Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani’s Government Contracts Practice Group highlights the key developments from the past month and their implications for federal contractors. Our team tracks significant decisions, regulatory changes, and practical updates to help contractors stay compliant in a rapidly changing environment.
Tune in to The Essential GovCon Brief podcast on Spotify or YouTube for a discussion on the issues highlighted below.
Executive Order on “Promoting Efficiency, Accountability, and Performance in Federal Contracting”
On April 30, 2026, President Trump issued a significant Executive Order (Order) directing a government-wide shift toward greater reliance on fixed-price contracts and tightening the standards agencies must meet before selecting more flexible contract types. The Order establishes new policy priorities, accelerates reform timelines, and directly targets some of the government’s largest, most complex procurements.
Key Policy Shifts
The Order sets a clear federal preference for fixed-price contracting and requires agencies to justify any deviation from that model. As a bridge while regulatory amendments proceed, agencies are instructed to rely on Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) deviations “to the maximum extent practicable.” This signals that the Administration expects immediate operational changes, not merely long-term reform.
The Order also directs agencies to review and, where practicable, restructure or renegotiate the federal government’s ten largest non-fixed-price contracts. Although details on scope and methodology will follow in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance, the directive suggests a sweeping reassessment of cost-type arrangements, performance incentives, and pricing structures in some of the government’s most high-value programs.
Implementation Requirements and Deadlines
Two deadlines structure the rollout:
- Within 45 days, the OMB must issue government-wide guidance for consistent implementation.
- Within 120 days, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), in coordination with the FAR Council, must propose amendments to the FAR embedding the new contracting preference.
The Order also requires OFPP, the Defense Acquisition University (DAU), and the Federal Acquisition Institute (FAI) to develop mandatory training addressing the formation, negotiation, and management of fixed-price contracts, with the goal of minimizing justified exceptions.
Practical Impact
The Executive Order will have both immediate and long-term implications:
- Agencies will likely face increased internal approval requirements and documentation obligations when selecting non-fixed-price contract types.
- Solicitations may begin incorporating deviations well before the FAR is formally amended.
- Contractors working on or pursuing high-value programs should expect agencies to revisit pricing structures, incentive models, and risk allocation, particularly those associated with the ten largest non-fixed-price federal contracts.
Taken together, these directives represent a decisive shift in federal procurement policy that is likely to affect every sector, especially major defense and civilian programs built on cost-type or hybrid contracting structures.
Federal Circuit Clarifies Standard for Challenging CICA Stay Overrides
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an important bid protest decision in April 2026 clarifying the standard applicable to Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) stay overrides. In Life Science Logistics, LLC v. United States, the court held that a contractor challenging an agency’s override of CICA’s automatic stay need only show that the override decision was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Under CICA, the filing of a timely Government Accountability Office protest generally triggers an automatic stay of contract award or performance while the protest is pending. Agencies may override that stay only upon written findings that urgent and compelling circumstances exist or that performance is otherwise in the best interests of the United States.
In Life Science Logistics, the incumbent contractor challenged the General Services Administration’s decision to override the automatic stay after the agency awarded a Strategic National Stockpile contract to a competitor. The government argued that, in addition to proving the override was arbitrary and capricious, the protester also needed to satisfy the traditional four-factor injunction test, including irreparable harm and likelihood of success on the merits. The Federal Circuit rejected that argument and affirmed the Court of Federal Claims.
The court emphasized that Congress intentionally created an automatic stay triggered by the filing of a timely protest. Requiring protesters to separately satisfy traditional equitable factors would improperly impose additional burdens not found in the statute.
Key Takeaways for Government Contractors
- The decision provides additional clarity regarding the legal framework applicable to CICA override challenges.
- Agencies will likely face greater scrutiny when overriding automatic stays. More robust documentation supporting override determinations may now be necessary.
- The decision provides contractors and agencies with clearer guidance regarding the standards governing override disputes.
- The decision may also discourage agencies from invoking CICA overrides absent strong contemporaneous support for the override determination.
Citation: Life Science Logistics, LLC v. United States, 172 F.4th 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2026).
GRSM Government Contracts Practice Group
GRSM’s Government Contracts team supports contractors throughout the entire procurement lifecycle, providing both proactive counseling and representation in disputes.
Our attorneys advise on compliance, small business programs, cybersecurity, subcontracting, and other regulatory issues, while also litigating bid protests, claims, and agency matters nationwide.
Please contact Patrick Burns, Meredith Thielbahr, or Gloria Cannon with any questions or for additional information.