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.

monitoring: in_progresstesting: affirmative

Practice-by-practice evidence

Denominator: 5 records · use cases designated high-impact
Reported in placeReported in progressNot applicableOther or ambiguous answer
PracticeIn scopeIn placeIn progressNot in placeN/APrecluded or waivedOtherNo answerAnsweredIn place of applicable
Pre-deployment testing55000000100%100% of 5
AI impact assessment51400000100%20% of 5
Independent review51400000100%20% of 5
Ongoing monitoring50500000100%0% of 5
Operator training52300000100%40% of 5
Fail-safe51301000100%25% of 4
Appeal process52003000100%100% of 2
User and public consultation52000030100%40% 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%0%0%0%25%0%100%25%4
SSA100%100%100%0%100%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

5 records with at least one practice unanswered or in progressOpen in explorer
Use caseStageTestAIAReviewMonitorTrainFail-safeAppealConsult
Babel
DHS · DHS-185
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeOther or ambiguous answer
Passive Body Scanner
DHS · DHS-2380
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressNot applicableOther or ambiguous answer
CBP Translate
DHS · DHS-2388
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeNot applicableNot applicableReported in place
Traffic Jam
DHS · DHS-2570
DeployedReported in placeReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in progressReported in placeOther or ambiguous answer
Policy Assistance Tool (PAT)
SSA · R3116
PilotReported in placeReported in placeReported in placeReported in progressReported in placeReported in placeNot applicableReported in place

Unanswered analytical questions

Generated from the data; for follow-up with agencies
  1. 4 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. 3 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?

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