A 7–14 day deltek costpoint migration assessment. Full module footprint, indirect-rate pool register, active IDIQ/CPFF continuity map, DCAA evidence-coverage matrix, Cognos report library classification, fixed-fee, written deliverables you keep regardless of next step.
Most consultant-led assessments are sales theater: a few interviews, a templated readiness slide, a sized statement of work designed to lock in a long engagement. A real assessment runs against your live Costpoint environment and produces evidence.
Federal contractors carry deep Costpoint customization accumulated over decades — dozens of indirect cost pools tuned across years of DCAA negotiation, hundreds of Project Labor Categories with effective-dated rate histories, intricate CLIN/SLIN structures across active IDIQs, multi-state allocation rules for state-tax exposure, custom Cognos reports finance has come to depend on for ICE submissions. Most assessments either skip the customization inventory entirely (and surface the gaps in week 18 of the build) or charge for months of T&M discovery to produce something approximating a real inventory.
Syntra ETL's deltek costpoint migration assessment runs differently. The discovery engine connects to your Costpoint Web Services and direct schema with a read-only application user and crawls the full data model in days — every pool definition, every allocation base, every approved rate certification, every active contract, every active customization, every Cognos report — producing hard evidence rather than interview anecdotes. The written readiness register is delivered in 7–14 days at a fixed fee and belongs to you whether you proceed with Syntra or with another vendor.
The assessment is a paid engagement, not a free sales workshop. The reason is honesty: a free assessment that exists to win a build engagement will always recommend the build. A paid fixed-fee assessment that delivers written evidence will sometimes recommend keeping Costpoint, sometimes recommend hybrid, sometimes recommend full migration — based on what the evidence supports, not on what the next sales target requires.
Skip any one of these and the build phase pays for the omission ten times over — usually during a DCAA audit or a contracting-officer rate-reconciliation request.
Which of your active pools translate 1:1 to Fusion Indirect Cost Recovery Schedules? Which require redesign? Which approved forward-pricing rate certifications need DCAA re-negotiation? Evidence-based, not interview-based.
Which IDIQs, CPFF and CPIF contracts are mid-period of performance? Which CLIN funding chains need to roll forward without break? Which contracting officers need formal notification of system-of-record change?
Is a business systems review (BSR) active? Is an incurred-cost-submission audit open? Are there any unresolved cost questioned items? When does the next ICS filing fall in the planning window?
What is your daily-entry timesheet volume? What is your floor-check audit-trail depth? What supervisor-approval evidence chain needs preservation? Is there pending DCAA timekeeping non-compliance correspondence?
Which contracts have Cobra-tracked earned value? What is the CPR/IPMR submission cadence? Is there an active EVMS surveillance review? What variance-explanation history needs preservation?
How many reports? Which are duplicates? Which are critical for ICE/IPMR submission? Which need OTBI/BI Publisher rebuild? Which can be retired? Hard counts, not estimates.
A structured, governed discovery workflow built specifically for the govt-contracting ERP. Fixed-fee, fixed-duration, written deliverables.
Initial workshop with controller, contract administrators, DCAA liaison, IT. Read-only Costpoint application user provisioned with scoped role assignments. Discovery engine deployed to your environment. Working agreements signed on scope, deliverables, fixed fee and timeline.
Discovery engine crawls Costpoint Web Services and direct schema in parallel: module footprint, indirect cost pools, allocation bases, approved rate certifications, active contracts, CLIN structures, PLC rate history, T&E volume, Cobra EVMS scope, WAWF iRAPT submission history, Cognos/BIRT report library, customization inventory.
Targeted interviews to confirm and add color to automated findings: controller on indirect-rate strategy, contract administrators on active CLIN continuity, DCAA liaison on audit-defensibility, IT on integration and security, finance ops on critical reports.
Findings synthesized into six written artifacts: Executive Readiness Register, Module Footprint Inventory, Indirect Cost Pool & Rate Register, Active Contract Continuity Map, DCAA Evidence-Coverage Matrix, Cognos Report Library Classification. Sized timeline and budget ranges produced.
