Subway on health inspections, place by place
See what routine health inspections recorded at Subway restaurants in each place we cover, next to the local rate for that same place. Every figure comes from that government’s own records.
Records through September 19, 2026.
In plain terms
Subway has enough routine inspections to chart in six of the six places we cover. Its restaurants came in clearly under the local rate in four, too close to the local rate to call in one and clearly over it in one.
Each place counts a different thing, so read each row against its own tall line and never against another row. Part of any gap is the menu: a chain that handles less raw food gives an inspector less to find.
Place by place
In each row the tall line is the local rate for that place. The bar is the range the chain’s real rate probably falls in, and the short tick is the rate we measured. Every row has its own scale, printed at its ends, because every place counts a different event.
- Clearly under the local rate
- Too close to call
- Clearly over
Compare Subway with another chain, place by place.
What stands out
One chain, three different positions. Subway is clearly under the local rate in four places, too close to call in Austin and clearly over in Seattle and King County. The menu is the same in all of them. That is the plainest sign on this site that a figure belongs to a place and its inspections, and not to a brand.
Seattle and King County. 278 of 593 (46.9%, likely range 42.9% to 50.9%), against 35.6% for all food service establishments. The whole range sits over the county rate. The county marks an inspection Unsatisfactory whenever a red critical violation is noted; it does not mean a closure, and the Seattle and King County page sets out what does and does not follow from one.
Chicago and Florida are measured closely, and point the other way. Chicago: 232 of 1,407 (16.5%, likely range 14.6% to 18.5%), against 24.4% for all restaurants. Florida: 1,266 of 3,261 (38.8%, likely range 37.2% to 40.5%), against 58.2% for all restaurants. Both ranges are narrow and both sit wholly under the local rate.
Austin cannot be called. 33 of 121 (27.3%, likely range 20.1% to 35.8%), against 33.6% for all food establishments. The measured rate is under the city’s, but the range includes it.
Part of the gap is the kind of kitchen. New York State’s health department sorts kitchens by how much preparation they do. It names “table-service restaurants, diners and school kitchens which prepare foods” as typical high risk, and kitchens that prepare food to order, “such as pizza, hamburgers and sandwiches,” as typical medium risk. Every local rate on this page includes table-service restaurants, so part of any gap between a chain and the local rate is the kind of kitchen, before anyone’s management comes into it. A sandwich line is the same wherever Subway operates, so the menu cannot be what separates King County from the other places.
Analysis written September 2026. The figures in it are read from the current records, so they move when the records do.
How these figures are made
- Sources. Florida: Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation; New York City: NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; New York State: New York State Department of Health; Chicago: Chicago Department of Public Health; Austin: Austin Public Health; Seattle and King County: Public Health - Seattle & King County. Each place’s page says exactly which inspections are counted and why.
- The figure. In each place, the number of the chain’s counted routine inspections that recorded that place’s finding, divided by all of them. The local rate is the same sum over everything in that place’s file.
- The range. A 95% Wilson score interval. Fewer inspections means a wider range. A chain needs 100 counted inspections in a place to be charted there.
- Matching names. Restaurant names are matched to Subway with a published table of name patterns, which also lists every spelling it matched. A location recorded under two chain names is counted for neither. If a match is wrong, write to hello@fastfoodfact.com.
- No combined figure. Nothing on this page adds, averages or orders rates from two places. The only number that spans places is a count of where the chain sits against each local rate.
The full method is on the methodology page.
New York State data: The analyses, interpretations and conclusions drawn from New York State data on this site were reached by FastFoodFact and not by the New York State Department of Health. The department states that this data was not collected for use as a restaurant grading system and does not support or endorse such a use; the figures here describe groups of inspections and are not a grade of any restaurant.
Chicago data: This site provides applications using data that has been modified for use from its original source, www.cityofchicago.org, the official website of the City of Chicago. The City of Chicago makes no claims as to the content, accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided at this site. The data provided at this site is subject to change at any time. It is understood that the data provided at this site is being used at one’s own risk.
What this does not show
- Management quality on its own. Chains differ in what they handle. A coffee counter deals with far less raw food than a kitchen that fries chicken, so part of any gap between a chain and the local rate is the menu, and the local rate includes full-service kitchens that do far more cooking than any chain here.
- The brand as a whole. These are Subway locations in six places over a few years. The records say nothing about its locations anywhere else.
- Anything about one restaurant. A figure sums up many inspections at many locations. It is not a warning about, or a recommendation of, the one near you.
- Which place is stricter or cleaner. Each place counts a different event under different rules, so the rows cannot be set against each other.
Informational only. These are public records, summarized; they are not a safety rating of any restaurant and not professional advice. Last reviewed: September 2026.
Frequently asked questions
How does Subway do on health inspections?
It depends on the place, and each place counts something different. Subway has enough routine inspections to chart in six of the six places this site covers (Florida, New York City, New York State, Chicago, Austin and Seattle and King County). Its restaurants came in clearly under the local rate in four, too close to the local rate to call in one and clearly over it in one. The figures describe those locations over those years, not the brand everywhere and not any one restaurant.
Can the Subway figures be compared between places?
No. Florida counts inspections that recorded at least one high-priority violation, New York City counts inspections that scored 14 or more points, New York State counts inspections that recorded at least one critical (red) violation, Chicago counts inspections that ended in a Fail, Austin counts inspections that scored under 90, below the city's top category and Seattle and King County counts inspections that received an Unsatisfactory result. Those are different events under different rules, so a lower number in one place does not mean cleaner restaurants there. The only fair reading is each figure against its own place's local rate.
Where do these figures come from?
From inspection records published by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the New York State Department of Health, the Chicago Department of Public Health, the Austin Public Health and the Public Health - Seattle & King County. We count routine inspections only, match restaurant names to chains with a published table of name patterns, and need 100 inspections in a place before charting a chain there.
Does this say anything about the Subway near me?
No. A figure here sums up many inspections at many locations. For one restaurant's record, look it up with the health department that inspects it; each place page on this site links to its source.
Related tools
How often state inspectors recorded a high-priority violation at each chain's Florida restaurants, against the rate for all restaurants in the state.
Open tool →Fast-food chains in New York CityHow often each chain's New York City restaurants scored too many points for an A on a first inspection, against the rate for all restaurants in the city.
Open tool →Fast-food chains in New York StateHow often inspectors recorded a critical violation at each chain's restaurants in New York State outside New York City, Suffolk and Erie, against the rate for all food service establishments there.
Open tool →Fast-food chains in ChicagoHow often routine city inspections ended in a Fail at each chain's Chicago restaurants, against the rate for all restaurants in the city.
Open tool →Fast-food chains in AustinHow often routine city inspections scored under 90 at each chain's Austin restaurants, against the rate for all food establishments in the city.
Open tool →Fast-food chains in Seattle and King CountyHow often routine county inspections were marked Unsatisfactory at each chain's restaurants in Seattle and King County, against the rate for all food service establishments in the county.
Open tool →