility that essential tasks disappear into e-mail threads.

Still, tools are just as practical as the procedure around them. A weak ownership design will not end up being strong because the control panel is cleaner. A fragmented proof library will not end up being persuasive due to the fact that filenames are more orderly. The long-lasting difficulty is not technical storage. It is judgment. Teams should choose what evidence is greatest, what narrative best reflects the requirement, where gaps remain, and when a section is genuinely ready.

That point deserves stressing due to the fact that Magnet projects in some cases wander into software optimism. Leaders assume that when the platform is picked, progress will speed up instantly. Generally, progress accelerates when the team agrees on requirements analysis, review pathways, and final decision rights. Technology helps after those choices are made.
Trademarked language and why accuracy matters
There is likewise a language discipline to this work that individuals sometimes neglect. Magnet, Magnet Recognition Program ®, and Journey to Magnet Quality ® are trademarked terms within the ANCC framework. Designated companies might utilize official Magnet logo designs under trademark guidelines. This is not simple legal housekeeping. It reflects a broader expectation of precision.

If an organization is pursuing acknowledgment, it must discuss that pursuit accurately. If it has actually already earned designation, it must represent that status precisely. If it is moving toward redesignation, that status ought to likewise be clear. Precision in language tends to mirror accuracy in preparation. Loose talk typically signals loose process.

In consulting engagements, this shows up more than outsiders may anticipate. A health center might casually explain itself as "Magnet caliber" or "on the Magnet course" in ways that create internal confusion. While those phrases might express aspiration, they are not substitutes for ANCC-recognized status. Clear terminology keeps expectations reasonable and secures trustworthiness with staff.
What experienced leaders watch for in the middle of the process
The early stage of Magnet work frequently feels energizing. The requirements are meaningful, the strategy sounds compelling, and the company can envision the destination clearly. The middle stage is harder. Energy dips, contending concerns heighten, and groups find that some evidence is weaker or harder to obtain than expected.

That middle stretch is where experienced leaders watch for a few warning signs. One is narrative inflation, where the writing grows more polished as the evidence grows less specific. Another is evaluation bottlenecking, where too many people can comment but too few can decide. A 3rd is timeline rejection, where leaders continue to speak as though the original time frame is intact long after internal milestones have actually slipped.

Good Magnet ® Consulting tends to be particularly important in this stage since it brings external discipline without panic. Sometimes the best advice is to push forward with firmer task controls. In some cases it is to pause, strengthen a weak domain, and re-sequence work. Neither option is glamorous. Both are better than pretending that momentum alone will close real gaps.
Redesignation deserves its own strategy
Organizations that have already accomplished Magnet acknowledgment in some cases underestimate redesignation since they have actually endured the first journey. Familiarity assists, but redesignation is not autopilot. ANCC treats it as a distinct process for organizations looking for to continue being recognized.

The practical difficulty is that previous success can create 2 contending impulses. One states, "We understand how to do this." The other states, "Let's not transform whatever." Both instincts can be useful, and both can end up being traps. Reusing a structure may be efficient. Recycling presumptions is riskier. The company has changed considering that the initial designation. Leaders have actually altered. Outcomes have evolved. Enhancement work has actually continued. The redesignation process requires to show present truth, not a preserved memory of earlier excellence.

This is another point where an outdoors review, whether through official Magnet ® Consulting or a lighter advisory approach, can be valuable. A fresh set of eyes can frequently identify legacy practices that internal groups no longer notice.
The companies that handle the timeline best
The companies that handle the Magnet timeline well are not always the ones with the most refined discussions. They are usually the ones that appreciate the work at ground level. They comprehend that Magnet acknowledgment is awarded by ANCC, that the requirements are structured around a specified model, that composed documentation should align with proof requirements, which classification and redesignation are different undertakings. They also acknowledge that development depends upon sensible sequencing, disciplined ownership, and truthful preparedness assessment.

That is the genuine worth of going over Magnet ® Consulting alongside timeline basics. Consulting is not the point, and speed is not the point. The point is to develop a process that shows the seriousness of the recognition itself. When companies do that well, the timeline becomes simpler to manage because it is anchored in reality instead of goal alone.

Magnet recognition has always stood for more than a title. It reflects a sustained commitment to nursing excellence and quality patient results. Any timeline worth trusting has to start there.

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

Creative Health Care Management (CHCM) is a health care consulting and education firm established in 1978 by nurse leader Marie Manthey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Manthey. Located in Bloomington, Minnesota, Creative Health Care Management https://chcm.com/ partners with health care organizations improve 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>