One Bad NOFO? AI Governance in Federal Grantmaking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08133v2
• Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 18:33:28 GMT
• Title: One Bad NOFO? AI Governance in Federal Grantmaking
• Authors: Dan Bateyko, Karen Levy,
• Abstract summary: U.S. agencies have an overlooked AI governance role when directing billions of dollars in federal financial assistance.<n>As discretionary grantmakers, agencies guide and restrict what grant winners do -- a hidden lever for AI governance.<n>We use a novel dataset of over 40,000 non-defense federal grant notices of funding opportunity (NOFOs) posted to the U.S. federal grants website between 2009 and 2024.
• Score: 0.2179228399562846
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Much scholarship considers how U.S. federal agencies govern artificial intelligence (AI) through rulemaking and their own internal use policies. But agencies have an overlooked AI governance role: setting discretionary grant policy when directing billions of dollars in federal financial assistance. These dollars enable state and local entities to study, create, and use AI. This funding not only goes to dedicated AI programs, but also to grantees using AI in the course of meeting their routine grant objectives. As discretionary grantmakers, agencies guide and restrict what grant winners do -- a hidden lever for AI governance. Agencies pull this lever by setting program objectives, judging criteria, and restrictions for AI use. Using a novel dataset of over 40,000 non-defense federal grant notices of funding opportunity (NOFOs) posted to the U.S. federal grants website between 2009 and 2024, we analyze how agencies regulate the use of AI by grantees. We select records mentioning AI and review their stated goals and requirements. We find agencies promoting AI in notice narratives, shaping adoption in ways other records of grant policy might fail to capture. Of the grant opportunities that mention AI, we find only a handful of AI-specific judging criteria or restrictions. This silence holds even when agencies fund AI uses in contexts affecting people's rights and which, under an analogous federal procurement regime, would result in extra oversight. These findings recast grant notices as a site of AI policymaking -- albeit one that is developing out of step with other regulatory efforts and incomplete in its consideration of transparency, accountability, and privacy protections. The paper concludes by drawing lessons from AI procurement scholarship, while identifying distinct challenges in grantmaking that invite further study.

Related papers

• Autonomous AI and Ownership Rules [0.09444500584367876]
  In cases where AI is traceable to an originator, accession doctrine provides an efficient means of assigning ownership.<n>In strategic ownership dissolution, autonomous AI is intentionally designed to evade attribution, creating opportunities for tax arbitrage and regulatory avoidance.<n>To counteract these inefficiencies, bounty systems, private incentives, and government subsidies are proposed as mechanisms to encourage AI capture and prevent ownerless AI from distorting markets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-09T18:58:52Z)
• Beware! The AI Act Can Also Apply to Your AI Research Practices [2.532202013576547]
  The EU has become one of the vanguards in regulating the digital age.<n>The AI Act specifies -- due to a risk-based approach -- various obligations for providers of AI systems.<n>This position paper argues that, indeed, the AI Act's obligations could apply in many more cases than the AI community is aware of.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T08:01:36Z)
• Artificial Intelligence in Government: Why People Feel They Lose Control [44.99833362998488]
  The use of Artificial Intelligence in public administration is expanding rapidly.<n>While AI promises greater efficiency and responsiveness, its integration into government functions raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and accountability.<n>This article applies principal-agent theory to AI adoption as a special case of delegation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T07:46:41Z)
• The AI Pentad, the CHARME$^{2}$D Model, and an Assessment of Current-State AI Regulation [5.231576332164012]
  This paper aims to establish a unifying model for AI regulation from the perspective of core AI components.<n>We first introduce the AI Pentad, which comprises the five essential components of AI.<n>We then review AI regulatory enablers, including AI registration and disclosure, AI monitoring, and AI enforcement mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-08T22:58:41Z)
• Responsible Artificial Intelligence (RAI) in U.S. Federal Government : Principles, Policies, and Practices [0.0]
  Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have made tremendous advancements in the past decades.<n> rapid growth of AI/ML and its proliferation in numerous private and public sector applications, while successful, has opened new challenges and obstacles for regulators.<n>With almost little to no human involvement required for some of the new decision-making AI/ML systems, there is now a pressing need to ensure the responsible use of these systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-12T16:06:37Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [102.19067750759471]
  Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI.<n>This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z)
• AI Procurement Checklists: Revisiting Implementation in the Age of AI Governance [18.290959557311552]
  Public sector use of AI has been on the rise for the past decade, but only recently have efforts to enter it entered the cultural zeitgeist. While simple to articulate, promoting ethical and effective roll outs of AI systems in government is a notoriously elusive task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T01:45:38Z)
• Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
  General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power. We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z)
• When Should Algorithms Resign? A Proposal for AI Governance [10.207523025324296]
  Algorithmic resignation is a strategic approach for managing the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by embedding governance directly into AI systems. It involves deliberate and informed disengagement from AI, such as restricting access AI outputs or displaying performance disclaimers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-28T13:48:44Z)
• Computing Power and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence [51.967584623262674]
  Governments and companies have started to leverage compute as a means to govern AI. compute-based policies and technologies have the potential to assist in these areas, but there is significant variation in their readiness for implementation. naive or poorly scoped approaches to compute governance carry significant risks in areas like privacy, economic impacts, and centralization of power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T21:10:21Z)
• Both eyes open: Vigilant Incentives help Regulatory Markets improve AI Safety [69.59465535312815]
  Regulatory Markets for AI is a proposal designed with adaptability in mind. It involves governments setting outcome-based targets for AI companies to achieve. We warn that it is alarmingly easy to stumble on incentives which would prevent Regulatory Markets from achieving this goal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-06T14:42:05Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)
• Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence: Evidence from a Survey of Machine Learning Researchers [0.0]
  Machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) researchers play an important role in the ethics and governance of AI. We conducted a survey of those who published in the top AI/ML conferences. We find that AI/ML researchers place high levels of trust in international organizations and scientific organizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-05T15:23:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.