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
Function
Start year

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

AI type: Generative AITopic: Information Technology

Practice-by-practice evidence

Denominator: 7 records · use cases designated high-impact
Reported in placeReported in progressNot applicableOther or ambiguous answerNo answer reported
PracticeIn scopeIn placeIn progressNot in placeN/APrecluded or waivedOtherNo answerAnsweredIn place of applicable
Pre-deployment testing7020000529%0% of 7
AI impact assessment7200000529%29% of 7
Independent review7200000529%29% of 7
Ongoing monitoring7020000529%0% of 7
Operator training7200000529%29% of 7
Fail-safe7200000529%29% of 7
Appeal process7000200529%0% of 5
User and public consultation7000002529%0% of 7

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 with any answerIn placeAnswered
Agency by governance practice
TestingImpact assess.Indep. reviewMonitoringTrainingFail-safeAppealConsultationn
DOE33%33%33%33%33%33%33%33%6
DOJ1

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

7 records with at least one practice unanswered or in progressOpen in explorer
Use caseStageTestAIAReviewMonitorTrainFail-safeAppealConsult
Copilot Studio
DOE · DOE-444
DeployedReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeNot applicableOther or ambiguous answer
Copilot for Microsoft 365
DOE · DOE-452
DeployedReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeNot applicableOther or ambiguous answer
AI for High Risk Property
DOE · DOE-454
Pre-deploymentNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reported
AI Enabled Code Review
DOE · DOE-606
Pre-deploymentNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reported
QuantomVision
DOE · DOE-635
Pre-deploymentNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reported
Knowledge Capture Agent (KCA)
DOE · DOE-640
Pre-deploymentNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reported
Generative AI R&D Sandbox
DOJ · DOJ-0090
PilotNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reportedNo answer reported

Unanswered analytical questions

Generated from the data; for follow-up with agencies
  1. 2 high-impact use cases mark an appeal process as not applicable. On what basis was each individual outcome judged not contestable?
  2. 3 high-impact use cases report using PII but give no link to a Privacy Impact Assessment. Is a PIA published elsewhere?
  3. 35 governance answers are ambiguous (for example, an answer option from a different question). What did the agency intend?

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