2958 Canfield Rd, Youngstown, OH 44511 · Mahoning County · (330) 792-5511
90 certified beds, about 72 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1994
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 365972 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on September 17, 2025, inspectors cited 21 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 54 health citations since September 2021, 4 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (3 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $149,318 in the last three years; the largest was $115,167, and the latest is dated September 17, 2025.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.05 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.49 of those hours.
55.2% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Communicare Health, an affiliated group of 110 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 54 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of a facility self-reported incident (SRI), observation of recorded video, review of a police report, interviews and review of the facility abuse policy, the facility failed to protect Resident #66's right to be free from physical abuse by Housekeeper #582. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and Actual Harm on 09/16/25 at approximately 11:15 A.M. when Housekeeper #582 physically abused Resident #66. Housekeeper #582 pushed Resident #66 in his wheelchair causing the resident to fall out of the wheelchair and hit his head on the nurse's medication cart. Housekeeper #582 was then observed by (staff) witnesses and per the resident to put his hand around Resident #66's neck and punch the resident with a closed fist. Resident #66 was subsequently transferred to the emergency room (ER) for an evaluation. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, review of a facility self-report incident, facility investigation review, police report review, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and/or intervention to prevent resident elopement. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for actual harm beginning on 05/24/25 when Resident #13, who was assessed as an elopement risk, had exit seeking behaviors and was deemed incompetent by the court system, was permitted by staff to leave the facility unattended and without guardian consent. The resident's whereabouts were unknown until the resident was returned to the facility via police escort on this same date. The Immediate Jeopardy and potential for actual harm continued on 08/16/25 when staff allowed Resident #61, a moderately cognitively impaired resident to leave the facility unattended. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, review of a facility self-report incident, facility investigation review, police report review, policy review and interviews, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and/or intervention to prevent resident elopement. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy and the potential for actual harm beginning on 05/24/25 when Resident #13, who was assessed as an elopement risk, had exit seeking behaviors and was deemed incompetent by the court system, was permitted by staff to leave the facility unattended and without guardian consent. The resident's whereabouts were unknown until the resident was returned to the facility via police escort on this same date. The Immediate Jeopardy and potential for actual harm continued on 08/16/25 when staff allowed Resident #61, a moderately cognitively impaired resident to leave the facility unattended. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on review of schedules, review of time punches, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure eight consecutive hours of registered nurse (RN) coverage was provided every day. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of job descriptions and personnel files, and interviews, facility administrative staff failed to identify deficient practices and failed to notify the Administrator of known non-compliance in an attempt to increase compliance. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility assessment and interview, the facility failed to ensure the assessment was accurate and pertinent to the facility and its available services. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview the facility failed to ensure progress notes were comprehensive, accurate and in chronological order for Resident #13, #25, #63, #76, and #83. This affected five (Residents #13, #25, #63, #76, and #83) of six residents records reviewed for clinical documentation. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, record review, facility policy review, review of the memorandum from the Department of Health & Human Services, review of guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, review of the facility's Tuberculosis (TB) Risk Assessment and Control Plan and Tuberculosis Symptom Screen Policy-Employee, the facility failed to ensure staff used appropriate infection control practices during incontinence care for Resident #6. This affected one (Resident #6) of six residents reviewed for infection control. In addition, the facility failed to ensure appropriate Tuberculosis screening for two employees. This had the potential to affect all 72 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure care conferences were completed quarterly for Residents #4, #25, #43, and #83. This affected four (Residents #4, #25, #43, and #83) of the eight residents reviewed for care conferences. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility did not ensure Resident #83's guardian was permitted to consent or decline influenza and COVID immunizations. This affected one (Resident #83) of three residents reviewed for guardian's consent to treatment. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents were informed of risks and benefits of medication prior to initiation of the medications. This affected two (Residents #2 and #10) of five residents reviewed for medication use. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to honor a resident's bathing preferences. This affected one (Resident #79) of 13 residents interviewed during a resident council meeting regarding receipt of care in a timely manner. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, interview and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify Resident #83's guardian of a change in condition requiring hospitalization. The facility also failed to notify Resident #13's guardian of his intent to sign out on leave of absence (LOA) to get her input and failed to inform her of Resident #13's return to the facility involving police escort in a timely manner. This affected two (Residents #13 and #83) of 22 residents reviewed for notification. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interview, observation and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #25 were free from staff-to-resident verbal abuse. This affected one (Resident #25) or two residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, staff interview, review of the shower audit tool and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #6 received showers as scheduled. This affected one (Resident #6) of one resident reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observation, interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were provided with one-on-one activities to meet their interests and needs. This affected three (Residents #25, #29, and #83) of three residents reviewed for activities. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interviews, the facility failed to ensure Resident #83's emergency contact was notified of a change in condition. This affected one (Resident #83) out of three residents reviewed for notification of change in condition. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure physician visits were provided in accordance with regulations for two (Residents #72 and #74) of three residents reviewed for physician visits. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of medication information, and interview, the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring of laboratory values to determine if medications were within recommended therapeutic range. This affected one (Resident #2) of five residents reviewed for medication use. