Public-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency
Lets a public body account for the AI it uses by keeping an inventory of use cases, flagging those that affect rights or services, and publishing what the public and oversight bodies are entitled to see.
What this label means
- Verified
- — a named reviewer opened the official source and confirmed the record; the date and the reviewer are shown.
- Pending review
- — linked to the official source and in the queue for a reviewer to confirm.
- Source-linked
- — linked to the official source, not yet confirmed by a reviewer.
On this page 6 sections
- Duties satisfied
- 2
- done properly, does the work
- Duties supported
- 4
- contributes; the duty needs more
- Jurisdictions
- 4
- Evidence items
- 3
In brief
Public-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency is a process, owned by the agency AI officer and run every year. 6 recorded duties in 4 jurisdictions rely on it, and it satisfies 2 of them outright. It produces 3 kinds of evidence an auditor can ask for.
How is it implemented?
Each agency or department nominates a responsible official who collects use cases from programme teams through a standard form covering purpose, stage, data, vendors, affected people and whether the use is high-impact. Entries are reviewed for completeness and consistency with the procurement record, exclusions are documented, and the resulting inventory is published on the required cadence with sensitive items summarised. Vendors are asked at contract time for the descriptions and evidence the agency will need, and the register is used to track that high-impact uses have the extra assessments and safeguards required.
Which legal duties does it serve?
Satisfies means the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports means it contributes but the duty needs more. The official text decides; open it before relying on either.
European Union 1 duty
-
satisfies Legal requirement confidence highPublic authorities must register their use of high-risk AI and must not use unregistered systems
EU AI Act · Article 26(8); Article 49(3) and 49(4) · applies from 2 Dec 2027
Registration of public-authority use with the required Annex VIII information.
United States 2 duties
-
satisfies Legal requirement confidence highPublish an annual AI use-case inventory
OMB M-25-21 · Section 3
Annual collection, review and publication of use cases with high-impact flags.
-
supports Legal requirement confidence lowFederal agencies must review and revise actions inconsistent with the new AI policy
EO 14179 · Section 5
Agency inventories are where superseded requirements are identified.
Nepal 1 duty
-
supports Voluntary confidence lowGovernment bodies to promote ethical, responsible and inclusive AI (policy commitment)
Nepal National AI Policy · Policy objectives and strategies (to be confirmed against the official text)
Institutional oversight of government AI use.
Texas (United States) 2 duties
-
supports Legal requirementGovernmental entities must not use AI for social scoring
Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.053 · applies from 1 Jan 2026
Register is the population to be screened.
-
supports Legal requirementGovernment agencies must disclose to consumers that they are interacting with an AI system
Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.051 · applies from 1 Jan 2026
Register identifies the consumer-facing systems that need the notice.
What evidence shows it is operating?
| Evidence | Type | What it shows |
|---|---|---|
| Public AI use-case inventory | Register entry | Published list of use cases with purpose, stage and high-impact flag. |
| Algorithmic transparency statement for one use case | Disclosure or notice | |
| Inventory review and publication sign-off | Approval or sign-off record |
Owner: Agency AI officer. Frequency: annual.
Which risks does it address?
Subdomains of the MIT AI Risk Repository, with the incidents the AI Incident Database has recorded under each. Counts are live; they say how often a risk has materialised, not how well this control prevents it.
- 6.5 Governance failure Socioeconomic & Environmental3 incidents · 61 risk entries
- 7.4 Lack of transparency or interpretability AI system safety, failures, & limitations5 incidents · 42 risk entries
- 5.2 Loss of human agency and autonomy Human-Computer Interaction4 incidents · 47 risk entries
Which standards clauses does it correspond to?
Clause numbers only. A reference means the standard asks for overlapping work, so evidence may be reusable; it never means the standard discharges a legal duty.
| Framework | Reference | Note | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIST AI RMF | MAP 1.1, 1.5; GOVERN 1.6, 5.1 | medium | |
| ISO/IEC 42001 | Clause 4.1; Annex A.8.5 | low | |
| OECD AI Principles | Principle 1.3 Transparency and explainability | medium |
Cite this record
AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Public-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency” [AIPT-CTL-0021, verified 26 September 2026 by Bhaskar Bhatt]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-CTL-0021 (accessed 8 November 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.
Permanent id AIPT-CTL-0021: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.
BibTeX
@misc{aipolicytracker2026_publicsectoraiusecasereg,
author = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
title = {{Public-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/controls/public-sector-ai-use-case-register}},
url = {https://aipolicytracker.org/controls/public-sector-ai-use-case-register},
urldate = {2026-11-08},
note = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 8 November 2026}
}
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.
Frequently asked questions
Which legal duties does "Public-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency" satisfy?
It is recorded as satisfying 2 and supporting 4 duties across European Union, United States, Nepal and Texas (United States). A mapping means the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for; the official text decides whether it is enough.
What evidence shows this control is operating?
Public AI use-case inventory, Algorithmic transparency statement for one use case and Inventory review and publication sign-off. Owner: Agency AI officer. Frequency: annual.