How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Rose Lane Nursing and Rehabilitation
5425 High Mill Avenue NW, Massillon, OH 44646 (opens Google Maps) · Stark County · (330) 833-3174· 171 certified beds · avg 161 residents/day · certified since Apr 20, 1973 · Medicare and Medicaid certified
Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →
Part of chain: SPRENGER HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS (12 facilities, chain avg rating 3.3★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 19, 2023
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Jan 20, 2024
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.44
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →
⚠ The most recent standard health inspection was more than 2 years ago — conditions may have changed.
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 13, 2021 · F-0880
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, widespread · Sep 13, 2021 · F-0880
The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide.
Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.
Severity (L): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was widespread: a systemic or pervasive problem. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Oct 21, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 20, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jan 20, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.
Corrected: Jan 15, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 35 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint F-0584
The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint F-0609
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689
View all 35 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 24, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Jan 20, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly notify residents about the balance of money it holds for them, or failed to return those funds when a resident was discharged, evicted, or died. · F-0569 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · F-0676 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623 |
| Nov 19, 2023 | B · Potential for minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625 |
| Aug 15, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726 |
| Aug 15, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Sep 13, 2021 | ▲ L · Immediate jeopardy, widespread | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
| Sep 13, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835 |
| Sep 13, 2021 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. · F-0867 |
| Sep 13, 2021 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Sep 13, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Sep 13, 2021 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' individual preferences, choices, values, and beliefs in their daily life and care. · F-0675 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · F-0710 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents actually saw their doctor face-to-face at all required visits. Doctors must examine nursing home residents in person on a regular schedule. · F-0712 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812 |
| Nov 7, 2019 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 13).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2019
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2021
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2023
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 11 | 0 | E |
| 2021 | 6 | 1 | L ▲ |
| 2023 | 15 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityOhio averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.44
Ohio average: 3.45
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.68
Ohio average: 0.60
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.13
Ohio average: 3.07
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Ohio avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.44 | 3.45 | 3.95 | top 41% in Ohio; bottom 34% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.68 | 0.60 | 0.69 | top 27% in Ohio; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.13 | 3.07 | 3.50 | top 36% in Ohio; bottom 38% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.49 | 0.42 | 0.48 | top 29% in Ohio; top 34% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 45.2 | 48.7 | 45.8 | top 41% in Ohio; bottom 49% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 31.8 | 43.9 | 42.9 | top 31% in Ohio; top 32% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.21, RN 0.63, weekend 2.92.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.21 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Quality measures: assessments & claims
Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.
Quality measures rating: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Rose Lane Nursing and Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
Calculate a stay from a quote you receive
Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.
Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.
Before you compare prices
- Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
- Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
- Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
Who owns this facility
How to read ownership records →
Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bluesky Healthcare INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 09/21/2010 |
| Hutsenpiller, Wendie | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 18% | 03/21/2011 |
| Malanowski, Kenneth | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 20% | 03/21/2011 |
| Sprenger, Nicole | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 31% | 03/21/2011 |
| Sprenger, Tracey | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 31% | 03/21/2011 |
| BSH Investments LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/21/2010 |
| Citrin Cooperman and Company, LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2025 |
| CMS & Co. Management Services, INC. | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/22/2001 |
| CMS & Co. Management Services, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/31/2025 |
| Courtock, Melissa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/02/2002 |
| Courtock, Melissa | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/02/2002 |
| Delta Health Care Consultants, INC. | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2008 |
| Didomenico, Richard | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/26/2024 |
| Didomenico, Richard | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/26/2024 |
| Epperly, Robert | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/20/2022 |
| Epperly, Robert | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/20/2022 |
| Fox, Emily | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2024 |
| Fox, Emily | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2024 |
| Fox, Emily | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/31/2024 |
| Gollinger, Kristen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/13/2000 |
Showing 20 of 44 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 24 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Sprenger Health Care Systems — 12 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.
- Smithville Western Care Center — Wooster, OH · overall 2/5
- Village of the Falls — Olmsted Falls, OH · overall 5/5
- Sprenger Health Care of Port Royal — Port Royal, SC · overall 1/5
- Sprenger Healthcare of Bluffton — Bluffton, SC · overall 5/5
- Amherst Manor Nursing Home — Amherst, OH · overall 2/5
- Anchor Lodge Nursing Home INC — Lorain, OH · overall 3/5
- Autumn Aegis Nursing Home — Lorain, OH · overall 4/5
- Elms Retirement Village INC — Wellington, OH · overall 5/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 11 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
- "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 45% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 44 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 65 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Pavilion at Canal Fulton for Nursing and Rehab | 1.5 mi | Canal Fulton, OH | ★★☆☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Altercare of Nobles Pond, INC | 2.3 mi | Canton, OH | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Laurels of Massillon, the | 3.1 mi | Massillon, OH | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Amherst Meadows Skilled Nursing and Rehab | 3.3 mi | Massillon, OH | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Chapel Hill Community | 3.7 mi | Canal Fulton, OH | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Meadow Wind Health Care Center | 4.8 mi | Massillon, OH | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Gardens of Belden Village | 5.1 mi | Canton, OH | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Hanover Healthcare Center | 5.3 mi | Massillon, OH | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Legends Care Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | 6.6 mi | Massillon, OH | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Saint Luke Lutheran Home | 6.6 mi | North Canton, OH | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
| Astoria Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation | 6.8 mi | Canton, OH | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Pines Healthcare Center | 6.9 mi | Canton, OH | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Stark, OH — 33 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Roselawn Gardens Nursing & Rehabilitation — Alliance, OH · overall 5/5
- Saint Joseph Care Center — Louisville, OH · overall 2/5
- The Pavilion at Edgefield for Nursing and Rehabili — Canton, OH · overall 1/5
- Windsor Medical Center INC — North Canton, OH · overall 4/5
- Altercare of Alliance Ctr for Rehab & NC INC — Alliance, OH · overall 3/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 365289.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).