Pass the ASHRM Advancing Health Care Risk Management CPHRM Questions and answers with ExamsMirror

Within Health Care Risk Management frameworks identified by ASHRM and the American Hospital Association Certification Center, organizational culture refers to the collective values, shared norms, guiding beliefs, and behavioral expectations that shape how members of a healthcare organization function. It influences decision-making, communication patterns, leadership styles, and responses to risk and safety concerns. Culture is transmitted formally through policies and training, and informally through leadership behavior, peer interactions, and organizational traditions.

Organizational culture plays a critical role in patient safety, compliance, and ethical conduct. A strong culture of safety encourages reporting of adverse events, supports transparency, and promotes continuous improvement. Conversely, a punitive or hierarchical culture may suppress reporting and increase liability exposure.

Corporate vision describes the aspirational future state of the organization. A strategic mission outlines the organization’s purpose and objectives. Managerial ethics refers to principles guiding leadership conduct. While these elements contribute to the broader organizational framework, they do not encompass the shared and socially transmitted system of norms and beliefs that define culture.

Therefore, the correct term describing shared and taught values and norms within a healthcare organization is organizational culture.

According to Health Care Risk Management standards supported by ASHRM and the American Hospital Association Certification Center, projecting contributions to a self-insured retention fund requires actuarially sound financial forecasting. Actuarial reports use historical claims data, trend analyses, loss development factors, and exposure projections to estimate future liabilities and required funding levels. Loss run reports provide detailed historical claims information, including paid losses, reserves, and claim status, which serve as foundational data for actuarial modeling.

Professional and general liability premiums are relevant to insured layers above the retention but do not determine funding requirements for the retained portion. Frequency and severity analyses of pending claims are important components of actuarial evaluation but, standing alone, may not capture long-tail development or incurred but not reported claims. Total incurred losses for the current year provide limited insight without considering historical patterns and future projections.

Risk financing objectives emphasize accurate funding of retained risk to ensure financial stability, regulatory compliance, and protection of organizational assets. Therefore, actuarial reports, supported by comprehensive loss run data, provide the most reliable basis for determining projected contributions to a self-insured retention fund.

According to Health Care Risk Management standards established by ASHRM and the American Hospital Association Certification Center, deaths resulting from criminal acts fall under medico-legal jurisdiction and are typically subject to coroner or medical examiner review. Even when a patient is a documented organ donor, as indicated on a driver's license under the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act framework, the circumstances of death may require legal investigation.

When a death is associated with trauma from a criminal act, it is generally considered a reportable death. The medical examiner or coroner has statutory authority to determine whether an autopsy is required and to ensure preservation of forensic evidence. Organ procurement activities must not interfere with legal investigation obligations. Therefore, prior to organ retrieval or withdrawal of life support, the appropriate legal authorities must be notified.

While honoring the patient’s documented donation wishes is important, compliance with state statutes governing reportable deaths and forensic investigations takes precedence. The family’s wishes do not override a valid donor designation, but coordination must occur within the legal framework.

Thus, the most appropriate action for the risk manager is to ensure that authorities are notified to determine autopsy requirements before proceeding.

Core risk treatment strategies includeavoidance(stop the activity),reduction/mitigation(controls that reduce likelihood/severity),retention(accept risk within appetite and fund losses via reserves/self-insurance), andtransfer(contracts/insurance shifting financial consequences). In healthcare, the highest priority is often mitigation for patient safety risks (standardization, technology, training), with financing mechanisms ensuring the organization can absorb residual loss without destabilizing operations. ERM aligns these strategies to enterprise objectives so leadership invests in the best mix of prevention and financing.

Leaving an at-risk patient unattended during/after medication administration is typically anactive failureoccurring at thesharp end—the point of direct care delivery. Active errors are the observable actions/omissions by frontline personnel that can immediately contribute to harm (e.g., failure to monitor sedation, failure to reassess after opioids). Risk management objectives, however, require looking beyond the individual act: Was staffing insufficient? Was monitoring policy unclear? Were alarms ineffective? Was there inadequate training or workload overload? Those “blunt end” conditions create latent risk that increases the likelihood of sharp-end failures. Proper classification helps organizations respond with systems fixes (monitoring standards, escalation triggers, staffing acuity tools, continuous pulse oximetry/capnography policies where appropriate) rather than blaming individuals alone.

