Publish an annual AI use-case inventory
Download: JSON · MarkdownUnder OMB M-25-21, Section 3
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 9 sections
In brief
Publish an annual AI use-case inventory is a legal requirement under the OMB M-25-21 in the United States (Section 3). Agencies must inventory their AI use cases annually and publish the inventory, identifying high-impact uses, with limited exclusions. The record carries 1 evidence example and mappings to 1 framework.
- Instrument
- OMB M-25-21
- Jurisdiction
- United States
- Nature
- Legal requirement
- Source reference
- Section 3
- Who it binds
- Public authority / government body
- Evidence examples
- 1
- Framework mappings
- NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0
- Controls that meet it
- 2
- Official source
- Open official text
- Verification
- Source-linked
What does it require?
Agencies must inventory their AI use cases annually and publish the inventory, identifying high-impact uses, with limited exclusions.
Practical action
Agencies maintain the inventory; vendors may be asked for use-case descriptions.
Who does it apply to?
Federal agencies.
- Use cases
- AI in public services
Which controls meet this duty?
Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.
-
satisfiesProcessAgency AI officer · annualPublic-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency
Serves 6 recorded duties · evidence: Public AI use-case inventory, Algorithmic transparency statement for one use case, Inventory review and publication sign-off
Annual collection, review and publication of use cases with high-impact flags.
-
supportsProcessAI governance lead · continuousAI system inventory and classification
Serves 11 recorded duties · evidence: AI system register, Risk-tier classification sign-off, AI intake and classification procedure
Vendor-side register supplies the use-case descriptions agencies ask for.
Templates that cover this duty
Generated from the records. Free · no account · links emailed to your work address. This duty is cited in each file with its source reference and a link back here.
- AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix
Register · XLSX and DOCX · v6
- EU AI Act Article 50 Transparency Kit
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v32
- NIST AI RMF ↔ EU AI Act ↔ ISO/IEC 42001 Crosswalk
Crosswalk · XLSX · v3
- AI Model Card
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v4
What evidence would a reviewer expect?
| Evidence | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| AI use-case inventory | register |
Framework mappings
Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.
See every United States duty mapped this way →
| Framework | Reference | Note | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIST AI RMF 1.0 | GOVERN 1.6 | Inventory of AI systems. | medium |
Frequently asked questions
Is this a legal requirement?
Yes. It is a legal requirement under OMB M-25-21 (Section 3).
Who must comply with this obligation?
Federal agencies.
What evidence shows compliance?
A reviewer would expect: AI use-case inventory.
Which frameworks map to this obligation?
It is mapped to NIST AI Risk Management Framework 1.0 GOVERN 1.6. These are editorial crosswalks with a stated confidence, not official mappings.
Which controls satisfy this obligation?
Public-sector AI use-case register and algorithmic transparency; AI system inventory and classification.
What should an organisation do in practice?
Agencies maintain the inventory; vendors may be asked for use-case descriptions.
Cite this record
AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Publish an annual AI use-case inventory (OMB M-25-21)” [AIPT-OBL-0117, verified 26 September 2026 by Bhaskar Bhatt]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0117 (accessed 27 October 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.
Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0117: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.
Cite the official text alongside it: M-25-21 Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust, Office of Management and Budget, https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-for-agencies/memoranda/.
BibTeX
@misc{aipolicytracker2026_publishanannualaiusecase,
author = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
title = {{Publish an annual AI use-case inventory (OMB M-25-21)}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-omb-m-25-21-use-case-inventory}},
url = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-omb-m-25-21-use-case-inventory},
urldate = {2026-10-27},
note = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 27 October 2026}
}
Change history
No change to this record's tracked fields has been recorded since 15 October 2026, when field-level history began.
Similar obligations in other instruments
- Employers must inform workers and their representatives before using high-risk AI at work — EU AI Act, European Union
- Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers must tell natural persons that a high-risk AI system is used in decisions about them — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers of emotion recognition or biometric categorisation must inform exposed persons — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers must disclose deepfakes and AI-generated text published on matters of public interest — EU AI Act, European Union
- Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way — EU AI Act, European Union
- Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request — EU AI Act, European Union
- Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model — California SB 53, California (United States)
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.