Summary

Is Your Archive Keeping Up? Legacy data archiving has changed considerably over the past few years, and many solutions that were once considered market-leading have struggled to keep pace. Tighter compliance requirements, deeper EHR integration needs, and the growing demand for real-time access to historical data have raised the bar. Hospitals and health systems that...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

Is Your Archive Keeping Up?

Legacy data archiving has changed considerably over the past few years, and many solutions that were once considered market-leading have struggled to keep pace. Tighter compliance requirements, deeper EHR integration needs, and the growing demand for real-time access to historical data have raised the bar.

Hospitals and health systems that continue to rely on outdated or underdeveloped archiving solutions risk missing out on critical benefits, including streamlined workflows, automation, faster ROI, and more informed clinical decision-making.

This playbook will help you evaluate your current archiving strategy, determine whether a change is needed, and understand how to successfully navigate a transition if it’s the right approach for your organization.

Ten Common Signs that Indicate Vendor Underperformance

Legacy system decommissioning timelines slip due to delays, scope gaps, or lack of confidence in archived data quality and completeness.
Vendor can only begin a limited number of projects at a time, or cannot complete certain systems within the application rationalization inventory.
The vendor doesn’t have evidence of long-standing health system partnerships that support holistic data management needs.
Vendor contacts are unresponsive or slow to escalate and resolve issues.
EHR-archive integration is limited, manual, or disruptive to clinical workflows.
Clinicians or HIM teams cannot easily access or trust historical records.
Clinicians must navigate outside the EHR to determine whether legacy patient data exists.
The vendor lacks a clear approach to leveraging AI within its solution.
The vendor cannot explain how its solution will support your future AI initiatives that may rely on legacy data.
The vendor avoids or cannot clearly answer questions about upcoming features and capabilities.

How to Determine Whether Your Archiving Approach Meets Modern Standards

When determining whether it’s time to switch archiving vendors, it helps to understand what a modern archiving solution delivers. The table below outlines the gap between underperforming solutions and the current standard, across six core functions.

Function	Old Approach	Modern Standard	Benefits
Access	Requires logging into a separate system, forcing clinicians to leave the EHR and re-establish context.	EHR-native access with Single Sign-On preserves authentication, patient context, and governance.	Clinicians: Less workflow disruption, faster access to history. Organization: Stronger governance, fewer inefficiencies. Patients: More informed care decisions.
Awareness	No indication in the EHR that legacy data exists, leading to incomplete clinical context.	EHR indicators flag the presence of legacy data for each patient.	Clinicians: Clear visibility into available history. Organization: More consistent use of archived data. Patients: Lower risk of incomplete context in care decisions.
Retrieval	Manual searches across systems by clinicians, HIM, and rev cycle teams.	Fast keyword search across structured and unstructured data.	Clinicians: Faster access to information for care decisions. HIM: Reduced time locating records. Organization: Lower admin burden, improved productivity. Rev Cycle: Quicker access to supporting documentation.
Analysis	Manual review of large record volumes to validate compliance, accuracy, or release.	AI-assisted analysis flags compliance risks and data issues, reducing manual effort.	HIM: Faster, more comprehensive reviews. Organization: Improved compliance readiness and efficiency. Patients: Lower risk of incomplete/inaccurate record handling.
Release	Record release workflows are manual, increasing effort and risk.	Automated, secure delivery to designated EHR endpoints.	HIM: Faster release workflows. Organization: Less manual effort and risk. Patients: More timely record access.
A/R Wind Down	Reliance on static PDFs or screenshots, requiring legacy systems to remain online or limiting recovery.	Active A/R workflows continue post-decommissioning, with tiered solutions to meet unique needs.	Organization: Faster decommissioning and improved revenue recovery. Patients: Fewer account resolution delays. Rev Cycle: Continued access to workflows and account details.

Old Approach

Access

Requires logging into a separate system, forcing clinicians to leave the EHR and re-establish context.

Awareness

No indication in the EHR that legacy data exists, leading to incomplete clinical context.

Retrieval

Manual searches across systems by clinicians, HIM, and rev cycle teams.

Analysis

Manual review of large record volumes to validate compliance, accuracy, or release.

Release

Record release workflows are manual, increasing effort and risk.

A/R Wind Down

Reliance on static PDFs or screenshots, requiring legacy systems to remain online or limiting recovery.

Modern Standard

Access

EHR-native access with Single Sign-On preserves authentication, patient context, and governance.

Awareness

EHR indicators flag the presence of legacy data for each patient.

Retrieval

Fast keyword search across structured and unstructured data.

Analysis

AI-assisted analysis flags compliance risks and data issues, reducing manual effort.

Release

Automated, secure delivery to designated EHR endpoints.

A/R Wind Down

Active A/R workflows continue post-decommissioning, with tiered solutions to meet unique needs.

Benefits

Access

Clinicians: Less workflow disruption, faster access to history.

Organization: Stronger governance, fewer inefficiencies.

Patients: More informed care decisions.

