State and local government

Texas first: AI and cloud investments mapped to your rules and to the budget each one draws on.

Map last reviewed

Know which rules a project brings with it before the budget request goes in: the Texas rules on how agencies use and buy AI and cloud services, the accessibility dates every state and local government works to, and the rules that come with criminal-justice, tax, health and education records and with water systems. Each card gives the rule, its status, the words that matter and our part in the work, so your business case can price what each rule asks for.

Who this is for

State agencies, cities, counties, utilities and public enterprises

Our headquarters is in Houston, Texas, and every government can start with a 45-minute Discovery Session on one business case. How buying works: how to buy.

We are available as a subcontractor or teaming partner to the DIR cooperative contract holder your agency chooses.

Texas

Texas: how agencies may use AI

The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (HB 149), SB 1964 and the AI rules DIR adopted under it set duties for state agencies, local governments and their vendors, and HB 3512 sets AI training for their staff.

TexasKey date: January 1, 2026

Texas TRAIGA (HB 149): disclosure when a governmental agency's AI interacts with consumers (Bus. & Com. Code §552.051)

In force since January 1, 2026.

“shall disclose to each consumer, before or at the time of interaction”

What we do: Every public-facing agent we build for a Texas agency tells people they are talking to AI before the conversation starts, in wording your counsel approves.

Source: Texas TRAIGA §552.051 disclosure (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

TexasKey date: January 1, 2026

Texas TRAIGA (HB 149): uses prohibited for governmental entities (§§552.053–552.054) and who is covered (§552.001)

In force since January 1, 2026; hospital districts and institutions of higher education are outside the definition of governmental entity.

“A governmental entity may not use or deploy an artificial intelligence system that evaluates”

What we do: Before a use case is ranked, we screen it against the uses Texas law prohibits for government: social scoring that leads to unjustified or detrimental treatment, and biometric identification without consent that infringes a person's rights.

Source: Texas TRAIGA prohibited uses (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

TexasKey date: January 1, 2026

Texas TRAIGA (HB 149): the NIST Generative AI Profile in the enforcement provisions (§552.105(e))

In force since January 1, 2026; a defense in Attorney General enforcement actions for a defendant that discovers a violation through an internal review process while substantially complying with the framework.

“the defendant discovers a violation of this chapter through: … (D) if the defendant substantially complies with the most recent version of the "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile" published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology or another nationally or internationally recognized risk management framework for artificial intelligence systems, an internal review process.”

What we do: We map the delivery to the NIST AI RMF and its Generative AI Profile, the frameworks Texas law names, and keep the risk screen, the test results and the review records with your team.

Source: Texas TRAIGA §552.105(e) NIST profile (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

TexasKey date: January 1, 2026

Texas TRAIGA (HB 149): the DIR regulatory sandbox (Bus. & Com. Code ch. 553)

Enacted, effective January 1, 2026; as of November 10, 2026 DIR has not proposed or adopted the rule that prescribes the application form (§553.052(b)), so how the sandbox runs in practice is not yet published.

“The department, in consultation with the council, shall create a regulatory sandbox program”

What we do: A Proof of Value readout carries what a sandbox report asks for: performance metrics (measured against a baseline), how the risks are mitigated, and feedback from users and affected stakeholders.

Source: Texas TRAIGA DIR sandbox (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Texas (state agencies, local governments and other DIR customers)Key date: September 1, 2025

Texas SB 1964: the Public Sector AI Sandbox (Gov. Code §2054.706)

In force since September 1, 2025; DIR says participation details will be published when available (checked November 10, 2026).

“The department shall establish and administer a program to support eligible entities in contracting with vendors to engage in research, development, training, testing, and other pre-deployment activities related to artificial intelligence systems”

What we do: A Proof of Value readout reports the performance measures and risk mitigation strategies the sandbox's quarterly report asks for, ready for your agency and the sandbox vendor it contracts with.

Source: Texas SB 1964 (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 12, 2026

Texas (state agencies and local governments)Key date: September 1, 2025

Texas SB 1964: heightened scrutiny AI systems, the AI code of ethics and vendor duties (Gov. Code §§2054.003, 2054.702, 2054.703, 2054.708)

In force since September 1, 2025; DIR's implementing rules (1 TAC chapter 219: the AI code of ethics, the risk and impact assessments and the vendor risk-framework requirement) took effect March 18, 2026, and DIR publishes the standardized notice form (AI System Facts).