Under Health Care Risk Management principles established by ASHRM and the American Hospital Association Certification Center, timely notice to a malpractice carrier is a critical obligation, particularly under claims-made policies. A demand letter from a patient constitutes a clear assertion of liability and a request for compensation, which typically meets the definition of a claim under most malpractice insurance policies. Failure to notify the carrier promptly may jeopardize coverage.

A written medical record request from an attorney may signal potential litigation, but it does not necessarily constitute a claim unless accompanied by an allegation of wrongdoing or a demand for damages. An internal incident report is a risk management tool used for quality and safety improvement and does not itself trigger insurance notification requirements. Similarly, disclosure to a patient regarding an adverse event aligns with transparency practices but does not automatically represent a formal claim.

Risk management objectives emphasize understanding policy language, particularly definitions of claim and reporting requirements. Because a demand letter explicitly alleges harm and seeks compensation, it most clearly triggers the duty to notify the malpractice carrier to preserve coverage and initiate appropriate claims handling procedures.

SBAR is a standardized communication framework used to reduce preventable harm caused by incomplete, unclear, or delayed clinical communication—especially during handoffs, escalations, and urgent updates. The four elements areSituation(what is happening now),Background(clinical context and relevant history),Assessment(what you think the problem is based on data), andRecommendation(what you need/request as the next step). By forcing concise structure, SBAR improves shared situational awareness, supports early recognition of deterioration, and reduces ambiguity (“hinting and hoping”). From a risk management standpoint, SBAR strengthens frontline reliability, decreases communication-related sentinel events, and supports defensible care by demonstrating a consistent escalation process. It also aligns with patient safety objectives: clearer teamwork, faster response to clinical changes, and fewer omissions during transitions of care.

The “sharp end” refers to the point in a system where clinicians directly interact with patients and deliver care—nurses administering medications, physicians performing procedures, therapists mobilizing patients, and so on. Errors at the sharp end are typicallyactive failuresthat are immediately visible, but they are often shaped by “blunt end” factors—staffing levels, training, equipment design, policies, and workflow constraints. Risk management objectives discourage blaming the sharp end alone; instead, they use incident analysis (RCA) to identify latent system conditions that make frontline errors more likely. Improving sharp-end safety includes standardization, teamwork tools (SBAR/TeamSTEPPS), human factors engineering, and reducing hazardous variability in processes. This systems approach helps prevent repeat events and supports a just culture where learning is prioritized while accountability is preserved for reckless conduct.

Verbal/telephone orders are widely recognized aserror-pronebecause they can be misheard, misunderstood, or transcribed incorrectly—especially with sound-alike drug names, confusing numerals (15 vs 50), background noise, accents, and interruptions. ISMP and patient safety advisories recommend minimizing verbal orders whenever possible and using safeguards such as read-back/confirm-back, spelling drug names, stating digits individually, and documenting promptly. Risk management objectives include reducing reliance on memory and imperfect communication by prioritizing written or electronic orders (CPOE), standardizing when verbal orders are permitted (true emergencies), and auditing compliance to prevent unsafe normalization. Because medication errors can cause severe harm, controlling verbal order risk is a high-yield safety intervention and improves legal defensibility by aligning practice with recognized safety recommendations.

According to Health Care Risk Management standards outlined by ASHRM and the American Hospital Association Certification Center, the governing board has ultimate responsibility for organizational oversight, quality of care, and patient safety. As part of its fiduciary and governance duties, the board approves high-level policies that establish the organization’s philosophy, strategic direction, and commitment to safety and risk management.

A philosophy regarding medical error management reflects the organization’s approach to disclosure, reporting, just culture principles, accountability, and system improvement. Because this philosophy sets the tone for organizational culture and impacts patient safety, legal exposure, and regulatory compliance, it requires board-level approval to ensure alignment with governance expectations and accreditation standards.

In contrast, the risk management department’s annual budget is typically approved through financial governance processes rather than as a policy document. Risk analyses are operational tools conducted by management and do not require board approval. Departmental personnel job descriptions are administrative documents managed at the executive or human resources level.

Health Care Operations objectives emphasize board engagement in safety culture and oversight of enterprise risk management. Therefore, the philosophy regarding medical error management should be approved by the organization’s board of directors.