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
Topic
AI type1
Sourcing
Vendor
Function
Start year

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

AI type: Computer visionfailsafe: affirmative

Practice-by-practice evidence

Denominator: 15 records · use cases designated high-impact
Reported in placeReported in progressNot applicablePrecluded by law or guidanceOther or ambiguous answerNo answer reported
PracticeIn scopeIn placeIn progressNot in placeN/APrecluded or waivedOtherNo answerAnsweredIn place of applicable
Pre-deployment testing151310000193%87% of 15
AI impact assessment1511400000100%73% of 15
Independent review151130000193%73% of 15
Ongoing monitoring151310000193%87% of 15
Operator training151310000193%87% of 15
Fail-safe1515000000100%100% of 15
Appeal process155009100100%100% of 5
User and public consultation1512000030100%80% of 15

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
DHS92%85%85%92%92%100%100%85%13
USDA100%0%0%100%100%100%100%0%1
SSA–0%–––100%0%100%1

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

4 records with at least one practice unanswered or in progressOpen in explorer
Use caseStageTestAIAReviewMonitorTrainFail-safeAppealConsult
Mobile Fortify
DHS · DHS-2731
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeNot applicableReported in place
Digital Identity Verification Services
SSA · R3122
DeployedNo answer reportedReported in progressNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedReported in placePrecluded by law or guidanceReported in place
Video Surveillance System
USDA · USDA-025
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeOther or ambiguous answer
FLIR 280 HD
DHS · DHS-2745
PilotReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeNot applicableOther or ambiguous answer

Unanswered analytical questions

Generated from the data; for follow-up with agencies
  1. 3 high-impact use cases are reported as deployed while their AI impact assessment is reported in progress. Was deployment authorised before the assessment was complete?
  2. 9 high-impact use cases mark an appeal process as not applicable. On what basis was each individual outcome judged not contestable?
  3. 2 high-impact use cases report using PII but give no link to a Privacy Impact Assessment. Is a PIA published elsewhere?

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