How TPF is Acknowledging AI Use

While this blog was entirely written by me, AI was used as a thought partner to develop TPF’s approach to acknowledging AI use.

At this point, we’ve all received documents, emails, and even texts that we think were totally, or mostly, created by AI. And, speaking for myself, those moments don’t feel good. Whether my initial assessment of authorship is correct or not, the result is a feeling of disconnection and distrust. The answer, however, is not to avoid using AI. It’s transparency about when and how we’re using it.

At The Patterson Foundation (TPF), we’re encouraging staff and consultants to acknowledge their AI use. Here’s how we’re thinking about:

1. Rooting it in our Values
By acknowledging our AI use, we can create a culture of open communication and live up to our values of transparency, accountability, and thoughtful stewardship of the resources that help advance our shared aspirations.

2. Defining an AI Use Statement
We’re defining an AI use statement as a short statement included with your work that names how AI was involved and that you stand behind the result. Rather than viewing an AI use statement as a confession, it is an opportunity for transparency and accountability. It’s okay to use AI!

3. Breaking It up Into Components
First, explain how AI was used. For example: thought partnership, analysis, synthesis, brainstorming or idea generation, drafting, text creation, text refinement. “I used AI as a development tool to assist with drafting and refining the text.”

Second, share that the author(s) take responsibility for the final content. “The content has been thoroughly reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by me, and I take full responsibility for the final published material.”

Optional: identify which AI(s) were used. For example: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity. This is typically only required for academic papers. “In the creation of this document, Andrew Spector used Claude 4.6 Adaptive to assist with synthesizing the listening and research, drafting and revising language, and as a strategic thought partner.”

4. Clarifying Between Internal and External Stakeholders
We believe we should live out our values of transparency, accountability, and thoughtful stewardship by sharing about AI use with both internal and external stakeholders.

For internal stakeholders, however, it doesn’t always need to be as formal a statement as with external stakeholders. For example, when emailing a draft you worked on with AI to an internal colleague, it could be as simple as, “I worked with Claude to put together this draft.”

Typically, the level of formality of an AI use statement should be in proportion to the stakes of the document. For instance, a simple draft you’re emailing an internal colleague is lower stakes than a comprehensive report that will be shared and used both internally and externally.

5. Continuously Evolving and Strengthening
AI is rapidly evolving. Our AI Squad, a cross-functional internal team, is committed to evolving our guidance around acknowledging AI use. We use an internal communication 1x/month to share insights and learnings about AI and distribute a survey where TPFers can share successes, challenges, and questions – including their experiences with acknowledging AI use. We also keep an open door for feedback and input.

How are you personally acknowledging AI use? What are your organization’s policies or guidelines around acknowledging AI Use? I’d love to know. Email me at aspector@thepattersonfoundation.org