FirstAlerts

Jewel Food Store #3454 in Chicago Fails Inspection

Chicago health inspectors recorded a failed inspection at Jewel Food Store #3454 on North Lincoln Avenue, citing issues including improper cold holding temperatures and a non-functioning dish machine.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 9, 2026, 5:52 a.m. ET
's inspection record for at shows the establishment on September 2, 2026, and was rated . The record lists multiple violations, including inadequate handwashing facilities, improper cold holding temperatures, and a dish machine not properly sanitizing. Inspectors observed no hot water at a handwashing sink inside the walk-in meat prep cooler, with water temperature at 85.0°F, below the required 100.0°F. They also recorded improper cold holding temperatures for TCS foods, with raw pork chops ranging from 47.5 to 49.5°F and other items up to 58.3°F. Management voluntarily discarded approximately 91 pounds of food worth $641.00. The walk-in meat prep cooler was tagged and may not be used until repaired and re-inspected by the Department of Public Health.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 19 Sept 2026, 09:52current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.