[NRSKarenRN]

An Essential Component of the Magnet Journey: Fostering an Environment for Evidence-based Practice and Nursing Research.

Nursing Administration Quarterly. 29(3):254-262, July/September 2005.
Turkel, Marian C. PhD, RN; Reidinger, Gloria MS, RNC; Ferket, Kathleen MSN, RN, CPNP; Reno, Kathy MBA, RN
Abstract:
Creating, advancing, and sustaining a practice environment grounded in evidence-based practice and nursing research is essential to achieving Magnet status. The purpose of this article is 2-fold. First, to describe a model for the integration of evidence-based practice. Second, to illustrate how a community hospital used this model as a framework for the integration of evidence-based practice and nursing research as part of its journey toward achieving Magnet status.

[mark hamel]

Bad news for U.C. Davis Medical Center RNs... http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11096623/

[NRSKarenRN]

Med center officials learned two weeks ago that their renewal application submitted last fall was denied; the reviewers cited "inconsistencies" across the organization, "unrest" in collective bargaining and a need for better communication in a few specific nursing units, according to the hospital.

The American Nurses Association kicked off a pilot project in the early 1990s to recognize hospitals, nursing homes, surgery centers and other care sites across the nation. The American Nurses Credentialing Center was formed as a separate corporation to run it; it now recognizes 192 sites around the nation.

"It's a very rigorous process," said program director Elaine Scherer. There is no provisional status; healthcare centers are either approved or not, although they may appeal.

A nine-member commission decides on magnet designation. It considers the data collected by reviewers and submitted by the hospital, but the hospital's name is not revealed, Scherer said.

Staff members have a chance to speak up during the site visit, through written comments or online, she said, "but we don't take comments at face value. We clarify, verify and amplify any comments we get."
About 70 percent of applicants that finish the review process win approval. She wouldn't say how often hospitals lose their status upon renewal review.

unrest in collective bargaining shows both sides not willing to work together...communication issues in few units... inconsistinces...

all goes to show that the review process working.

[RN4MERCY]

Originally Posted by NRSKarenRN

unrest in collective bargaining shows both sides not willing to work together...communication issues in few units... inconsistinces...

all goes to show that the review process working.

I'm pretty sure the process is working for the consultants. Maybe not for patients and staff nurses. I believe it costs upwards of $80,000.00 for review and certification. UC Davis is a public institution and I believe public funds should provide tangible public benefits like increased RN staffing, indigent/uninsured-underinsured care, public access to outpatient/inpatient treatment, clinics, prescription drugs, therapy, follow-up physician/NP visits. So, the consultants take the taxpayer's money and run. The staff nurses are uniquely qualified to assess and evaluate the outcome and I'm proud they chose to expose the Magnet. In this case, "The Emperor has no clothes".

I've selectively quoted from the Massachusetts State Nurses Association Position Paper on Magnet and I couldn't agree with them more!

http://www.massnurses.org/pubs/positions/magnet.htm

"Money Spent on Consultants is Better Spent on Direct Patient Care
The Magnet program is another expensive program, requiring thousands of dollars in fees to consultants, and thousands of dollars in staff time. This money would be better spent on improving staffing conditions or on nursing salaries. It is also important to understand just who is behind this program. The Magnet program was created by the American Nurses Association as a profit making venture. Not only does ANCC collect fees to conduct the Magnet evaluation, it also provides consultants, for a fee, to assist in achieving the designation. The ANA is firmly opposed to nurses' having the right to mandatory RN-to-patient ratios. "

"Voluntary Credentialing/Accreditation Programs Don't Work
The nursing community has had many years of experience in evaluating the effectiveness of voluntary credentialing programs such as the JCAHO accreditation process. The JCAHO program is universally condemned by nurses as a farce, providing no true evaluation of the quality of care in the hospitals it surveys. In fact, this has been substantiated by two exhaustive governmental reports on the process: one in 1999 by the Inspector General of the United States and another by the Government Accounting Office, which found that many JCAHO accredited hospitals were found to have significant patient safety problems undetected by the surveyors. The Inspector General's report criticized JCAHO because there was too collegial a relationship between the surveyors and the surveyed in the process. We see the same problems being duplicated by the Magnet Recognition Program."

"In the Unionized Setting, the Magnet Process Undermines the Collective Bargaining Process and True Workplace Democracy
In a hospital where nurses are unionized, the collective bargaining process conducted through the existing labor/management relationship is the established, legally protected forum for addressing all issues impacting nurses' working conditions. Any program that purports to seek and utilize staff nurses' input, any program that proposes changes in policies and practices to boost retention and recruitment of staff without directly dealing with the nurses' elected union representatives undermines the collective bargaining process and nurses' rights. Such decisions can only be decided by the union as a matter of law. Further, if the hospital is serious about working in partnership with nurses as equals to arrive at standards they are willing to stand behind and truly endorse, then they should be willing to engage in good faith negotiations over those changes and to codify them through enforceable language as part of the union contract."

[NRSKarenRN]

Magnet Recognition — a Journey, Not a Destination
Lorraine Steefel, RN, MSN, CTN

Nursing Spectrum
Masthead Date February 01, 2006

In the midst of all the enthusiastic buzz about Magnet recognition, Daniel Pesut, RN, APRN-BC, PhD, FAAN, says Magnet has given us pause to reflect and the benefit of self-study.