“A state agency that deploys or uses a heightened scrutiny artificial intelligence system or a vendor that contracts with a state agency for the deployment or use of a heightened scrutiny artificial intelligence system shall conduct a system assessment that outlines:”

What we do: When a system will make, or be a controlling factor in, a decision about access to a government service, we document whether it meets the heightened-scrutiny definition for your agency's inventory, draft the risk assessment DIR's rules ask for, write the impact assessment Texas asks of a state agency and its vendor (or the review a local government completes), and prepare DIR's standardized notice for your agency to publish.

Source: Texas SB 1964 (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Texas (state agencies, institutions of higher education and, in limited scope, local governments)Key date: March 18, 2026

Texas DIR AI rules (1 TAC chapter 219): the AI code of ethics and the minimum standards for heightened scrutiny AI systems

Adopted; in effect since March 18, 2026.

“A state agency or local government that contracts with vendors to deploy a heightened scrutiny AI system shall mitigate third party risk by contractually requiring those vendors to implement an AI risk management framework such as that published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology or a comparable standard for heightened scrutiny AI systems.”

What we do: When we deliver a heightened scrutiny AI system, the statement of work maps our delivery to the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, the framework the rule names, and we prepare the impact assessment when your agency asks for it.

Source: Texas DIR AI rules (1 TAC chapter 219) (sos.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Texas (state agencies and local governments)Key date: September 1, 2025

Texas HB 3512: certified AI training for state and local government staff

In force since September 1, 2025.

“certify at least five artificial intelligence training programs for state and local government employees”

What we do: Our change work builds on the AI awareness training your staff complete under Texas law.

Source: Texas HB 3512 (capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. federal (voluntary framework; named by Texas law)Key date: January 26, 2023

NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and the Generative AI Profile (NIST AI 600-1)

AI RMF 1.0 released January 26, 2023 and being revised under the AI Action Plan; NIST AI 600-1 released July 26, 2024.

“The AI RMF 1.0 is being revised as part of the White House AI Action Plan.”

What we do: We map the delivery to the NIST AI RMF and its Generative AI Profile, and keep the risk screen, the test results and the review records with your team.

Source: NIST AI Risk Management Framework (nist.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Texas

Texas: cloud, security, buying and project delivery

TX-RAMP for the cloud services a state agency buys, the Texas Cybersecurity Framework, DIR cooperative contracts and the Project Delivery Framework for major information resources projects.

Texas (state agencies)Key date: September 1, 2025

TX-RAMP: the state risk and authorization management program for cloud services (Gov. Code §2063.408, formerly §2054.0593)

In force; transferred to Gov. Code §2063.408 by HB 150 (effective September 1, 2025): the Texas Cyber Command establishes the program and evaluates vendors, and the program rules moved to 1 TAC chapter 477 on August 1, 2026. DIR's TX-RAMP team runs assessments and certification until the transfer completes, no later than December 31, 2026.

“A state agency may not enter or renew a contract with a vendor to purchase cloud computing services for the agency that are subject to the state risk and authorization management program unless the vendor demonstrates compliance with program requirements.”

What we do: We design on cloud services that hold the TX-RAMP certification level your agency requires, and list each service's level before design starts.

Source: TX-RAMP (statutes.capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

TexasKey date: September 1, 2025

Texas Cybersecurity Framework and the Texas Cyber Command (HB 150)

TCF current (42 control objectives); HB 150 created the Texas Cyber Command (Gov. Code ch. 2063); DIR's information security standards moved to 1 TAC chapter 477 on August 1, 2026, and the transfer of DIR's cybersecurity functions completes no later than December 31, 2026.

“currently consists of 42 total security control objectives”

What we do: The Secure milestone maps the identity, network and data-boundary controls on your platform to the Texas Cybersecurity Framework control objectives, as evidence your security team can use in its security plan.

Source: Texas Cybersecurity Framework and the Texas Cyber Command (dir.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Texas (state agencies)Key date: September 1, 2025

Texas DIR cooperative contracts for commodity technology (Gov. Code §2157.068)

In force; DIR's rule (1 TAC §212.10) has state agencies other than institutions of higher education buy listed commodity items, which by statute include technology services, through DIR contracts unless they first obtain a DIR exemption, express prior Legislative Budget Board approval or DIR's certification that the item is unavailable. Local governments are eligible DIR customers.

