Report 2010-036 Recommendation 12 Responses

Report 2010-036: Indian Gaming Special Distribution Fund: Local Governments Continue to Have Difficulty Justifying Distribution Fund Grants (Release Date: February 2011)

Recommendation #12 To: San Diego, County of

To help ensure that they meet the grant requirements established in the Government Code, counties should more rigorously review applications that are to be administered and spent by an entity other than the local government that applies for the funds. Specifically, benefit committees should require that each grant application clearly show how the grant will mitigate the impact of the casino on the applicant agency.

Agency Response*

The county stated that the benefit committee's process is one that provides a rigorous review of the grant applications through a comprehensive, transparent, and public process. The benefit committee has established application policies, procedures, and an application form for the grants following the priorities specified in Section 12715(g) of the California Government Code. The benefit committee further confirmed that grant documents request information from applicants to ensure that metrics clearly demonstrate proportionality for impacts. (See 2013-406, p. 68)

  • Response Type†: 1-Year
  • Response Date: February 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented

All Recommendations in 2010-036

†Response Type refers to the interval in which the auditee is providing the State Auditor with their status in implementing recommendations made in an audit report. Auditees must submit a response regarding their progress in implementing recommendations from our reports at three intervals from the release of the report: 60 days, six months, and one year or subsequent to one year.

*Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.

Report type

Report type

© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader