The factual accuracy of the story is quite strong, with the primary claim regarding the winning numbers of the Ohio Rolling Cash 5 game being verifiable and supported by multiple external sources. The numbers 11, 17, 21, 28, and 36 were indeed confirmed as the winning combination for the specified date. However, the story's suggestion to visit Jackpot.com for more lottery results and to order lottery tickets introduces elements that require further verification. While the winning numbers are accurate, the reliability of Jackpot.com as a source for lottery results and ticket purchases is not confirmed, which slightly diminishes the overall accuracy score.

The story is focused solely on reporting the winning numbers of a lottery game, which inherently limits the range of perspectives and viewpoints. There is no indication of bias or favoritism, as the content is factual and straightforward. However, the story lacks balance in terms of providing additional context or perspectives on lottery gaming, such as statistical odds, implications of gambling, or broader societal impacts. This narrow focus results in a moderate score for balance, as it does not present a comprehensive view of the topic.

The language of the article is clear and straightforward, with the winning numbers being presented in both numerical and written form for clarity. The structure is simple and to the point, making it easy for readers to understand the key information. However, the lack of additional context or explanation regarding the source of the information limits the clarity to some extent. Overall, the article is easy to read, but it could benefit from additional context to enhance understanding.

The article references Jackpot.com as a source for further lottery results, but it does not provide any information about the credibility or authority of this source. The lack of attribution to official lottery organizations or state-run websites reduces the source quality score. While the winning numbers can be cross-referenced with reliable sources, the reliance on an unverified external site for additional information and ticket purchases raises concerns about the overall quality and reliability of the sources used.

The article lacks transparency in terms of the sources and methodologies used to obtain the information presented. There is no disclosure about the process of obtaining the winning numbers or the reliability of Jackpot.com as a source for lottery results and ticket purchases. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for readers to assess the basis of the claims and the potential for conflicts of interest, which impacts the transparency score negatively.