A new report assessing the U.S. government’s efforts in artificial intelligence (AI) governance highlights significant progress but underscores persistent challenges in leadership, compliance, and resource allocation. The white paper, authored by researchers from “Stanford’s Institute for Human-Centered AI and the Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Lab,” evaluates federal agencies’ implementation of AI leadership and compliance mandates under recent executive actions.
The study assesses how agencies have met requirements to appoint Chief AI Officers (CAIOs), issue compliance plans, and secure funding for AI-related initiatives. The findings reveal a sharp improvement over previous AI governance efforts, but also point to concerns about leadership gaps, budget limitations, and inconsistencies in compliance.
The federal government has taken a more structured approach to AI leadership, with 80 of 266 agencies publicly disclosing their CAIOs. The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Act agencies—which include major departments such as Defense, Treasury, and Health and Human Services—have fully complied with CAIO designations. However, nearly 90% of CAIOs hold dual roles, often combining AI responsibilities with their existing positions as Chief Information Officers or Chief Data Officers.
The report warns that this “dual-hatting” strategy may dilute the effectiveness of AI leadership. While it allows agencies to integrate AI governance within existing structures, it also raises concerns about whether CAIOs have the bandwidth or expertise to prioritize AI initiatives effectively. Furthermore, while 56% of CAIOs have prior technology experience, few have direct AI-specific expertise. The Department of Justice stands out as the only agency to appoint a CAIO from outside the federal government, hiring an AI expert from academia.
As part of broader governance efforts, federal agencies were required to submit AI compliance plans detailing how they manage AI risks and align with Office of Management and Budget guidelines. The report finds 86% of major agencies (CFO Act agencies and large independent agencies) submitted compliance plans, a dramatic improvement over past directives.
However, the quality and transparency of these plans vary. Some agencies provided detailed risk management strategies, while others lacked specifics on AI safeguards and ethical considerations. The report notes that barriers to AI adoption—such as funding constraints, workforce shortages, and computing infrastructure gaps—remain widespread.
Despite federal mandates to strengthen AI oversight, budget allocations for AI governance remain inconsistent. Only 35% of agencies explicitly addressed AI funding in their 2025 budget requests. While the Department of Defense requested $435 million for AI initiatives, most other agencies sought modest allocations averaging $270,000.
This lack of dedicated funding raises concerns about whether agencies can fully implement AI governance measures or recruit specialized talent needed to manage AI risks effectively.
Need Help?
If you have questions or concerns about any global guidelines, regulations and laws, don’t hesitate to reach out to BABL AI. Their Audit Experts can offer valuable insight, and ensure you’re informed and compliant.
