10731 State Route 118, Rockford, OH 45882 · Mercer County · (419) 363-2620
69 certified beds, about 63 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 366125 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 11, 2026, inspectors cited 7 health deficiencies (the Ohio average is 10.5, the national average 9.2).
None of its 24 health citations since April 2023 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.68 hours per resident per day, against 3.69 across Ohio and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.50 of those hours.
56.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Ohio average 48.7%).
CMS links it to Divine Healthcare Management, an affiliated group of 9 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 24 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure safe temperatures were maintained and documented for resident personal refrigerators. This deficient practice affected four (#7, #37, #38, and #40) of four residents reviewed for personal refrigerators. The facility census was 54.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, resident and resident representative interview, staff interview, and review of posted meal times, the facility failed to serve meals in a manner to preserve resident dignity. This affected two (#45 and #10) of two residents directly observed during meals. The facility census was 54.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, family representative interview, staff interview, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain the building in a safe, clean, and homelike manner. This affected two (#10 and #48) of 20 residents residing on the Memory Care Unit. The census was 54. Findings Include:Observation on 06/08/26 at 9:30 A.M. during tour of the Memory Care Unit dining room revealed, on the East wall, an air conditioning (AC) unit was installed in the wall under a window. Around the AC unit and along the wall near the floor there appeared to be three large black-green fuzzy spots on the wall. On the North wall, the wallpaper located next to the door leading into the kitchen area was torn and peeling off the wall in four spots. There appeared to be brown residue on the floor where the wall connected to the flooring under the torn wallpaper. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure a Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) was completed when a resident was diagnosed with a new serious mental illness. This deficient practice affected one (#7) of one residents reviewed for PASARR. The facility census was 54.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were not pre-prepared for administration. This affected three (#48, #52, and #55) of three residents observed with medications which were pre-prepared and not given immediately after preparation. The facility census was 54.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, medical record review, staff interview, review of medication packaging, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered resulting in a medication error rate greater than five (5) percent (%). A total of two (2) medication errors were observed out of 29 opportunities for a medication error rate of 6.9%. This affected two (#22 and #40) of four residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 54.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of a facility sign, the facility failed to ensure staff followed required infection control practices related to care of residents on enhanced barrier precautions. This deficient practice affected one (#4) of four residents reviewed for infection control. The facility census was 54.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, review of facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure residents were free from abuse and neglect. This affected one (#10) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, review of facility Self-Reported Incident (SRI), staff interview and policy review, the facility failed to ensure allegations of abuse and neglect were timely reported to the Administrator. This affected one (#10) of three residents reviewed for abuse. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of the facility's Self-Reported Incidents (SRI), facility investigation documentation, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure staff were immediately removed from the floor when allegations of staff to resident verbal abuse occurred. This affected one resident (#5) of four residents reviewed. The facility census was 65. Findings Include: Review of Resident #5's medical record revealed an admission date of 02/08/22 and a discharge date of 02/27/25. Diagnoses included major depressive disorder, altered mental status, type II diabetes, anxiety disorder, chronic pain, and insomnia. Review of Resident #5's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15 indicating Resident #5 was cognitively intact. Resident #5 required supervision with toilet use and personal hygiene. [...]
