, FL. The person in charge at Aroma Di Espresso, a mobile vendor operating in Florida, could not answer basic questions about preventing foodborne illness and could not produce written procedures for handling a vomit or diarrhea event when a state inspector arrived on September 10, 2026.
The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services conducted the inspection and found three violations. None were classified as priority violations, and none were marked as repeat findings. The establishment did meet sanitation inspection requirements overall, but the gaps inspectors documented point to a vendor operating without some of the foundational safeguards the state requires.
What Inspectors Found
The first violation is straightforward: the establishment does not have a certified food protection manager. State rules require that at least one person at a food operation hold a certification showing they have passed an accredited food safety exam.
The second violation is more immediate. The inspector wrote that the person in charge "could not answer questions that relate to foodborne illness." That is not a paperwork gap. That is the person running the operation on the day of the inspection being unable to demonstrate working knowledge of how illness spreads through food.
The third violation is specific. The inspector noted that the person in charge "could not show written employee procedures for cleanup of a vomit and diarrhea event." State rules require mobile vendors to have those procedures documented and accessible, not simply understood in theory.
None of the three violations were corrected on site during the inspection.
What These Violations Mean
The certification requirement exists because food safety knowledge degrades when it is not formalized. A certified food protection manager has passed a standardized exam covering temperature control, cross-contamination, employee illness policies, and cleaning protocols. At Aroma Di Espresso, no one in that role holds that credential.
The foodborne illness knowledge gap compounds that problem. When an inspector asks a person in charge how to respond to a sick employee, or what temperatures keep food out of the danger zone, those are not trick questions. They are the baseline. A vendor whose operator cannot answer them is a vendor where the basic decision-making framework for preventing illness is absent.
The missing vomit and diarrhea cleanup procedure may sound like a minor administrative item. It is not. Norovirus, one of the most common causes of foodborne illness outbreaks, spreads through exactly these events. A written procedure ensures that contaminated surfaces are treated with the correct disinfectant concentration, that employees know to remove and bag contaminated materials, and that the area is properly cleared before food service resumes. Without a written plan, cleanup is improvised, and improvised cleanup of a norovirus event is how outbreaks spread beyond a single person.
Aroma Di Espresso is a mobile vendor, which means it operates in varying locations and serves customers who have no way of knowing what documentation the operator carries. The violations documented here are not about a dirty surface or a temperature reading. They are about whether the person operating the unit knows what to do when something goes wrong.
The Longer Record
The inspection data for Aroma Di Espresso does not include prior inspections on record, which means this September 10, 2026 visit is either the first documented inspection for this vendor or the only one available in the state's records. That absence of history cuts two ways.
On one hand, there is no pattern of repeat violations to report. The three findings here are not marked as repeat citations, meaning inspectors have not previously flagged the same problems at this location.
On the other hand, the lack of a certified food protection manager is not the kind of violation that develops overnight. Obtaining a food protection manager certification requires scheduling and passing an exam. The fact that no one at the operation holds that credential on the date of inspection suggests it was never obtained, not that it lapsed recently.
For a mobile vendor with no extended inspection history in the state database, the record that exists is this one. Three violations, zero corrected on site, and a person in charge who could not demonstrate the knowledge the state requires.
Where Things Stand
The September 10 inspection ended with Aroma Di Espresso meeting overall sanitation requirements, which means the state did not order a closure or a stop sale. The vendor was allowed to continue operating.
But none of the three violations were resolved during the inspection itself. The establishment still had no certified food protection manager when the inspector left. The person in charge had not demonstrated adequate knowledge of foodborne illness prevention. The written cleanup procedures for a vomit or diarrhea event had not been produced.
Those three items remain open as of the inspection date.