Awareness

Clinicians: Clear visibility into available history.

Organization: More consistent use of archived data.

Patients: Lower risk of incomplete context in care decisions.

Retrieval

Clinicians: Faster access to information for care decisions.

HIM: Reduced time locating records.

Organization: Lower admin burden, improved productivity.

Rev Cycle: Quicker access to supporting documentation.

Analysis

HIM: Faster, more comprehensive reviews.

Organization: Improved compliance readiness and efficiency.

Patients: Lower risk of incomplete/inaccurate record handling.

Release

HIM: Faster release workflows.

Organization: Less manual effort and risk.

Patients: More timely record access.

A/R Wind Down

Organization: Faster decommissioning and improved revenue recovery.

Patients: Fewer account resolution delays.

Rev Cycle: Continued access to workflows and account details.

Understanding the Difference Between a Vendor and a Strategic Partner

While the capabilities of modern archiving solutions are critical, they are only part of the equation. The strength of your vendor as a long-term partner matters just as much.

Common challenges that arise due to poor vendor partnerships include:

Slow follow-through from vendors on various aspects of archiving projects, despite early assurances and promises.
Unclear escalation paths, with slow and frustrating responses when issues arise.
Limited ongoing support, including little or no contact with the original account representative.
Limited scalability and enterprise experience, making it difficult to efficiently manage additional applications and evolving data retention requirements.

What a True Partner Provides

You should expect more from your vendor relationship. A strong partner:

Communicates proactively
Maintains consistent points of contact
Provides support well beyond go-live
Seeks to understand your current and long-term goals
Explores how your archiving strategy can support future initiatives (such as those related to AI and analytics)

The partner should also provide a repeatable and scalable archiving approach that can scale with your organization over time. What might start as a single-system archive should expand into a repeatable, enterprise-wide data management strategy, supported by standardized processes, predictable timelines, and a platform that evolves alongside your organization.

Rethinking Common Vendor Switch Concerns

Fear of disruption is one of the most common reasons organizations hesitate to switch archiving vendors, even if a vendor switch is warranted. While that concern is understandable, the perceived difficulty of switching often outweighs the reality. In fact, switching is often faster and less disruptive than anticipated.

Concern: “We may lose data in a transition.”

Experienced archiving vendors use proven extraction and validation processes to ensure data integrity throughout the migration. This includes verifying completeness across structured and unstructured data while preserving the original clinical and operational context.

Concern: “We may lose access to records during a switch.”

Well-managed transitions include parallel access periods, allowing clinical and HIM workflows to continue uninterrupted. Many organizations ultimately gain better access to historical records due to improved search, usability, and EHR integration.

Concern: “Switching will take too long.”

Timelines vary based on scope and complexity, but organizations often see faster progress with a new partner. Experienced vendors bring repeatable processes, predictable timelines, and the ability to execute efficiently.

Concern: “Switching may cost too much.”

While there are costs associated with any transition, organizations should also consider the financial benefits associated with acting sooner. Many organizations achieve long-term savings through reduced hosting, maintenance, and administrative overhead, making the total cost of ownership lower over time.

A key factor in successful transitions is selecting a partner with specific experience in vendor-to-vendor migrations. Proven methodologies, dedicated resources, and deep experience help ensure a smoother process and a more predictable outcome.

The Cost of Staying Put

Maintaining the status quo when a vendor switch is necessary carries significant costs:

Delayed ROI due to ongoing maintenance, licensing, and support costs for legacy systems that remain in place (due to lack of confidence in decommissioning).
Staff time absorbed by workarounds, manual processes, and rework.
Limited access to historical records for clinicians and HIM teams.
Care decisions made without full clinical context.
Increased security risk as outdated systems stay live longer than intended.

What to Expect During an Archiving Vendor Transition

Understanding the switch process often helps put stakeholder concerns to rest. A vendor transition should not mean restarting from zero. The most experienced vendors provide a structured handoff that builds on what has already been done and addresses gaps or issues in prior work. While the switch process varies depending on the specific situation, a strong transition often includes:

1. Discovery and Scoping

The new partner will conduct a thorough assessment of the current state, including what systems are involved, what data exists and in what condition, what integrations are in place, and where gaps or errors exist in work already completed. This will establish a clear baseline.

2. Extraction and Validation

The partner will obtain the previously archived data. Discrete data elements, documents, and images will be captured and validated for completeness and accuracy, and any data integrity issues from the prior vendor will be identified and mitigated. The most effective vendors will use automated extraction to reduce manual effort and speed implementation, while preserving native data formats and standardizing documents within the archive to ensure consistent, reliable access.

3. Migration

Validated data will be migrated into the new archive environment. For organizations switching from an existing archive, this will include migrating previously archived data so that all historical records are securely transferred within the new platform.

4. Integration Configuration

EHR integration will be configured and tested, including Single Sign-On access. Workflows for clinical access, release of information, and A/R wind-down will be set up and validated with end users before go-live.

