AGB’s OnBoard board effectiveness survey finds that AI use is racing ahead of formal AI governance in higher education and beyond. Among board directors surveyed, 92% reported using AI for board work in the past six months, but far fewer reported enforced board-level AI oversight—such as documented responsibilities, committee assignments, or structured reporting on AI risk. The survey quantifies a performance gap tied to enforcement: boards with an enforced AI policy rate themselves 88% effective versus 55% for boards without one. Only 6% of boards reported having an enforced policy, and AGB noted that accreditation bodies are beginning to ask how institutions document decision-making that involves AI. The immediate governance implication is that AI oversight is transitioning from “operational preference” to “board capability.” Universities seeking reaccreditation or preparing for state oversight requirements will likely need documented AI governance frameworks rather than informal guidance.