POMPANO BEACH, FL. Back in December 2025, a state inspector walked into a Pompano Beach perishable food processing operation and asked the person in charge a basic question: what symptoms can cause a foodborne illness? The answer was wrong.
That exchange sits at the center of a December 8, 2025 inspection of Delidreams, a perishable food processor operating in Broward County. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services inspection turned up three violations, all classified at the priority foundation level, meaning they relate to the foundational practices that prevent serious food safety failures before they happen.
None were corrected on site.
What Inspectors Found
The inspector's notes were direct. The person in charge "was unable to correctly respond to questions relating to food borne disease and symptoms that may cause food borne disease." The same person "was unable to relate to conditions of restriction and exclusion," meaning they could not explain when a sick employee should be kept away from food or removed from work entirely.
The second violation compounded the first. The person in charge "was unable to ensure that food employees were informed in a verifiable manner to report their illness and or symptoms relate to diseases that are transmissible through food." In plain terms: workers at this facility had not been formally told they needed to report when they were sick.
The third violation was structural. The facility had no written procedures at all for handling accidental vomiting or diarrheal incidents. The inspector noted the food entity "does not have any written procedures to address clean up procedures for accidental vomiting and diarrheal incidents."
What These Violations Mean
Delidreams is not a restaurant. It is a perishable food processor, meaning products made or handled there move into a supply chain and reach consumers without a final cooking step to kill pathogens. That context makes the illness-reporting failures documented here more consequential than they might appear at first.
When a person in charge cannot correctly answer questions about foodborne illness symptoms, it signals that the operation's first line of defense against contamination is not functioning. The person in charge is responsible for making real-time decisions about whether a sick worker should be handling food. If that person does not know which symptoms require exclusion, workers with norovirus, Salmonella, or Hepatitis A can continue handling products.
The absence of written illness reporting procedures is a related gap. Employees who have never been formally told they must report symptoms are less likely to do so, particularly if they fear losing pay or shifts. Without a verifiable record that employees received that training, there is no way to confirm the communication ever happened.
The missing vomit and diarrheal cleanup protocol matters because norovirus, one of the most common causes of foodborne illness outbreaks, spreads rapidly through contaminated surfaces. A processing environment without written cleanup steps risks cross-contamination of food contact surfaces if an incident occurs and staff improvise a response.
The Longer Record
The December 8 inspection was not Delidreams' first. State records show eight additional inspections at this location, stretching from that December 2025 visit through March 2026.
Most of those visits went well. The facility passed preoperational inspections with zero violations on December 16, December 19, December 22, March 11, and March 19 of 2026. A December 11 inspection turned up one violation, and a December 29 inspection found one violation marked as a repeat.
The January 6, 2026 sanitation inspection was the roughest in the record, producing four violations. That inspection type differs from the preoperational checks that bookend it, examining the facility under full operating conditions rather than before a production run begins.
The pattern across nine inspections suggests a facility that moves in and out of compliance, clearing violations in some visits while accumulating new ones in others. The three unresolved violations from December 8 were not corrected on site, and the subsequent December 11 and December 29 inspections each still found at least one problem.
Where Things Stood
At the close of the December 8 inspection, all three violations remained open. The inspector did not record any corrections made during the visit.
The violations flagged that day were not about a dirty floor or a mislabeled container. They concerned whether the people running this operation understood the basic rules for keeping sick workers away from food, and whether the facility had any written plan for containing a contamination event if one occurred. On December 8, the answer to both questions was no.
The facility's March 2026 inspections both passed with zero violations, suggesting those gaps were eventually addressed. But the record of what was found in December stands on its own.