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to arrange for outside services with an orthopedic doctor in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #5) of 12 residents reviewed for accidents and follow up actions taken related to accidents. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review and interview, the facility failed to maintain furniture in proper working order. This affected four (Residents #17, #36, #46 and #82) of 72 residents whose environment was screened for safety, functionality and comfort. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's criminal background check log, review of time punches, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure criminal background check results were received within the State's required time frame of 30 days and permitted staff to continue to have direct contact with residents pending results. This had the potential to affect all residents. The facility census was 72.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of personnel records and interview, the facility failed to complete required performance evaluations for certified nursing assistants (CNAs). This had the potential to affect all 72 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on closed record review, policy review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #65's written discharge summary was accurate to reflect the amount of the medication, Oxycodone, provided to the resident at the time of discharge. This affected one resident (#65) of three residents reviewed for discharge. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility did not ensure an allegation of physical abuse was thoroughly investigated. This affected one resident (#70) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 62.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, review of controlled drug administration records, review of facility policy and interviews, the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive and individualized pain management program, including assessment/monitoring of pain and administration of narcotic pain medication (Percocet) to meet Resident #45's needs and prevent severe pain. Actual harm occurred on 09/18/23 when as needed (PRN) Percocet 5-325 milligrams (mg) was not available to administer to Resident #45 as requested and as ordered by the physician. On 09/18/23 at 10:21 A.M. Resident #45 rated her pain level an eight on a scale of zero (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). Resident #45 was administered a dose of Percocet on 09/19/23 at 12:23 P.M. for severe pain rated at a level nine out of 10 after having gone over 48 hours without receiving the Percocet as requested. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interview the facility failed to use the services of a registered nurse (RN) for at least eight consecutive hours a day, seven days a week as required. This had the potential to affect all 66 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to serve palatable meals. This affected 65 residents who received meals from the kitchen. The facility identified Resident #22 as receiving noting by mouth. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and facility policy. The facility failed to ensure the dietary staff members wore appropriate hair covering and failed to ensure the kitchen was clean and sanitary. This affected 65 resident who received meals from the kitchen, the facility identified Resident #22 as receiving nothing by mouth. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview the facility failed to have the required participants at the Quality Assurance Performance Improvement ( QAPI) meeting. This had the potential to affect all 66 residents. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation , record review, review of medication information, policy review and interview the facility failed to store medication appropriately. Improper storage was identified on two (Unit II medication cart and Unit I medication room) of three storage units observed. This affected four residents, Resident #12, #24, #57, and #261 of 66 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure a staff member did not verbally abuse Resident #57. This affected one resident (#57) out of five residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to complete level two Preadmission Screening and Resident Review ( PASRR) for Resident #42's new diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder. This affected one (Resident #42) of two residents reviewed for PASRR. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident #48 was provided an opportunity to give input into her plan of care. This effected one resident (Resident #48) of two residents reviewed for care planning. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to initiate a dressing and grooming restorative program for one resident, Resident #48, of twenty five residents screened for activities of daily living. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to initiate a Range of Motion (ROM)Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) for one resident , Resident #40, of twenty residents screened for range of motion. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, observations and interviews, the facility failed to eliminate hazard risk when a cognitively and physically impaired resident with fall risk was able to leave the secured courtyard smoking area due to an unsecured gate. This affected one resident ( Resident #31) of eight residents reviewed for accidents/hazards. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on policy review, interview, review of an article from the American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, and observation, the facility failed to ensure staff appropriately flushed a feeding tube during medication administration . This effected one (Resident #22) of one resident reviewed for medication administration via feeding tube.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, facility policy review and interview the facility failed to ensure Resident #29's medication regimen was free of unnecessary medication. The facility failed to ensure a psychotropic medication was discontinued timely following a pharmacy recommendation and nurse practitioner approval. This affected one resident (#29) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and interview, the facility failed to obtain laboratory tests as ordered. This affected one resident (#43) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide routine dental services for Resident #39 and Resident #15. This affected two residents (#15 and #39) of 25 residents screened for dental services. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure treatments were documented in the medical record as completed for Resident #43. This affected one resident (#43) of the 31 resident records reviewed for the annual survey. The facility census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and policy review the facility failed to ensure adequate infection control measures were implemented during trach care, pressure ulcer bandage changes, and use of the urinary catheter. This affected two residents (#22 and #43). The census was 66.