Report 2010-036 Recommendation 6 Responses

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

Recommendation #6 To: Shasta County

To help ensure that they meet the grant requirements established in the Government Code, counties should require that the county auditor review each grant application to ensure a rigorous analysis of a casino's impact and of the proportion of funding for the project provided by the grant. Benefit committees should consider a grant application only when the county auditor certifies that the applicant has quantified the impact of the casino and verifies that the grant funds requested will be proportional to the casino's impact.

Agency Response*

Shasta County's Auditor-Controller will make himself available to review grant applications that the Shasta County Indian Gaming Local Community Benefit Committee may feel need to be reviewed to determine that the grant funds requested will be proportional to the casino's impact.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Estimated Completion Date: Next Funding Cycle
  • Response Date: September 2015

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Not Fully Implemented


Agency Response*

Shasta County's Auditor-Controller will make himself available to review grant applications that the Shasta County Indian Gaming Local Community Benefit Committee may feel need to be reviewed to determine that the grant funds requested will be proportional to the casino's impact.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Estimated Completion Date: June 2015
  • Response Date: October 2014

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Not Fully Implemented


Agency Response*

Shasta County's Auditor-Controller will make himself available to review grant applications that the Shasta County Indian Gaming Local Community Benefit Committee may feel need to be reviewed to determine that the grant funds requested will be proportional to the casino's impact.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Estimated Completion Date: June 2014
  • Response Date: October 2013

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Not Fully Implemented


Agency Response*

The department did not provide a reason it will not implement this recommendation.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Response Date: December 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Will Not Implement


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