Federal AI Intelligence
Menu
Snapshot · OMB 2025 inventory · processed Oct 11, 2026
Governance and accountability

Governance evidence

What agencies reported about the OMB M-25-21 minimum practices for high-impact AI. This is a disclosure analysis, not an audit, a compliance finding or an official assessment. An unanswered question is missing evidence, not evidence that a safeguard is absent.

Agency
Stage
High-impact
Topic1
AI type1
Sourcing
Vendor
No options match.
Function
Start year

Only records with a parseable start date match a year filter.

AI type: Classical / predictive MLfeedback: otherTopic: Law Enforcement

Practice-by-practice evidence

Denominator: 5 records · use cases designated high-impact
Reported in placeNot applicablePrecluded by law or guidanceOther or ambiguous answer
PracticeIn scopeIn placeIn progressNot in placeN/APrecluded or waivedOtherNo answerAnsweredIn place of applicable
Pre-deployment testing55000000100%100% of 5
AI impact assessment55000000100%100% of 5
Independent review55000000100%100% of 5
Ongoing monitoring55000000100%100% of 5
Operator training55000000100%100% of 5
Fail-safe55000000100%100% of 5
Appeal process50003200100%n/a of 0
User and public consultation50000050100%0% of 5

Answered = records with any answer ÷ records in scope. In place of applicable = reported in place ÷ (in scope minus not applicable, precluded and waived). Unanswered records stay in that denominator, so the rate is a lower bound on reported evidence, not an estimate of real practice.

Agency-by-safeguard heatmap

Cell: share reported in place, among applicable recordsIn placeAnswered
Agency by governance practice
TestingImpact assess.Indep. reviewMonitoringTrainingFail-safeAppealConsultationn
DHS100%100%100%100%100%100%0%0%5

Hatched cells: the agency answered nothing for that practice, so there is no evidence either way. Compare agencies with care: each agency is one reporting unit, and portfolios differ in size and type.

Records requiring further investigation

0 records with at least one practice unanswered or in progressOpen in explorer
Use caseStageTestAIAReviewMonitorTrainFail-safeAppealConsult

Unanswered analytical questions

Generated from the data; for follow-up with agencies
  1. 3 high-impact use cases mark an appeal process as not applicable. On what basis was each individual outcome judged not contestable?

These are questions the inventory raises but cannot answer. They are not findings of non-compliance.