“The department may adopt rules regulating a purchase by a state agency of a commodity item under this section, including a requirement that, notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, the agency must make the purchase in accordance with a contract developed by the department”

What we do: We are available as a subcontractor or teaming partner to the DIR cooperative contract holder your agency chooses.

Where it applies

Source: Texas DIR cooperative contracts for commodity technology (statutes.capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Texas (state agencies; major information resources projects)Key date: September 1, 2005

Texas Project Delivery Framework: business case (Gov. Code §2054.303) and post-implementation review (§2054.306)

In force since September 1, 2005; applies to major information resources projects: projects in a state agency's biennial operating plan with development costs above $5 million that take a year or more to reach operations, involve more than one agency or substantially alter work methods or service delivery, projects the Legislature designates, and projects designated for additional monitoring with development costs above $5 million (Gov. Code §2054.003(10)).

“After implementation of a major information resources project, a state agency shall prepare a post-implementation review.”

What we do: For Texas major information resources projects, the Business Case Sprint drafts the business case and workbook on DIR's templates for your agency to approve and file, and the Run milestone measures the outcomes your post-implementation review compares with the business case.

Source: Texas Project Delivery Framework (statutes.capitol.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Accessibility

Accessibility dates for state and local governments

The ADA Title II rule for web content and mobile apps and the HHS Section 504 rule for recipients of HHS funding, with the compliance dates as they now stand.

U.S. (state and local governments)Key date: April 20, 2026

ADA Title II web and mobile accessibility rule: compliance dates extended (DOJ interim final rule)

IFR (91 FR 20902) effective April 20, 2026: 50,000 or more → April 26, 2027; under 50,000 and special districts → April 26, 2028; WCAG 2.1 AA stands as adopted in 2024. DOJ plans future rulemaking on the substance, and NFB v. DOJ, No. 1:26-cv-02007 (D. Md., filed May 21, 2026), which asks the court to vacate the extension, is pending.

“The compliance date for public entities with a total population of less than 50,000, or any special district government, is extended from April 26, 2027, to April 26, 2028.”

What we do: Public-facing apps, agents and dashboards we build for state and local governments are built and tested to WCAG 2.1 Level AA, and remediation against your compliance date becomes a costed line in the business case.

Source: ADA Title II web and mobile accessibility rule (govinfo.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 12, 2026

U.S. (recipients of HHS financial assistance)Key date: May 7, 2026

HHS Section 504 web and mobile accessibility rule: compliance dates extended (HHS interim final rule)

IFR (91 FR 25496, published May 11, 2026) effective May 7, 2026: 15 or more employees → May 11, 2027; fewer than 15 → May 10, 2028; WCAG 2.1 AA stands as adopted in 2024. HHS plans future rulemaking on the substance, and NFB v. DOJ, No. 1:26-cv-02007 (D. Md., filed May 21, 2026), which asks the court to vacate the extension, is pending.

“The compliance date for recipients with fifteen (15) or more employees is extended from May 11, 2026, to May 11, 2027.”

What we do: Patient- and client-facing screens we build for public health agencies are built and tested to WCAG 2.1 Level AA, with the test results handed over with the deliverable.

Source: HHS Section 504 web and mobile accessibility rule (federalregister.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 12, 2026

Cloud authorization

GovRAMP and the Microsoft services on its list

GovRAMP (formerly StateRAMP) verifies the security of cloud products for the state and local governments that take part, and its list shows Microsoft Azure, Azure Government and Microsoft 365 Government Community Cloud at High, Authorized.

U.S. (participating state and local governments)Key date: November 1, 2026

GovRAMP security program (verification statuses)

Current program built on NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5.

“Built on NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5”

What we do: We list each proposed cloud service's GovRAMP status for your project and design on the services your government accepts.

Source: GovRAMP security program (govramp.org) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

GovRAMP Authorized Product List; vendor statement (Microsoft Learn)Key date: April 24, 2022

Microsoft services on the GovRAMP Authorized Product List

GovRAMP Authorized Product List: Microsoft Azure Government and Microsoft Azure Commercial at High, Authorized, April 24, 2022; M365 Government Community Cloud & Supporting Services at High, Authorized, July 21, 2024; Microsoft 365 Commercial at Moderate, Core, November 20, 2025.

“To be covered by the GCC GovRAMP Authorization, customers must purchase a GCC SKU.”

What we do: We confirm each service's status on the GovRAMP and TX-RAMP lists for your project before design starts.

