Overall impression: Reviews of Conway Healthcare & Rehab are mixed, with a recurrent theme that individual staff members—particularly some nurses and CNAs—provide compassionate, professional care while the facility as a whole shows inconsistent performance across cleanliness, infection control, communication, and management. Multiple reviewers praised specific staff members and highlighted positive experiences such as helpful doctors, therapists who were adequate, warm hospitality, and well-kept common spaces. At the same time, a substantial number of reviews identified serious concerns about hygiene, safety, and organizational responsiveness. The result is a polarized set of experiences: families who received regular updates and witnessed caring staff felt relief and gratitude, while others observed neglect, safety lapses, and poor facility conditions that led them to recommend finding an alternative.
Care quality and safety: Several reviews commend nursing staff and some CNAs as going above and beyond, offering thoughtful care and consistent family communication (including photos and FaceTime updates). However, serious safety issues were also reported: falls allegedly left unattended, missing post-fall neurological documentation, injuries that required ER visits, and accounts of neglect. Reviewers described frequent resident illnesses and outbreaks, with pneumonia mentioned multiple times, suggesting concerns about infection control and clinical follow-through. These conflicting reports point to variability in the day-to-day quality of clinical attention—some residents receive attentive, professional care while others experience lapses with significant consequences.
Staffing, culture, and communication: Communication patterns are inconsistent. Several families praised staff for facilitating contact during COVID (porch visits, FaceTime) and for keeping families updated, which reduced stress for those relatives. Conversely, other reviewers reported difficulty reaching the director of nursing or administrator, slow responses to concerns, and long wait times for assistance. There are allegations of staff mistreatment, high CNA/nurse turnover, and even retaliation and management behaviors intended to make metrics look better. These cultural and leadership issues likely contribute to inconsistent care delivery and to the uneven experiences described by reviewers.
Facilities, cleanliness, and infection control: Reviews contain contradictory impressions of the physical environment. Some reviewers describe clean, open common areas and pleasant outdoor spaces, while many others report dirty rooms, clothing with mildew, persistent urine or bad smells, and an overall perception of poor facility cleanliness. Several reviewers explicitly link this to infection spread and frequent illnesses among residents. The lack of visible infection-control measures—such as readily available hand sanitizer—was noted by multiple reviewers and heightens concern about the facility’s ability to prevent communicable illnesses.
Activities and memory care: Activity offerings appear limited in several accounts. Reviewers reported residents spending long periods sitting in front or common rooms, little engagement, and instances of memory care residents kept in dark rooms watching movies. While some social spaces are available for games and movies, these reports point to uneven programming and possible understaffing or insufficient activity coordination, especially for people in memory care who require structured, engaging interventions.
Dining, therapy, and other services: Dining experiences are mixed—some reviewers found meals very good, while others described variability in quality. Physical and occupational therapy received varied feedback: one reviewer found physical therapy too difficult, while others reported therapists as adequate. Practical amenities such as a free shuttle service are seen as positives, and the presence of an attentive doctor and helpful administrative staff was highlighted in certain reviews.
Patterns and recommendations: The dominant pattern is variability—excellent, compassionate individual caregivers coexist with systemic problems (cleanliness, infection control, safety documentation, and inconsistent leadership). Families considering this facility should weigh the potential for excellent one-on-one care against the reports of hygiene problems, infection spread, and management issues. Specific areas for improvement based on these reviews include strengthening infection-control practices (sanitizer availability, laundry cleanliness), improving post-fall protocols and documentation, stabilizing staffing and leadership to reduce turnover and morale problems, enhancing communication with families, and increasing structured activities, especially for memory care residents.
Bottom line: Conway Healthcare & Rehab shows clear strengths in staff compassion and some pleasant communal spaces and services, but recurring, serious concerns about cleanliness, infection control, safety incidents, and inconsistent management communication suggest uneven quality. Prospective residents and families should tour the facility, ask about recent infection-control audits, staffing stability, fall-reporting protocols, and activity programming for memory care, and seek direct references from current families to assess how representative the positive or negative reviews might be for their own potential experience.
