Grid connections are becoming a software and workflow market.

Interconnection is often discussed as a queue: a list of projects waiting for studies, approvals and network upgrades. That view is accurate but incomplete. Each request also moves through data collection, engineering studies, utility coordination, decisions about available capacity and, in some cases, a long sequence of construction work.

Recent public funding and vendor activity point to a market forming around those workflows. The evidence is mixed: an open grant round, selected software pilots, provider-reported utility use, a provider-announced customer selection and a collaboration that says pilots and evaluation are still part of the work. Those distinctions matter.

First signal: public funding is aimed at queue workflow

The U.S. Department of Energy’s i2X program describes its Innovative Queue Management Solutions (iQMS) program as funding software pilots for utility queues that handle renewable-energy and electric-vehicle interconnection. DOE says it announced 12 Phase 1 selectees in January 2025, with up to $11.2 million available through the program. The listed projects are pilot selections; the cited page does not establish the later operating results of all 12 projects. DOE iQMS program page

A separate signal arrived on October 20, 2026: DOE opened the FY 2025–26 application period for the Grid Resilience State and Tribal Formula Grants, with a deadline of February 17, 2027. States, territories and eligible Tribal applicants request allocations, then choose local resilience projects. The opportunity broadens the funding environment around grid resilience, though it is not an interconnection-software award and does not mean any specific project is already funded. DOE application information

Second signal: utilities are buying tools for process and visibility

Interconnection software is not a single product category. Workflow platforms can coordinate applications, documents, status changes and handoffs. Grid-visibility tools can bring operational data together for planners and operators. A different set of products helps utilities model flexible connections or manage large-load requests.

Clean Power Research describes PowerClerk as a configurable, no-code workflow platform. Its Colorado page lists program portals for Fort Collins Utilities, CORE Electric Cooperative and Holy Cross Energy. This is provider-published evidence of named portals; it does not tell us the full deployment scope or outcomes for each utility. PowerClerk product page · Colorado programs listed by the provider

Camus Energy’s grid-visibility page describes integrations across AMI, GIS, SCADA and distributed-energy data, and includes a provider case study about La Plata Electric Association. That case study is relevant to western utilities, but it remains a provider-reported account. A buyer evaluating a product would still need to ask about local data readiness, integration scope, operating support and measured results. Camus grid-visibility page

Third signal: selections and pilots are not the same as deployment

GridUnity announced in July 2025 that Xcel Energy selected its GridInterConnect platform for Public Service Company of Colorado’s large-generation interconnection process. That announcement documents selection by the provider; the cited release does not verify a production go-live or performance results. GridUnity announcement

In October 2026, Camus Energy and Black & Veatch announced work on flexible interconnection for large loads. The release describes utility evaluation, pilots, stakeholder engagement and implementation readiness. That is a meaningful development signal, while its own wording shows the work is still about evaluation and adoption. It is not evidence of broad deployment. Collaboration announcement · FlexConnect product page

What this market signal does—and does not—tell us

The signal is that utilities and vendors are actively working on process software, grid visibility and flexible connection methods. It aligns with the bottlenecks that appear in public grid-planning and queue discussions: coordination, data quality, study capacity and the transition from a request to a buildable project.

It does not show that software alone resolves queue backlogs, that any one vendor is the right choice for a utility, or that a product selection has already improved connection times. Grid capacity, study methods, regulatory requirements, equipment availability and construction schedules still matter.

For Assemble Teams, the practical question is how to make the people and operating workflows around grid infrastructure easier to discover and coordinate. GameChangers is in development; this article is market research, not a statement that Assemble Teams offers the products described above or has partnerships with their providers.

What we will track next

• Whether DOE iQMS pilot teams publish outcomes or utility deployment evidence.
• Whether GridUnity or Xcel confirms production use and measured queue results.
• Whether flexible-interconnection work moves from evaluations and pilots into operational utility programs.
• Which state and Tribal projects receive awards through the FY25–26 grid-resilience grant round.