Source: Microsoft services on the GovRAMP Authorized Product List (govramp.org) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 12, 2026

Other states

AI rules in other states

State AI rules that reach public services, vendors or procurement, and the federal order on state AI laws.

ColoradoKey date: January 1, 2027

Colorado SB 26-189: Automated Decision-Making Technology (repeals and re-enacts SB 24-205)

Signed May 14, 2026 (Session Law ch. 131); takes effect January 1, 2027 for developers and deployers and applies to consequential decisions made on or after that date. Attorney General rules are due by January 1, 2027 (hearing held October 26, 2026). A federal court order of April 27, 2026 in xAI v. Weiser (D. Colo.) bars enforcement for violations occurring up to 14 days after a ruling on a preliminary-injunction motion due within 28 days of the final rules. Each government body's counsel determines whether it is a deployer.

“essential government services and public benefits”

What we do: Where a system helps decide access to public benefits, we design the notice, the plain-language explanation and the human review path in from the start.

Source: Colorado SB 26-189 (leg.colorado.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 12, 2026

California (state entities)Key date: March 2024

California Technology Letter 24-01: GenAI risk assessment and vendor disclosure in state procurement

Active (CDT Technology Letters index, checked November 10, 2026); issued March 21, 2024: GenAI disclosure language in solicitations from March 21, 2024 and the SIMM 5305-F risk assessment from July 1, 2024. Technology Letter 25-01 (February 20, 2025) added the GenAI policies in SAM 4986.1–4986.13; SAM 4986.9 GenAI Procurement (revised November 2025) has the state entity complete the SIMM 5305-F prior to award and submit it to CDT for all risk levels, and puts a GenAI disclosure clause in IT and telecommunications solicitations and contracts.

“State entities acquiring GenAI tools must complete a SIMM 5305-F Generative Artificial Intelligence Risk Assessment.”

What we do: We disclose every generative AI component we propose, so your team can complete the state's GenAI risk assessment before award.

Source: California Technology Letter 24-01 (cdt.ca.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

New York (state contracts that incorporate it; issued by NYS ITS)Key date: April 2025

New York Appendix C-AI: Standard Terms for AI Purchases for NYS Office of Information Technology Services

Current ITS standard clauses (April 2025), listed on the ITS vendor resources page on November 10, 2026; they bind the contracts that incorporate them.

“Contractor or Vendor agrees to provide ITS with written notice at least 90 days prior to the implementation or use of any artificial intelligence (AI) technology”

What we do: For contracts that carry New York's Appendix C-AI, we plan the 90-day written AI notice and the State's written approval into the schedule, and keep prompts, uploaded content and outputs as the State's property.

Source: New York Appendix C-AI (ogs.ny.gov, PDF) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. federal (and the states it addresses)Key date: December 11, 2025

Executive Order 14365, Sec. 8(b): the proposed federal AI framework is not to preempt state laws on state procurement and use of AI

In force (signed December 11, 2025). The Sec. 8(a) legislative recommendation was published in March 2026 and proposes that a national standard not preempt requirements governing a state's own use of AI, including procurement; it is a proposal to Congress. The Sec. 3 AI Litigation Task Force (January 9, 2026) was merged into the DOJ Super Intelligence Task Force by an Attorney General memorandum of October 13, 2026, announced November 5, 2026.

“The legislative recommendation called for in subsection (a) of this section shall not propose preempting otherwise lawful State AI laws relating to: … (iii) State government procurement and use of AI”

What we do: We design for each state's own rules on how its agencies buy and use AI, which the White House's March 2026 legislative recommendations propose not to preempt.

Source: Executive Order 14365, Sec. 8(b) (federalregister.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 12, 2026

Sector rules

Rules that come with the data, the funds and the assets

Criminal-justice, tax, health and education records, water systems, drones bought with federal funds, workplace safety and public-sector accounting.

U.S. federal and state (criminal justice information)Key date: June 25, 2026

FBI CJIS Security Policy (v6.1) and Microsoft CJIS agreements

CJIS Security Policy v6.1 released June 25, 2026; Texas audits through March 31, 2027 use v5.9.5.

“All Texas CJIS audits through March 31, 2027 are conducted against FBI CJIS Security Policy version 5.9.5.”

What we do: Criminal-justice data stays inside the Microsoft government services your state's CJIS agreement covers, and we design to the policy version your auditor uses.

