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 type
Sourcing
Vendor
Function
Start year

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

feedback: affirmative

Practice-by-practice evidence

Denominator: 22 records · deployed high-impact use cases
Reported in placeReported in progressNot applicablePrecluded by law or guidanceNo answer reported
PracticeIn scopeIn placeIn progressNot in placeN/APrecluded or waivedOtherNo answerAnsweredIn place of applicable
Pre-deployment testing222100000195%95% of 22
AI impact assessment2217500000100%77% of 22
Independent review221740000195%77% of 22
Ongoing monitoring222010000195%91% of 22
Operator training222100000195%95% of 22
Fail-safe2220002000100%100% of 20
Appeal process2270013200100%100% of 7
User and public consultation2222000000100%100% of 22

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%89%89%94%100%100%100%100%18
SSA50%50%50%50%50%100%0%100%2
STATE100%0%0%100%100%100%100%100%2

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

5 records with at least one practice unanswered or in progressOpen in explorer
Use caseStageTestAIAReviewMonitorTrainFail-safeAppealConsult
CBP Translate
DHS · DHS-2388
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeNot applicableNot applicableReported in place
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
AI-Augmented Declassification Review
STATE · R3213
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeReported in place
Electronic Health Record AI Enhancements
STATE · R3248
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeNot applicableReported in place

Unanswered analytical questions

Generated from the data; for follow-up with agencies
  1. 5 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. 14 high-impact use cases mark an appeal process as not applicable. On what basis was each individual outcome judged not contestable?
  3. 1 high-impact use cases report using PII but give no link to a Privacy Impact Assessment. Is a PIA published elsewhere?
  4. 48 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.