Boeing struck a deal with the Justice Department. What’s next?

Boeing’s announcement on Sunday that the company had agreed to plead guilty to a federal criminal charge as part of a deal with the Justice Department was the culmination of a years-long crisis surrounding the company’s 737 MAX plane.

The agreement could help Boeing end a federal lawsuit stemming from two fatal crashes of the 737 Max in 2018 and 2019. But the settlement is not the final word in that saga and may have little impact on other problems, including questions about the company’s manufacturing quality that came to light when a panel exploded on a Max jet during a flight in January.

Here’s what else you need to know about Boeing’s deal with federal prosecutors and other challenges facing the company.

What is expected now?

Boeing and the Justice Department first reached a settlement over the two crashes in 2021, allowing the company to avoid criminal charges. But federal prosecutors this year said the company had violated the terms of that agreement and struck a new one, which was approved in principle Sunday.

Under the latest agreement, Boeing would plead guilty to conspiracy to defraud the federal government. The company would also agree to an independent monitor, three years of probation and additional financial penalties. That includes a $487.2 million fine, half of which could be forgiven because of Boeing’s previous penalty payments.

But the arrangement is not yet official.

“Sometimes people hear that there’s a plea agreement and they think that’s all done and dusted, but that’s not necessarily true,” said Kya M. Henley, a white-collar crime attorney and former prosecutor.

A formal agreement is expected to be filed in federal court soon. The judge hearing the case will then review the deal, which is strongly opposed by many families of those killed in the two crashes.

If the judge sides with the families, Boeing and the Justice Department would have to come up with a new deal.

Otherwise, a monitor will be chosen by an independent committee, with the final decision made by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. The Justice Department has said it will solicit names of candidates for the job from the public and consider feedback from Boeing.

Why are the families unhappy and what can they do?

The families have said they remain deeply disappointed with the Justice Department’s handling of the case against Boeing. Despite the company pleading guilty to criminal charges, prosecutors failed to hold the company or its executives accountable for the deaths of 346 people in the two crashes, attorneys for the families said.

“We don’t think the deal is adequate,” said Erin Applebaum, a lawyer representing 34 families who lost loved ones in the second crash in Ethiopia. “We don’t think it adequately addresses the root cause of Boeing’s problems.”

Ms. Applebaum said the only way to effect meaningful change at Boeing would be to take action that would affect profits, which would mean higher fines and tougher consequences. She also criticized the decision to consider public proposals for the independent monitor as “nothing more than lip service,” noting that the Justice Department would have the final say in the decision.

For now, the families hope to convince a judge to reject the deal, arguing that it would not improve public safety. In addition, trials in a handful of civil cases filed by some of the families against Boeing are scheduled to begin later this year.

Who is the supervisor and what will he/she do?

The Justice Department will appoint an independent compliance monitor as part of Boeing’s three-year probationary period. That person, who will have the powers of a probation officer, will file annual reports with the government and ensure the company is complying with safety measures.

The monitor’s reports can suggest changes in the company’s manufacturing process or quality control. Similar monitors have been placed at other companies, including Apple and Deutsche Bank, as part of settlements with federal prosecutors.

It is still unclear who the government will nominate for the role. The monitor in this case will probably be an aviation expert.

“Nobody wants a free-roaming monitor looking at their files,” said John C. Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University who focuses on corporate governance. “So there’s probably a lot of sensitivity to who the person is.”

The extent of the monitor’s authority will depend on the fine print of the final agreement. Some key questions remain unresolved, such as whether the monitor can go directly to court with his or her findings and whether the court can impose a penalty in response. Those would have to be addressed in the final terms, Mr. Coffee said.

Veronica Root Martinez, a Duke University law professor who studies corporate misconduct and compliance, said there would almost certainly be court oversight of the monitoring, since it stemmed from a guilty plea, with public reports filed on the court calendar. The monitor would likely have a relationship with insiders at the company to draft recommendations and ensure compliance with the plea agreement.

“It’s not necessarily someone who is passively watching,” Ms. Martinez said.

Are there any other consequences for Boeing if he pleads guilty?

The guilty plea jeopardizes Boeing’s lucrative government contracts. A company convicted of certain crimes cannot receive government contracts without obtaining a waiver. According to an insider, Boeing is in talks with the Pentagon over the fate of those government contracts.

A disruption to Boeing’s defense and aerospace businesses could be catastrophic for the company’s business, said Loren Thompson, a veteran aerospace analyst. Government contracts generate more than a third of the company’s revenue.

Mr. Thompson said Boeing’s defense business has been declining in recent decades while other manufacturers have been profitable. “Any further impediment to new defense business will be very damaging to the company’s product portfolio,” he said.

It was not immediately clear whether the settlement would affect a separate investigation into the January fight over Alaska Airlines, in which a panel blew up a Max jet. The FBI, which is investigating the incident, declined to comment.