ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY COFFEE SHOP

Inspection summary

ROOSEVELT UNIVERSITY COFFEE SHOP has been inspected 6 times by Chicago Department of Public Health since May 22, 2012. The most recent inspection, on September 8, 2017, found no infractions.

2 of 6 inspections on record found no infractions at all. No inspections are on record from the past 12 months. All recorded findings relate to upkeep, equipment or paperwork rather than direct food-handling risks.

The last 2 inspections in a row found no infractions. Recent inspections have recorded fewer infractions than earlier ones, so the record is improving.

What these findings mean

Health authorities word their violations differently, so we group them by what they mean for food safety. Higher-risk findings are the ones inspectors treat as critical, because they can directly make someone sick.

• Equipment and utensilsLower risk

  Equipment has to be built from cleanable materials, kept in good repair and stored properly. These findings are mostly about upkeep, like a cracked shelf, a worn gasket or utensils stored the wrong way. They are generally lower risk but show how well the kitchen is maintained.

  Recorded 7 times across 4 separate inspections, most recently on March 3, 2015. For example: VENTILATION: ROOMS AND EQUIPMENT VENTED AS REQUIRED: PLUMBING: INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED

• Building, plumbing and upkeepLower risk

  Floors, walls and ceilings must be smooth and clean, with working lighting, ventilation, plumbing, hot and cold water, and washrooms. These are rarely an immediate food-safety risk on their own, but persistent problems can lead to pest or sanitation issues.

  Recorded 2 times across 2 separate inspections, most recently on July 17, 2014. For example: FLOORS: CONSTRUCTED PER CODE, CLEANED, GOOD REPAIR, COVING INSTALLED, DUST-LESS CLEANING METHODS USED

• Food safety training and certificationLower risk

  Most jurisdictions require a certified food handler or manager on site, and some require allergen or food-worker training. These findings mean the paperwork or the trained person was missing at the time. They do not by themselves mean food was handled unsafely.

  Recorded once on March 3, 2015. For example: FOOD HANDLER REQUIREMENTS MET

• Permits, records and postingLower risk

  Operating permits, required signage, written procedures and logs. These findings are administrative: the documentation was missing or out of date at the time of inspection.

  Recorded once on November 15, 2013. For example: * INSPECTION REPORT SUMMARY DISPLAYED AND VISIBLE TO ALL CUSTOMERS

• Other findingsLower risk

  Findings that do not fit the categories above, such as follow-ups that confirm an earlier violation was corrected, or requirements specific to this type of facility.

  Recorded once on November 15, 2013. For example: ADEQUATE NUMBER, CONVENIENT, ACCESSIBLE, DESIGNED, AND MAINTAINED

About this data

These results come from Chicago Department of Public Health, which inspects food premises and other public facilities in this area. We republish the authority's public disclosure data and refresh it regularly; the official record is the final word.

• View the official Chicago Department of Public Health disclosure site
• See all inspected facilities in Chicago
• How to read an inspection report