Methodology
Migration is a data-quality exercise before it is a software exercise.
Moving an equipment register into a new system does not fix the register. The six steps below are applied in order, and the work is mostly done before anyone logs into anything.
The sequence
Import, normalize, identify, assign, verify, report.
Each step produces something you can look at, and each one surfaces problems that the next step depends on.
The order matters. Assigning custodians before items are individually identified produces a register that looks complete and cannot be verified. Verifying before project association is established produces evidence that cannot be reported at program level.
- 01
Import
Take the register as it exists. Spreadsheet exports, receiving records, accounting extracts, and mobile-device console reports are all accepted in whatever shape they arrive in. Nothing is discarded at this stage.
- 02
Normalize
Reconcile duplicate columns, inconsistent manufacturer and model naming, free-text location values, and mixed date formats into structured fields. This is where most of the effort in a migration actually sits.
- 03
Identify
Assign property identifiers, attach serial numbers, and separate lot records from individually accountable items. Lots that cannot be individually identified are flagged rather than quietly accepted.
- 04
Assign
Establish an acknowledged custodian and a project or grant association for every accountable record. Records that cannot be assigned become explicit findings instead of blank cells.
- 05
Verify
Set a verification policy window and record physical verification against it. The demonstration environment uses a 180-day window; yours should reflect your program and risk profile.
- 06
Report
Produce the register, custody-history, verification, condition, project-summary, and partner-held exports, together with a findings report that states what is incomplete and what action each finding needs.
Equipment accountability review
What the review produces.
A written set of findings against your existing register, with the migration work stated plainly rather than estimated optimistically.
| Section | Contents |
|---|---|
| Register assessment | Record counts, accountable unit counts, and a record-completeness measure showing which fields are missing across the register. |
| Custody findings | Records with no acknowledged custodian, custody assignments with no supporting evidence, and gaps in the custody chain. |
| Location and verification findings | Locations recorded but not physically verified, verification outside the policy window, and items with no verification history at all. |
| Identification findings | Missing serial numbers, lot records that cannot be individually identified, and duplicate or ambiguous property identifiers. |
| Project association findings | Records with no project, grant, or funding line, and records whose association cannot be reconciled to a budget line. |
| Off-site holdings | Partner-held and field-deployed equipment, with the confirmation status of each holding. |
| Migration considerations | Field mapping from your current register, the data that must be captured before migration, and an estimate of the identification work required. |
Preparing a submission
What to send, and what to remove.
A review can be prepared from a redacted extract. It does not need — and should not receive — project-specific or controlled detail.
Useful to include
- Column headers from your existing register, even if the values are removed
- Approximate record counts and accountable unit counts
- The categories of equipment involved
- How custody is currently recorded and where hand receipts are held
- Whether any equipment is held by field partners or deployed off-site
- How and how often physical verification currently happens