BCG Announces Interpretation Regarding Use of AI

Why BCG Is Issuing This Guidance

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become part of everyday genealogical practice. It increasingly powers the search tools we use, the hints our subscription sites offer, and the tools that help us read and write. BCG recognizes the real benefits of these technologies and encourages their thoughtful, responsible use in genealogical work.

This guidance is not about AI use in genealogy generally. It addresses one situation: the initial application for the Certified Genealogist® credential.

More than two years have passed since BCG issued its first interpretation on this subject in July 2024. The tools have changed considerably in that time, and applicants have raised thoughtful questions that the original statement did not anticipate. This document replaces both that interpretation and the FAQs that followed it.

What the Initial Portfolio Evaluates

Genealogy is a discipline that depends on skilled genealogists whose understanding and methods are informed by Genealogy Standards and the Genealogical Proof Standard. The initial CG application evaluates competence in research, documentation, analysis and correlation, conflict resolution, and writing. Judges are assessing skills in these areas.

The portfolio is where an applicant demonstrates those skills. AI has real value in a working genealogist’s practice. However, applicants must demonstrate independent mastery of the skills required for certification. This foundation ensures that Certified Genealogists^® can critically evaluate, verify, and take responsibility for later work that incorporates AI.

This is why the application requirements state that “No material in an initial Part 1 or Part 2 application may have been reviewed, critiqued, or proofread by another individual.”^[1] That principle has always applied to colleagues, mentors, and study groups. It applies equally to AI.

The clearest way to understand the boundary is to look at the rubrics. BCG publishes them for judges evaluating Part 1 and Part 2 applications, and applicants are encouraged to use them to assess their own work. Whatever the rubrics measure, the applicant must demonstrate. If a rubric indicator evaluates a skill — framing a research question, planning research, citing sources, analyzing evidence, resolving conflicts, correlating information, reaching a conclusion, or writing it up — AI assistance with that indicator is not appropriate.

Acceptable Uses and Limitations

• AI-powered search tools may be used— full-text search, genealogy-company hints, and online trees are acceptable uses of AI. These tools can help you find records you have decided to look for. However, evaluating your research question, studying the locality, and building a research plan are analytical and research-planning skills. Because the rubrics measure these skills, you may not ask an AI tool to apply them to your project. General background — how a record group works, what repositories exist in a given county — is another matter, and you may learn it from AI as you would from a lecture or a reference book.
• Spelling and grammar checking tools may be used— tools that flag incorrect usage or spelling, or suggest improvements to grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are acceptable. Asking AI to draft, rewrite, or revise your prose is getting feedback on your work and is not permitted.
• Translation tools may be used— usage should be disclosed as you would credit a human translator’s contribution. No translation tools may be used for the BCG-supplied document.
• All writing must be your own— work samples may not be written or generated by AI. Sharing sentences, paragraphs, or any part of your portfolio with another person or AI is not allowed.
• All analysis, review, and critique must be your own— do not ask AI to review, critique, or proofread your portfolio. Doing so provides external feedback on work that is meant to be evaluated as solely your own.
• All citations must be your own— this is a skill measured by the rubrics. AI should not be used to generate citations or check citations for consistency.
• The BCG-supplied document work must be your own— AI may not be used for any aspect of this requirement: citing, transcribing, translating, abstracting, analyzing, framing the research question, or research planning. This element demonstrates how you handle an unfamiliar document.

Applying This to Your Portfolio

• If the client report you would like to submit was written with AI assistance, please choose a different report. AI should not be used to assist with any of the skills measured by the research report rubric.
• Since the research report rubric does not evaluate client contracts, any contract created or edited with AI assistance is permissible.
• If an AI tool has drafted, rewritten, or reviewed one of your work samples, do not include it in your portfolio. Please select a different work sample.
• If you are on the clock and have already used AI in the BCG-supplied document work, contact BCG’s Executive Director to request a replacement document. Reaching out early is far better than submitting work that cannot be fairly evaluated.
• Responsibility for staying within permissible use rests with you.
• If you are unsure whether a particular use of AI is permissible, please contact BCG’s Executive Director before you submit. BCG would much rather answer a question early than see an otherwise strong portfolio compromised.

A Note on Trust

Certification has always relied on the integrity of those who seek it. Applicants sign and date The Genealogist’s Code of Ethics with both Part 1 and Part 2, and this guidance depends on that same commitment.

^[1] Board for Certification of Genealogists, The BCG Application Guide, 2025 (Washington, DC: BCG, 2025), 3.

The following is the original formulation of AI guidelines posted July 2024 that have now been updated to the above content.

This week the Board for Certification of Genealogists approved an interpretation of existing
requirements in The BCG Application Guide for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in a new CG^®
application portfolio. The interpretation states:

Use of Artificial Intelligence in New CG^® Application Portfolios

BCG’s application process evaluates competence in research, documentation, analysis and
correlation, conflict resolution, and writing. BCG provides this interpretation of current
requirements for the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in new CG^® application portfolios.

Work submitted in a new CG^® portfolio must be entirely the applicant’s own. This means it
may not be written or generated by AI. Additionally, the application requirements state, “No
material in an initial application may have been reviewed, critiqued, or proofread by
another individual.” These restrictions apply to the use of AI, with these exceptions:

• • Applicants may use AI-powered search tools such as search engines, genealogy-
    company hints, and online trees.
  • Applicants may use spelling and grammar checking tools.
  • Applicants may translate documents—except the BCG-supplied document—with the
    help of translation tools.

AI may not be used for any aspect of the BCG-Supplied Document Work requirement:
transcribing, translating, abstracting, analyzing, and research planning.

The applicant assumes responsibility for the permissible use of AI.

BCG expects to issue Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on its website within several weeks. This
interpretation and the FAQs will be posted on the BCG website, www.bcgcertification.org, as soon as
possible. [Click here for the FAQ.]

The words Certified Genealogist and letters CG are registered certification marks, and the designations Certified Genetic Genealogist or CGG, and Certified Genealogical Lecturer or CGL are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, used under license by board certificants after periodic evaluation.