146 Vaughn Drive, Fayetteville, GA 30214
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Shirley Home Away From Home II
Pros
Shirley provides great services.- Shirley's services are described as great.
- Shirley delivers outstanding services.
Cons
The woman is rude.- Her facilities are nothing more than a source of income.
- The day center is nothing more than a room with tables.
- The staff is overworked and underpaid.
- There is a lack of communication and disorganization, which is nothing compared to how they treat the consumers.
- It is unclear how she stays in business.
- The reviewer warns others never to work for her and not to leave their loved ones in her care.
Review
Shirley Home Away From Home II in Fayetteville, GA is best suited for families seeking a small, home-like setting where staff can deliver personal attention and residents feel known. It works for those who need modest assistance and who prize warmth, familiarity, and a non-clinical atmosphere over highly formal programming. The operation appears intimate, with the potential for caregiver-resident relationships that aren’t buried in a large staff roster. Those who require consistently polished systems, rigorous oversight, or advanced medical supports may want to consider alternatives. In short, this community serves as a practical option for families comfortable with variable staffing and governance who value a familial touch in daily life.
On the upside, the mixed feedback contains a glimmer of trust in care when things run smoothly. A positive note exists from a reviewer who thanked Shirley for providing great services, signaling that meaningful help and genuine attention can emerge in the right circumstances. The small size can also translate into more direct communication and a neighborhood feel where neighbors and caregivers know one another. For families willing to stay engaged, this setup can yield timely responses and a sense that a loved one is cared for on a day-to-day basis, rather than shuffled through a rigid, impersonal program.
Yet the strongest currents in the reviews pull toward caution. A pointed critique describes an owner who comes across as rude and driven by income, a day center that feels more like a bare room than a robust activity hub, and staff who are overworked and underpaid. The responder highlights a cascade of issues, poor communication, disorganization, and a troubling dynamic between staff, residents, and leadership. Taken together, these reflections raise red flags about consistency, morale, and the reliability of care when needs intensify or emergencies arise. Such concerns are not trivial in a setting where daily stability can hinge on dependable leadership and clear processes.
That is where the decision calculus tightens. The potential advantages of a small, intimate operation can be offset by governance and staffing fragility, unless rigorous oversight is in place. If a family can supply hands-on advocacy, regular visits, proactive problem-solving, and clear lines of communication, the positives may tilt toward workable daily life for a resident who mainly needs companionship, supervision of routine tasks, and help with activities of daily living. However, for any resident with evolving or higher care requirements, the risk that inconsistent staffing and shifting priorities will disrupt safety and well-being becomes a consequential worry. In this sense, the offset is conditional and fragile.
Explicit alternatives deserve serious consideration for families prioritizing reliability, transparency, and sufficient clinical support. If a community must demonstrate steady staffing, predictable routines, and proactive, professional management, larger facilities or smaller operators with documented governance and licensing compliance should be explored. Look for facilities with transparent staffing ratios, clear onboarding and training standards, established family communication channels, and consistent performance in state inspections and resident satisfaction. In short, seek environments where leadership accountability and staff stability are visible and verifiable.
The final verdict is practical and decisive: Shirley Home Away From Home II can work for a select subset of residents and families, the ones who can tolerate occasional leadership wrinkles in exchange for a warm, homey daily life and a level of personal attention that a tiny setting can offer. For others, especially those needing dependable, high-level care with strong administrative systems, alternatives are advisable. Prospective movers should plan thorough, multi-angle evaluations: spend time at different hours, speak with staff and residents, request a copy of care plans, and probe for staffing ratios and turnover. Verify licensing status and read multiple references; insist on candid conversations about how problems are handled when the day-to-day pressure mounts. Only with that kind of due diligence can a confident, resident-centered choice be made.
3 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Cable or satellite TV
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
William B Hartsfield-Atlanta International (12 miles away)
24-hour supervision
Activities of daily living assistance
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Meal preparation and service
Medication management
Special dietary restrictions
Transportation arrangement (medical)
Transportation to doctors appointments
Comprehensive Insights into Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and Their Assessment
Guiding Elderly Parents Who Refuse Assisted Living: 6 Practical Steps
Your Comprehensive Guide to Luxury Assisted Living: Elevated Facilities, Amenities, and Costs