Formal read-out to executive sponsor, controller, contract administrators, DCAA liaison and IT. Written deliverables handed over. Recommendation documented: proceed (with scope), remediate first (with plan), or pursue hybrid (with architecture). Engagement closes regardless of next-step direction.
The economics of the assessment determine the honesty of the recommendation. A free assessment exists to win a build engagement. A paid assessment exists to produce useful evidence.
Sometimes the recommendation is 'keep Costpoint, integrate Fusion alongside.' Sometimes it's 'hybrid.' Sometimes it's 'full migration.' Paid fixed-fee model means the recommendation follows the evidence — not the next sales quarter.
The six written artifacts are yours, signed and dated. Use them with Syntra ETL, with another vendor, or to build the case for not migrating at all. No vendor lock-in on the assessment output.
Discovery engine crawls live Costpoint Web Services and direct schema. Findings backed by extracted artifacts (pool definitions, CLIN structures, report metadata) not stakeholder anecdotes that vary by who's in the room.
7–14 calendar days. Fixed fee against agreed scope. No T&M hourly billing. No scope-creep extensions. If the engagement takes longer it's at Syntra cost, not yours.
DCAA evidence-coverage matrix is a first-class deliverable. The assessment is led by people who have lived through DCAA business systems reviews and contracting-officer rate-reconciliation requests — not by generalist ERP consultants.
Same methodology refined across dozens of Costpoint assessments for federal primes, services firms, defense product manufacturers, FFRDC operators. Predictable deliverable quality, predictable timeline.
A deltek costpoint migration assessment is a structured discovery exercise that catalogs every module, every customization, every active contract, every indirect cost pool, every Project Labor Category, every Cognos/BIRT report and every DCAA-relevant audit-trail dependency before a Fusion migration plan is committed. For a US federal contractor with multi-year IDIQ contracts, dozens of indirect cost pools tuned across years of DCAA negotiation, and a 7+ year incurred-cost-submission lookback obligation, skipping the assessment means discovering audit-defensibility gaps in week 18 of a contracting officer review — when the auditor's request for FY2019 pool calculation reconstruction can no longer be answered. Syntra ETL's assessment runs against your live Costpoint Web Services and direct schema in 7–14 days and produces a written readiness register, customization inventory, contract continuity map and DCAA evidence-coverage matrix.
Syntra ETL's deltek costpoint migration assessment runs 7–14 calendar days from kick-off to written readiness register. A focused single-module scope (Costpoint AP only, or Cobra EVMS only) completes in 5 days. A full-footprint assessment covering Projects + Accounting + AP/AR + Billing + T&E + Cobra EVMS + WAWF iRAPT + indirect-rate pool design + Cognos report library typically completes in 10–14 days. Pricing is fixed-fee against the agreed scope (no T&M hourly billing on assessment), and the deliverable belongs to you regardless of whether you proceed with the migration or not. The assessment routinely pays for itself by catching one expensive surprise — a customization that nobody documented, an indirect-rate pool calculation that doesn't translate, a closed-contract billing chain still active in the audit window.
The Syntra ETL deltek costpoint migration assessment runs ten parallel discovery streams: (1) full module footprint with active vs sunset usage; (2) indirect cost pool inventory (fringe, OH, G&A, B&P, IR&D, material handling, sub handling) with allocation base, approved provisional rate and forward-pricing rate certification history; (3) active contract continuity register (every IDIQ, CPFF, T&M, FFP, cost-plus with CLIN/SLIN, NTE ceiling, funded/unfunded delineation, period of performance); (4) Project Labor Category and rate history inventory; (5) Cognos/BIRT/Crystal report library classification; (6) Time & Expense volume and DCAA timekeeping evidence depth; (7) Cobra (CER) earned-value record scope; (8) WAWF iRAPT submission history depth; (9) interface and integration map (subcontractor portals, banking, payroll, government payment systems); (10) DCAA audit-coverage gap analysis. Output is a single readiness register signed by stakeholders before scoping the build.