Source: FBI CJIS Security Policy (dps.texas.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. federal and state (federal tax information)Key date: November 2021

IRS Publication 1075, Tax Information Security Guidelines for Federal, State and Local Agencies

Rev. 11-2021 current (IRS Safeguards page, last reviewed June 28, 2026). An early-release draft, Rev. 12-2026, takes effect 6 months after its publication date and adds a section on artificial intelligence.

“Publication 1075, Tax Information Security Guidelines for Federal, State and Local Agencies … (Rev. 11-2021)”

What we do: Federal tax information stays inside the authorized government cloud boundary your safeguards review relies on, and we design the data platform to the current Publication 1075.

Source: IRS Publication 1075, Tax Information Security Guidelines for Federal, State and Local Agencies (irs.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. federal (HHS)Key date: January 6, 2025

HIPAA Security Rule: proposed rule to strengthen the cybersecurity of ePHI (RIN 0945-AA22)

Proposed January 6, 2025; Unified Agenda lists it under Long-Term Actions with final action 07/2027; the current Security Rule applies.

“HIPAA Security Rule to Strengthen the Cybersecurity of Electronic Protected Health Information”

What we do: Where your agency is a HIPAA covered entity, such as a public hospital or a state Medicaid program, we keep protected health information in your tenant, work under a business associate agreement signed before any access, and map the design to the HIPAA Security Rule in force.

Source: HIPAA Security Rule (reginfo.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. (educational agencies and institutions)Key date: January 8, 2009

FERPA: contractors as school officials (34 CFR 99.31(a)(1)(i)(B))

In force since January 8, 2009 (final rule of December 9, 2008, 73 FR 74806); §99.31 last amended December 2, 2011.

“Is under the direct control of the agency or institution with respect to the use and maintenance of education records”

What we do: Where education records are in scope, the contract places our work under your direct control and FERPA's redisclosure limits.

Source: FERPA (ecfr.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. (community water systems serving more than 3,300 people)Key date: October 23, 2018

America's Water Infrastructure Act §2013: risk and resilience assessments and emergency response plans

In force. This cycle's risk and resilience assessment certifications were due March 31, 2025, December 31, 2025 and June 30, 2026, by system size; emergency response plans follow six months after each assessment certification, the last on EPA's schedule by December 31, 2026; reviews repeat at least once every five years.

“electronic, computer, or other automated systems (including the security of such systems)”

What we do: Utility twin, operational-data and capital-planning work is scoped so its findings can feed the risk and resilience assessment and the emergency response plan a community water system reviews and certifies to EPA at least once every five years.

Source: America's Water Infrastructure Act §2013 (epa.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. federal (agencies and recipients of federal grants and cooperative agreements)Key date: December 22, 2025

American Security Drone Act and OMB M-26-02: drones bought or operated with federal funds

In force; the grant-funds prohibition applies on or after December 22, 2025.

“Pursuant to section 1825 of the American Security Drone Act of 2023 (Public Law 118-31), on or after December 22, 2025, the following prohibition applies to the use of funds provided through any Federal grant, cooperative agreement, or other award”

What we do: When federal funds are involved, we screen every drone option against the federal prohibited-source rules before it enters the comparison.

Where it applies

Source: American Security Drone Act and OMB M-26-02 (whitehouse.gov, PDF) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. (states without an approved State Plan, including Texas)Key date: December 29, 1970

OSHA coverage of state and local government workers (State Plans)

In force: the OSH Act's definition of employer leaves out states and their political subdivisions (29 U.S.C. 652(5)); OSHA lists 22 State Plans covering private sector and state and local government workers and seven covering state and local government workers only, and Texas is under federal OSHA jurisdiction for most private sector workers.

“State and local government workers are not covered by federal OSHA.”

What we do: In Texas we build the safety case for a municipal robot pilot on the robot-safety standards and your own safety program, include the federal OSHA duties of the contractors on site, and follow the State Plan in states with public-sector plans.

Where it applies

Source: OSHA coverage of state and local government workers (osha.gov) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

U.S. (state and local government accounting)Key date: June 15, 2022

GASB Statement No. 96: Subscription-Based Information Technology Arrangements

Effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2022.

“A SBITA is defined as a contract that conveys control of the right to use another party's (a SBITA vendor's) information technology (IT) software, alone or in combination with tangible capital assets (the underlying IT assets), as specified in the contract for a period of time in an exchange or exchange-like transaction.”

What we do: For state and local governments, the business case models how subscription payments and implementation costs may be treated under GASB Statement No. 96, and your auditors determine the classification.

