Over the last two decades, the Government and its contracting partners have experienced an appropriations process wherein each fiscal year starts with one or more continuing resolutions (CRs). While providing basic funding to federal agencies, these stop-gap bills bring with them the possibility of one or more Government shutdown every year, and they limit the ability for Government and industry officials alike to start new programs or end existing ones. Given the national elections in November 2024, it appears very likely that the beginning of FY25 will be no different – we face the very real possibility that the Government won’t enact an FY25 full-year appropriations bill until spring.

What underpins this shift toward a “new normal”? What are the real-world implications of funding federal agencies in this way? How can Government and industry officials work together to help accelerate the flow of funding from appropriations to obligations? What steps have successful businesses taken to mitigate any negative effects of “lumpy” or inconsistent funding streams? How has business planning changed to reflect accommodate this changed approach to appropriations?

As the U.S. Government races to harness the potential of game-changing technologies—like artificial intelligence—it is also important to ensure fairness and security in this rapidly evolving federal marketplace. How can Government officials manage the explosive progress of AI in federal acquisitions while also providing room for its growth? How is the Government laying a solid policy foundation to guide AI development and use? How should the private sector highlight the “art of the possible” in terms of securing systems and data that support innovation for their federal customers? And what strategies is the government using to ensure the timely procurement of emerging technologies?

Collaborative, productive communications among Government procurement officials and industry partners are often stymied by misconceptions of, or old approaches to, “dos,” “don’ts,” and timelines associated with procurement practices and / or vendor relationships. What should industry engagement look like across the full acquisition lifecycle? What is required by the FAR, and what has become general practice – but isn’t necessarily required? How can the Government most effectively communicate with industry to reduce the risk of protests, and what practical activities and engagements can involve industry in better acquisition approaches? This panel will address myths regarding: common misconceptions that can unnecessarily hinder procurement flexibilities (e.g., role of market research, impact on set-aside programs or socio-economic groups); facts and examples to help overcome such misconceptions; and strategies for improving cooperation and engagement --- and by extension, acquisition outcomes.