“Although Magnet status is a stamp of approval, it’s more important to focus on the means versus the ends,” says Pesut, president of the Honor Society of Nursing, Sigma Theta Tau International, and dean for graduate programs at Indiana University School of Nursing in Indianapolis.

“The important part of Magnet is the process of engaging people in the work of self-study, analysis, and commitment to ways and means that help achieve the standards,” says Pesut. “The real learning takes place along the way.”

[NRSKarenRN]

From Nursing Spectrum:

Magnet Has Mercy

Elissa Crocker, RN, BSN
Masthead Date August 15, 2005

...
In April, Oklahoma City’s Mercy Health Center became the first Magnet hospital in the state and placed itself among good company — only 150 of the more than 6,000 hospitals in the United States have received this stamp of approval. But like other hospitals that have gone through the Magnet application process, Mercy officials learned showing their worthiness isn’t easy.

“It was an all-out effort that took us about three years,” says Christine Weigel, RN, BSN, MBA, chief nursing officer at Mercy Health Center. “It has to be an organizational commitment, and until you get that commitment, you will not achieve Magnet status.”

After reading the article, learned in 2001, Mercy had a vacancy rate of 17% and retention rate of 79%. They jetsoned agency personnel and retention boneses; in turn they reinvested in staff: funneling monies into the hospital’s educational coffers and obtaining state-of-the-art beds for the entire hospital. Empowered nurses did market research in order to choose the model best suited to their needs. Mercy’s vacancy rate is now 4%, and its retention rate is up to 87%; the hospital now has a waiting list of applicants. This article shows great examples of the purpose of Nursing Magnet award: empowering nursing staff to have input into quality nursing practice and patient care.

[PANurseRN1]

It seems like nothing more than a marketing tool for hospitals. The area hospital that has magnet designation does not have better staffing, their nurses don't have more say in pt. care, etc. This hospital is also spending big $$ importing nurses from the Phillipines. Things are better in the critical care areas, but on the general nursing units, it's more of the same, woeful understaffing, mandatory OT, etc.

It seems more about who can pony up the $$ for magnet designation than anything else.

[NRSKarenRN]

Nurses Who Go Beyond
Everybody knows how important nurses are. And at Lehigh Valley Hospital, they’re even more important, because we’re a Magnet hospital that attracts the nation’s best nurses to care for you. Magnet helps you find nurses who have earned the seal of approval for quality care.

[NRSKarenRN]

10 Pennsylvania Hospitals Awarded Magnet Status

The Magnet Recognition Program® was developed by the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC) to recognize health care organizations that provide the very best in nursing care and uphold the tradition within nursing of professional nursing practice.Of some 6,000 hospitals in the country, only 2% have achieved Magnet status.

Pennsylvania has 10 hospitals honored by ANCC's Magnet Program. The Magnet designation lasts for four years, after which the system will have to reapply and go through the lengthy process again.

Hospitals that have reached Magnet Recognition follows, including the year of designation:

· Abington Memorial Hospital in 2003
· Children's Hospital of Philadelphia in 2004
· Fox Chase Cancer Center in 2000
· Lancaster General Hospital in 2002
· Lehigh Valley Hospital and Health Network in 2002
· Main Line Hospitals - Bryn Mawr Hospital in 2005
· Main Line Hospitals - Lankenau Hospital in 2005
· Main Line Hospitals - Paoli Hospital in 2005
· Pinnacle Health System in 2006
· The Western Pennsylvania Hospital in 2006

To read more on the ANCC Magnet Recognition Program...www.nursecredentialing.org/magnet/index.html

[NRSKarenRN]

Public Comments Solicited for Magnet Applicant Facilities

The Magnet Recognition Program accepts comments at any time. Verbal comments may be made by phone at 301-628-5223. For urgent issues, call toll-free 1-866-588-3301.

Input from the patients, families, clients, staff, and public with whom health care organizations interact is sought to assist Magnet program appraisers in the evaluation of organizations applying for Magnet designation.

ANCC evaluates the environment in which nursing is practiced as well as nursing's compliance with standards promulgated by the American Nurses Association. The written documentation is available for public review at the health care organization. Its exact location is indicated in the public notice posted at entrances throughout the organization's facility.

Anyone who would like to participate in this evaluation process is encouraged to do so. Comments are confidential and may be made anonymously. Comments must be received by the Magnet Program Office by the comment deadline date indicated below. All comments must be in writing, and forwarded to ANCC via e-mail, fax, or direct mail to the addresses and/or numbers listed below. Comments may include request to meet with or talk to the appraiser should the evaluation of the written documentation progress to an on-site review.

American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC)
Magnet Recognition Program® Office
8515 Georgia Ave, Suite 400
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3492
Fax: 301-628-5217
E-Mail: magnet@ana.org (Please indicate "Public Notice Comment" in the subject line.)

For further information, please contact the Magnet Recognition Program® Office at 301-628-5223


For Schedule Deadline see: http://www.nursecredentialing.org/magnet/siteevals.html