JONES CO REST HOME
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Jones Co Rest Home in Ellisville, Mississippi has a Trust Grade of D, which indicates it falls below average with several concerns. It ranks #120 out of 200 facilities in the state, placing it in the bottom half, and #3 out of 4 in Jones County, meaning only one local option is better. The facility is showing improvement in its issues, decreasing from 7 concerns in 2023 to 6 in 2025. Staffing is a strength here with a 4 out of 5-star rating and a turnover rate of 44%, which is better than the state average. However, the facility has faced serious issues, including failing to create appropriate care plans for residents with behavioral issues and discontinuing necessary behavioral health services, which contributed to ongoing aggression from a resident. Additionally, there are concerns about food safety practices, with improper storage and labeling of food items.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Mississippi
- #120/200
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 44% turnover. Near Mississippi's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $12,735 in fines. Higher than 85% of Mississippi facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ○ Average
- Each resident gets 32 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Mississippi. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (44%)
4 points below Mississippi average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Below Mississippi average (2.6)
Below average - review inspection findings carefully
Near Mississippi avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Mar 2025
6 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to develop and implement a comprehensive, person-centered care plan and individualized interventions, as evidenced by ...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the ongoing provision of behavioral health services for a cognitively impaired resident with severe, escalating behavi...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0561
(Tag F0561)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to honor resident food dislikes by placing food items on meal trays that were identified as dislikes f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide a reason for a resident transfer for one (1) of 23 residents sampled. Resident #5
Findings Include:
A review of the facility's Noti...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0637
(Tag F0637)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to complete a Significant Change in Status Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment after a resident experienced two (2) or...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0646
(Tag F0646)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to notify the state mental health authority following a significant change in status for one (1) of two (2) resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2023
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide written notification of transfer to the resident and the Resident's Representative (RR), for a resident t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interviews, record review and facility policy review, the facility failed to provide the Resident and the Resident Representative (RR) with written notification of the bed hold policy at the ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0565
(Tag F0565)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interviews, record review, and facility policy review the facility failed to ensure grievances related to dietary services were resolved for ten (10) of 24 sampled residents. (Resident #1, #1...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, staff interviews, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure staff washed or sanitized hands during Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy (PEG) site c...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, staff interviews and facility policy review, the facility failed to store food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety related to food items not dated w...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(B)
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
Minor procedural issue · This affected multiple residents
Based on staff interview, record review, and facility policy review, the facility failed to transmit a discharge Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment for one (1) of 24 residents reviewed for MDS assessme...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observations, record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to ensure implementation of additional precautions intended to mitigate the transmission and spread of...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2022
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0661
(Tag F0661)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on record review, interviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to reconcile a resident's pre-discharge medications with the post-discharge medications for one (1) of three (3) dis...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2021
3 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Unnecessary Medications
(Tag F0759)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy review, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than five percent (5%) for one of six (6) medication...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, staff interviews, record reviews, and facility policy reviews the facility failed to prevent the possible ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, staff interviews, and facility policy reviews, the facility failed to properly sanitize the food processors for pureed diets which could affect 11 of 11 residents receiving puree...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 44% turnover. Below Mississippi's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 17 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $12,735 in fines. Above average for Mississippi. Some compliance problems on record.
- • Grade D (43/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Jones Co Rest Home's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns JONES CO REST HOME an overall rating of 2 out of 5 stars, which is considered below average nationally. Within Mississippi, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Jones Co Rest Home Staffed?
CMS rates JONES CO REST HOME's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 44%, compared to the Mississippi average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Jones Co Rest Home?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at JONES CO REST HOME during 2021 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm, 14 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Jones Co Rest Home?
JONES CO REST HOME is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 122 certified beds and approximately 114 residents (about 93% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in ELLISVILLE, Mississippi.
How Does Jones Co Rest Home Compare to Other Mississippi Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Mississippi, JONES CO REST HOME's overall rating (2 stars) is below the state average of 2.6, staff turnover (44%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Jones Co Rest Home?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"
Is Jones Co Rest Home Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, JONES CO REST HOME has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 2-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Mississippi. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.
Do Nurses at Jones Co Rest Home Stick Around?
JONES CO REST HOME has a staff turnover rate of 44%, which is about average for Mississippi nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Jones Co Rest Home Ever Fined?
JONES CO REST HOME has been fined $12,735 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Mississippi average of $33,206. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Jones Co Rest Home on Any Federal Watch List?
JONES CO REST HOME is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.