LO
DeploymentCognitive automation2026-04-13
Forty-five US federal agencies answered the same 20-item commercial AI checklist: 39 reported an AI tool inside their word processor, 11 reported one for booking travel
Administrative assistantoccupation page →
Event date / reported
2026-04-13 · reported 2026-04-14
Evidence stage
DeploymentAn employer has put it into production. Can move the baseline — weighted by scale and how similar the setting is.
Tasks this bears on
Expenses, travel and documents
Booking, reconciling, filing, formatting, and getting the right form to the right system.
Automating✓ Evidence-backed
Where this applies
OMB compiled this file from the inventories each agency publishes under the Advancing American AI Act and OMB Memorandum M-25-21. It is a census rather than a survey: 20 fixed questions, put to every reporting agency, each answered Y or N with the commercial product named and the number of licences given as a band. The file carries 45 agencies and 900 rows; the repository summary states that 46 agencies submitted a consolidated report, so one submission is not in this file. Two of the 20 questions fall inside this task. Using AI-assisted tools in word processors is Y at 39 of 45, joint second of the 20. Finding and booking travel accommodations using AI-powered platforms is Y at 11 of 45, joint sixteenth. Three things this does not establish. The licence band belongs to the product and not to the question: Microsoft 365 Copilot is the product named on many rows at the same agency, so a band of 10,000-50,000 cannot be read as the number of people doing this task with it. Of the 11 agencies reporting AI for travel booking, most name SAP Concur, CWTSatoTravel or an existing government travel system, platforms that predate generative AI, so part of that 11 is agencies pointing at software they already had rather than a tool they went out and bought. And a Y says the agency has such a product, not that any particular assistant uses it, nor how much of the task it does. Read against the rest of the table, the low end is the part worth noticing: scheduling internal meetings and setting reminders is Y at 10 of 45, and logging and analysing time spent on tasks at 9 of 45, eighteenth and nineteenth of the 20.
What this means
One very large employer has bought a writing tool for nearly everyone: 39 of its 45 reporting agencies say there is an AI assistant inside the word processor. The document half of this task — formatting, filing, getting the right form to the right system — now has a machine in the room by default at that employer.
What it does not yet show
The same table counts no documents and no people. It does not say anyone is faster, and it does not say anyone left; the licence bands belong to the product, so they cannot be read as the number of people doing this work. The travel half of the task moved far less, and part of even that 11 is agencies naming a booking platform they already had.
What you can check
Take the 20 questions to your own week and mark the ones you actually do. Then ask what your employer has already bought for each of them. The common answer is a licence that is already on your account and that nobody told you about — which is a different problem from the one people expect.
Does it change the assessment?
No. The impact index is never moved by a single event. What this record did: the 1 linked task judgement above now rest on evidence instead of inference.
Source
OMB — 2025 Federal Agency AI Use Case Inventory, consolidated commercial off-the-shelf AI use cases (CSV, 45 agencies × 20 questions) · verified 2026-09-22 · VOLO agent · interpreted 2026-09-22 · VOLO agent
Primary source — published by the party that did this, or the authority of record. No co-signature needed.