Audit-defensibility is the heaviest workstream in any federal-contractor migration assessment. The Syntra ETL discovery engine maps every active DCAA audit (incurred cost submission, business systems review, contract audit, indirect-rate post-award review) against the data classes those audits reference — and identifies any gap where a Fusion target-state would lose audit-trail evidence. Approved CAS Disclosure Statement entries are cross-referenced against the proposed Fusion cost allocation design to confirm cost-accounting-practice consistency. The assessment output includes a written DCAA evidence-coverage matrix showing exactly which Costpoint data classes need 7+ year immutable preservation, which need queryable historical access for contracting-officer lookback, and which can safely move to long-term archive. This evidence pack is what the controller and DCAA liaison sign off on before approving the migration plan.
Six written artifacts: (1) Executive Readiness Register — 5-page summary with go/no-go recommendation, top risks, timeline range, budget range, organizational change profile; (2) Module Footprint Inventory — every active module with usage volume, customization count and Fusion target mapping; (3) Indirect Cost Pool & Rate Register — every pool with allocation base, approved provisional/forward-pricing rate, audit posture and Fusion Indirect Cost Recovery Schedule mapping; (4) Active Contract Continuity Map — every multi-year IDIQ/CPFF with CLIN structure, funding chain, NTE ceiling and migration-window strategy; (5) DCAA Evidence-Coverage Matrix — every audit-relevant data class with retention and lookback obligation; (6) Cognos/BIRT Report Library Classification — every report with business value, audit weight, rebuild-in-OTBI/BI-Publisher recommendation and retire/keep decision. All written, all signed.
Yes — this is one of the most valuable assessment outputs for a federal contractor. Fusion ERP's native project accounting (Fusion PPM + Grants) has improved substantially but still does not match Costpoint depth for DCAA-compliant indirect-rate calculation, CLIN-level billing rigor or DCAA audit-trail preservation at the level a govt-contracts auditor expects. The assessment evaluates three architectures: (a) full Fusion replacement with Costpoint sunset (works for some smaller govt contractors with simple cost structures); (b) hybrid where Costpoint stays as project ledger and Fusion takes corporate GL + HCM (the most common pattern for diversified contractors); (c) commercial-vs-government split where commercial subsidiaries move to Fusion while government contracts remain in Costpoint. The recommendation is honest, evidence-based, and sized to your DCAA audit posture and contract portfolio profile.
Federal contractors live on three calendars: company fiscal year, federal fiscal year (October 1) and incurred-cost submission cycle (typically due 6 months after fiscal year-end, so a December 31 calendar-year contractor files by June 30). The assessment identifies the optimal cutover window that minimizes audit-period bridging complexity — typically the calendar quarter immediately after ICS filing, when the just-filed submission is locked and the next year's data accumulation is just starting. The assessment also identifies any active DCAA audit underway during the planning window and recommends either accelerating the cutover before the audit opens or deferring until after audit closure, depending on audit scope and remaining duration. The output is a cutover-calendar recommendation aligned to federal contracting realities — not a generic ERP cutover calendar.
Three paths. Path 1 (most common): the readiness register confirms migration viability, scope is committed, a fixed-fee build statement of work is signed and the Syntra ETL Costpoint extractors are deployed against your environment — kick-off to first FBDI load typically within 3 weeks. Path 2: the assessment surfaces blockers (CAS Disclosure Statement misalignment, missing approved forward-pricing rate certifications, an active DCAA business systems review that should not be disturbed) and the recommendation is to remediate before migrating — Syntra advises on the remediation plan but you may execute it with internal resources or another vendor. Path 3: the assessment recommends Costpoint stays as project ledger with Fusion taking corporate GL + HCM in a hybrid pattern. All three paths leave you with a defensible written plan whether you proceed with Syntra or not.
30-minute discovery call to scope the assessment. We'll walk through your Costpoint module footprint, active contract profile and DCAA audit posture, agree the fixed fee and start the 7–14 day clock the same week.