FirstAlerts
Food Safety Inspections

MI TIERRITA COLOMBIA CHICAGO in Chicago Failed Its Inspection

City of Chicago health inspection records show MI TIERRITA COLOMBIA CHICAGO failed an inspection on August 10, 2026.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 3:37 p.m. ET
, located at in , failed its health inspection on August 10, 2026, according to City of health inspection records. The establishment was categorized under . The record shows no later inspection of this establishment, though it may have been re-inspected since without the record being updated. The status remains open. During the August 10 inspection, the inspector observed no hot water (71.4F) at the handwashing sink in the washroom and instructed the manager to provide at least 100F water, issuing a Priority 7-38-030(C) citation. The inspector also observed soiled wiping cloths stored on a prep table and instructed the manager to store wiping cloths in sanitizing solution between uses. Unwrapped single spoons and straws were noted as not inverted on the front display case, with instructions given to invert all single-service articles to protect them from contamination. Additionally, the inspection noted a soiled and stained cutting board on the prep cooler, with instructions to replace and maintain the cutting board. Dust buildup was also observed on ceiling tiles, ceiling vents, and walls in the prep area, and management was instructed to clean and maintain the physical facility.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 119 Aug 2026, 19:37current

    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.