Inspectors wroteTHE FOLLOWING DEFICIENCY REPRESENTS AN INCIDENT OF PAST NONCOMPLIANCE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CORRECTED PRIOR TO THIS SURVEY. Based on record review, review of a facility self-reported incident (SRI), staff interview, and review of the facility misappropriation policy, the facility failed to ensure a resident was free from misappropriation of medication. This affected one (Resident #01) out of three residents reviewed for misappropriation. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and staff interviews, the facility failed to ensure residents were free of potential hazards and accidents. This affected one (#60) resident and had the ability to affect 19 additional residents (#7, #8, #11, #14, #28, #29, #30, #34, #36, #39, #40, #41, #48, #50, #51, #53, #56, #58, and #59) in the memory unit who were cognitively impaired and independently mobile. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident authorization form was in place for a resident with a personal fund account. This affected one (#15) of the six residents reviewed for personal fund accounts. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, staff and resident interviews, revealed the facility failed to maintain a homelike environment in completing repairs. This affected one (#60) of 23 resident rooms observed. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation of wound care, record review, resident interview, staff interview, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure residents did not acquire pressure ulcers from medical devices in place. This affected one (#32) of three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. The current census is 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, staff and resident interviews, interview with respiratory care provider, and policy review, the facility failed to ensure a resident's noninvasive ventilator such as bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPap), average volume-assured pressure support (AVAPS), or continuous positive airway pressure was administered as ordered. This affected one (#25) resident of four residents reviewed for noninvasive ventilators. The facility identified four residents had noninvasive ventilators. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interview, and review of policy, the facility failed to monitor blood pressure prior to the administer of medications as ordered. This affected for one (#24) of five residents observed for medication administration. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview and review of the product insert instructions, the facility failed to ensure insulin pen needles were primed after a new needle was applied. This affected one (#24) of two residents observed for insulin administration. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, staff interview, and review of policy, the facility failed to ensure personal protective equipment (PPE) was utilized during a procedure for one resident (#04) of two residents with Enhanced Barrier Protection (EBP) in place. The facility also failed to ensure staff performed proper hand hygiene when performing tracheostomy care for one (#04) resident out of the two residents reviewed for tracheostomy care. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure a sanitary environment was provided during meal service. This directly affected one resident (#20) and had the possibility to affect five males (#13, #17, #20, #24, and #61) who eat in their rooms. The facility census was 64.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and review of facility policies, the facility staff failed to maintain contact precautions during wound care, and failed to have a Legionella water management program in place. This directly affected one (#165) of three residents reviewed for transmission based precautions and had the potential to affect all 58 residents residing in the facility. The census was 58.
Inspectors wroteBased on review of employee files, staff interview, and review of facility policy, the facility failed to ensure state tested nurse aides (STNAs) who worked the in the facility for more than one year received 12 hours of continuing education for the previous year, and failed to ensure STNAs received specific education related to providing care and services to residents on the special care unit. This affected eight (STNA #212, #213, #218, #226, #243, #244, #246, and #278) of eight employee files reviewed. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all 58 residents residing in the facility. The census was 58.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, staff interviews, and policy review, the facility failed to comprehensively assess a resident's activity pursuits on admission. This affected one (#42) of the 16 residents reviewed for assessments. The facility census was 58.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review and family and staff interview, the facility failed to conduct a quarterly care plan review meeting. This affected one (#37) of 16 residents reviewed for care planning meetings. The facility census was 58.
Inspectors wroteBased on medical record review, observation, staff interview, and policy review, the facility failed to provide adequate interventions and supervision to ensure a cognitively impaired resident did not elope from the facility. Additionally, the facility failed to conduct a thorough investigation to determine root cause analysis to identify potential hazards and resident-specific interventions to prevent further elopements. This affected one (#37) resident of seven residents reviewed on the secured memory care unit. The facility census was 58.
33 fire safety citations on file: 10 on June 11, 2026, 10 on April 10, 2024, 3 on March 11, 2024, 10 on April 27, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
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) | 3.68 | 3.69 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.50 | 0.64 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.35 | 3.28 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.31 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.87 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 56.8% | 48.7% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 70.0% | 43.9% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.83 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 3.82 on weekdays and 3.35 on weekends, 12% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 37.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.53 in April to June 2025 to 3.68 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 | 3.68 | 0.50 | 3.82 | 3.35 | 37.8% | 0 of 90 | 63 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.29 | 0.56 | 3.41 | 3.00 | 24.6% | 0 of 92 | 63 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.65 | 0.64 | 3.78 | 3.31 | 21.2% | 0 of 92 | 62 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.53 | 0.53 | 3.64 | 3.26 | 26.9% | 0 of 91 | 64 |
| 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 | 5.4 | 5.3 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 4.2 | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.1 | 6.1 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.3 | 3.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.9 | 8.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 24.2 | 24.9 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 19.8 | 12.9 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.3 | 1.7 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Divine Rehabilitation and Nursing at Shane Hill's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it worse than the national rate (21.7% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
21.7% this home
Worse than 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. 37 eligible stays.
10.5% 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. 53 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. 14 eligible stays.
39.1% this home
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. 23 residents counted.
3.7% 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. 27 residents counted.
3.2% 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. 27 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. 6 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: SHANE HILL REHABILITATION AND NURSING CENTER LLC. CMS links this home to Divine Healthcare Management, a group of 9 nursing homes averaging 2.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dhm Oh Three Holdings LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 12/01/2020 |
| Markovits, Isaak | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 12/01/2020 |
| Richland, Ilan | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 50% | 12/01/2020 |
| Markovits, Isaak | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2020 | |
| Richland, Ilan | Corporate officer | Individual | 12/01/2020 | |
| Markovits, Isaak | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/01/2020 |
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.