FirstAlerts

SLA MONTROSE LLC in Chicago Failed Its Inspection

City health inspection records show SLA MONTROSE LLC on Montrose Avenue failed its August 13, 2026 inspection.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 5:11 p.m. ET
, located at . in , , failed its health inspection on August 13, 2026, according to official health inspection records. The establishment was classified as . The inspection record shows no later inspection of this establishment. It may have been re-inspected since without the record being updated. During the inspection, the following observations were recorded by the inspector: - PROCEDURES FOR RESPONDING TO VOMITING AND DIARRHEAL EVENTS: Observed no clean up procedure or supplies on premises to respond to vomit and diarrheal events. Instructed to provide both. Priority foundation violation 7-38-005. No citation issued. - CONTAMINATION PREVENTED DURING FOOD PREPARATION, STORAGE & DISPLAY: Must install splashguards between exposed handwashing sink and prep table in the kitchen food prep area. Must install and maintain at all times. - WAREWASHING FACILITIES: INSTALLED, MAINTAINED & USED; TEST STRIPS: Observed no irreversible registering temperature indicators on the premises to measure the surfaces temperatures of utensils being sanitized in the high temperature dish machine. Management instructed to provide. Priority foundation violation 7-38-005. No citation issued.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 119 Aug 2026, 21:11current

    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.