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the infection/antibiotic stewardship log, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure all antibiotics were appropriate for treatment. This had the potential to affect all 78 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the infection/antibiotic stewardship log, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure all antibiotics were appropriate for treatment. This had the potential to affect all 78 residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, review of an injury report, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a physician and responsible party received timely notification of an accident involving one (Resident #338) and one (Resident #339) and/or responsible party were timely notified of a room change. This affected two (Resident's #338 and #339) of two residents reviewed for notification. The census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of personnel files, review of facility reported incidents, review of the facility's Abuse policy, review of the employee handbook and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff did not misappropriate resident property. This affected one (Resident #340) of five residents reviewed for misappropriation. The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of personnel files, review of facility reported incidents, review of the facility's Abuse policy, review of the employee handbook and interview, the facility failed to ensure allegations of a staff potentially misappropriating a resident's property were reported to the State Agency. This affected one (Resident #340) of five residents reviewed for misappropriation. The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure treatments for a wound were implemented in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #339) of two residents reviewed for non-pressure related skin impairment. The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, interviews, observation and policy review, the facility failed to ensure restorative therapy was performed per the resident's physician's orders and plan of care. This affected two (Resident's #12 and #339) of four reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL). The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, review of facility smoking list, observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure residents were provided adequate supervision while smoking and failed to ensure accurate comprehensive smoking assessments were completed. This affected two (Resident #12 and #62) of four reviewed for accidents. The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Resident #334 received diet ordered by the physician. This affected one (Resident #334) of seven residents reviewed for nutrition. The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on interviews, record reviews and policy review, the facility failed to ensure Seroquel (antipsychotic) was prescribed appropriately for Resident #34 who had no approved diagnoses for the antipsychotic medication. This effected one (Resident #34) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. The facility census was 78.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure dental consents were signed in a timely manner. This affected one (Resident #67) of one resident reviewed for dental services. The facility census was 78.
9 fire safety citations on file: 3 on September 17, 2025, 2 on September 29, 2023, 4 on September 16, 2021.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| September 17, 2025 | Fine | $115,167 |
| September 29, 2023 | Fine | $34,151 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Ohio | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.05 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.49 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.67 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.77 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.79 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 55.2% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 77.8% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 4.00 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.20 on weekdays and 2.67 on weekends, 17% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.07 in April to June 2025 to 3.05 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.05 | 0.49 | 3.20 | 2.67 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 72 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.28 | 0.50 | 3.42 | 2.91 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 64 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.27 | 0.42 | 3.40 | 2.94 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 68 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.07 | 0.40 | 3.19 | 2.77 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 69 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Ohio, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.64 | 0.60 | 3.80 | 3.24 | 4.6% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ohio, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.76 | $17.93 to $21.44 | 63,280 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.78 | $27.34 to $31.68 | 39,900 |
| Registered nurses | $39.67 | $38.08 to $47.61 | 143,730 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Ohio | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.4 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 13.2 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 31.4 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 18.7 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Canfield Healthcare Center's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (49.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
49.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Ohio: 147 better, 20 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 29 eligible stays.
10.2% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Ohio: 3 better, 7 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 31 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Ohio: 1 better, 4 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 17 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Ohio55.6% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 14 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Ohio0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 25 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Ohio1.4% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 25 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Ohio100.0% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 9 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: CANFIELD LEASING CO LLC. CMS links this home to Communicare Health, a group of 110 nursing homes averaging 3.2 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sxcy Mstr Lsco, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 03/01/2018 |
| Health Care Lease Facilities, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Sxcy Holdings, LLC | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Groves, Donna | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2018 | |
| Romeo, Dominic | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| Stoltz, Charles | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2018 | |
| Wilheim, Ronald | Corporate officer | Individual | 03/01/2018 | |
| Canfield Mgt Co., LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Lott, Tiffany | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/09/2024 | |
| Ricciardi, Santuccio | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/01/2021 | |
| Romeo, Dominic | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 04/01/2023 | |
| C.r. Stoltz Family Investment Company Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| C.r. Stoltz Irrevocable Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Canfield Mgt Co., LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 06/25/2025 | |
| Health Care Lease Facilities, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| I. Rosedale Irrevocable Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| R.s. Wilheim Irrevocable Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Ronald S Wilheim 2012 Spousal Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Rosedale Family Investment Company, Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Rrw, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| S.l. Rosedale Irrevocable Trust | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Skilled Hc Holdings, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Sxcy Holdings, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Wilheim Family Investment Company, Inc. | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/01/2018 | |
| Lott, Tiffany | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/05/2025 | |
| Ricciardi, Santuccio | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/05/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Ohio. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.