Accounting treatment is determined by your auditors; we provide evidence and documentation.

Source: GASB Statement No. 96 (gasb.org) (opens in a new tab) · Checked November 10, 2026

Where to start

Offers that bring the evidence these rules ask for into your budget request

A business case and workbook in the Project Delivery Framework's terms, ready for the quality assurance team when a major information resources project goes into your legislative appropriations request; a pilot whose readout carries the performance, risk and limitation evidence a Texas system assessment and a sandbox report draw on; an AI operating model built on the AI training your staff complete; and a twin pilot whose findings, including capital and operational needs, can feed a water system's risk and resilience assessment. All offers: offers for agencies.

AI Value & Capital Planning Business Case Sprint

Which AI investments deserve funding in this budget cycle, and what evidence will the request need?

What we look at

  • Use-case inventory tied to mission outcomes and budget lines, screened for high-impact uses
  • Benefit-cost analysis in the terms OMB Circular A-94 uses, with federal savings and public benefits shown separately
  • Costs split into development, modernization and enhancement (DME) and operations and maintenance (O&M), with planned and actual costs by budget account and IT investment
  • Accounting options documented for your finance team and auditors: FASAB for federal entities, GASB for state and local governments
  • NIST AI RMF risk screen, and for Texas agencies a screen against the uses state law prohibits
  • Ranked roadmap with the funding routes your agency can choose from, such as an IT working capital fund for a federal agency, or the appropriations or capital budget request for a state or local government

What you get

  • Business-case workbook your budget office can rerun
  • One-page summary for your investment review board
  • Ranked roadmap
  • Decision meeting with the evidence for the next milestone

Each milestone is quoted in writing before your team chooses how to buy it. Cloud consumption, software licenses and equipment are separate line items or are furnished by your agency.

AI Value Experiment (Proof of Value)

Did the AI move the mission measure, and is the evidence strong enough to scale it?

What we look at

  • Pre-registered hypothesis and one mission KPI
  • A/B, stepped-wedge or difference-in-differences design
  • Instrumented pilot on services your agency has authorized, such as Azure OpenAI in Azure Government, with Azure Databricks or Microsoft Fabric where the data authorization fits
  • Effect size with confidence intervals, written up as pre-deployment testing evidence
  • A measure your contract can carry in its quality assurance surveillance plan
  • Scale-or-stop decision

What you get

  • Experiment protocol
  • Measurement dashboard
  • Readout with effect size for your AI impact assessment
  • Scale-or-stop decision

Each milestone is quoted in writing before your team chooses how to buy it. Cloud consumption, software licenses and equipment are separate line items or are furnished by your agency.

Rules this work is mapped to

AI Operating Model & Governance Diagnostic

Which tasks deserve agents, which stay with people, and how does each AI use case move through your agency's governance?

What we look at

  • Task-exposure analysis across programs and back-office functions
  • AI governance workflow: use-case inventory, evidence for high-impact (federal) or heightened scrutiny (Texas) determinations, and the generative AI policy put into practice
  • Human-AI workflow design with your staff, building on the AI training they complete
  • Model documentation pack and the user-reporting route your LLM procurement policy describes
  • AI center of excellence design

What you get

  • Operating-model blueprint
  • Governance workflow and use-case register
  • Role cards
  • Change plan

Each milestone is quoted in writing before your team chooses how to buy it. Cloud consumption, software licenses and equipment are separate line items or are furnished by your agency.

Digital Twin Readiness & Pilot for Public Assets

Which asset, facility or network has the downtime or maintenance cost that justifies a twin, and is its data ready?

What we look at

  • Twin maturity and operational data readiness for utilities, facilities, fleets and infrastructure
  • Platform fit on the cloud your agency has authorized: operations twins on Databricks or Microsoft Fabric, or a specialist simulation platform
  • Security of operational technology connections and logging designed in from the first sensor
  • One bounded pilot with a KPI baseline, scoped so its findings can feed a water system's risk and resilience assessment

What you get

  • Readiness scorecard
  • Target architecture
  • Pilot with baseline and readout

Each milestone is quoted in writing before your team chooses how to buy it. Cloud consumption, software licenses and equipment are separate line items or are furnished by your agency.

Rules this work is mapped to

Working under one of these rules?

Bring the rule and the system it touches. In the Discovery Session we look at the business case for that system and the most efficient way for your government to buy the work.