5. Access and Go-Live

Before retiring the previous system, staff will have time to validate the new archive and confirm that all required records are available. Go-live will happen when the organization is confident in the completeness and accuracy of the data.

6. Legacy System Retirement

Once the new archive is live and validated, the legacy systems/previous archive can be decommissioned and the associated costs eliminated.

Vendor Switch Case Studies

The case studies in this report demonstrate that switching archiving vendors can be transformational. Featured organizations include:

Parkview Health
AltaMed
Franciscan Health

Read the full report

Tips for Managing Internal Stakeholder Conversations

Even when the case for switching is clear, the internal decision-making process can be challenging. A vendor transition requires alignment across multiple stakeholders, and each group tends to come to the conversation with different priorities and concerns.

IT and Project Management. This group is typically most focused on execution risk. The most effective approach here is specificity and proof. Focus on the new partner’s track record for similar projects, the switch plan and process, and the safeguards that will ensure the same problems don’t occur with this new partner.
Finance. Finance needs a clear ROI case that accounts for the cost of transition, the cost of staying, and the financial benefit of retiring legacy systems. The framing should be forward-looking. For example, share the projected cost over the next 12 to 24 months without making a transition, and the expected ROI and benefits from making a transition.
HIM and Clinical Leadership. These stakeholders care deeply about access continuity. They need assurance that historical records will be available throughout the transition, that workflows will not be disrupted at go-live, and that the new archive will genuinely be easier to use than what they have now, not just different.
Legal and Compliance. This group focuses closely on regulatory exposure, data security, and contractual obligations. Make sure to address the vendor’s certifications, audit capabilities, and documented security posture, and provide a clear picture of how the transition will reduce compliance risk rather than introducing it.

Addressing the “We Already Invested” Objection

When this objection comes up, and it will, the most honest response is also the most practical: the question is not whether money has already been spent, but whether the current path is likely to deliver the intended outcome at an acceptable level of cost and risk. If the answer is no, continued investment does not protect the original spend. It only adds to it.

How to Evaluate and Select the Right Vendor Partner

The right vendor combines a modern platform with proven experience successfully transitioning organizations from underperforming solutions.

Experience and Breadth

How many software brands has the vendor worked with? Can they demonstrate experience with specific systems in your environment?
Have they handled projects of similar scale and complexity, and can they provide references from comparable organizations?
Have they successfully taken over from a prior archiving vendor?

EHR Integration Capabilities

Does the vendor support Single Sign-On and patient context sharing with your EHR?
Does the EHR surface indicators when legacy data exists for a patient?
Does the integration preserve patient context (e.g., launching directly into the correct patient record without re-searching)?

Modern Platform Capabilities

How easily can users search and retrieve data across both structured and unstructured records?
Does the solution automate key record release processes, reducing manual effort?
Does the solution support AI-assisted analysis and compliance flagging?
How frequently does the vendor release meaningful product updates?
Can A/R workflows continue post-decommissioning without relying on static exports or keeping legacy systems live?

Security and Compliance

Is the vendor HITRUST certified, and what other relevant security certifications do they maintain?
How is data protected in transit and at rest, and what audit logging and access controls are in place?
How does the vendor support compliance with evolving regulatory requirements (e.g., updates to HIPAA and related frameworks)?
What is the vendor’s approach to ongoing monitoring, threat detection, and incident response?
How does the solution reduce risk associated with legacy systems, particularly by enabling timely and secure decommissioning?
What is their track record in supporting audit readiness and compliance across organizations similar to ours?

Independent Validation

Has the vendor been evaluated by KLAS or another independent rating organization, and what do those scores reflect over time?
What do peer organizations say about the vendor’s performance, particularly in the post-implementation period when the sales team is no longer as involved?
Is the vendor recognized specifically for high-complexity projects, not just standard implementations?

Next Steps

Harmony Healthcare IT has been ranked among the top three KLAS data archiving vendors for four consecutive years, with a performance score above 90 each year since 2021. Our team has worked with more than 500 organizations across 715+ software brands, including successfully taking over archiving programs that were not delivering as expected.

If you’re evaluating your current approach and considering a change, we’re available to share what we’ve learned and help you assess your options.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

Executive Summary In a crowded market, it can be difficult to evaluate which healthcare data archiving solutions will deliver lasting value. Many vendors overpromise and underdeliver, falling short when it comes to preserving data integrity, ensuring long-term accessibility, meeting evolving compliance requirements, and enabling AI readiness. The consequences are significant: limited access to critical historical...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

Executive Summary

In a crowded market, it can be difficult to evaluate which healthcare data archiving solutions will deliver lasting value. Many vendors overpromise and underdeliver, falling short when it comes to preserving data integrity, ensuring long-term accessibility, meeting evolving compliance requirements, and enabling AI readiness.

The consequences are significant: limited access to critical historical data, increased risk, unnecessary system costs, and diminished ROI. Hospitals and health systems can’t afford to get archiving wrong.

This guide will help you avoid common pitfalls and take a more strategic approach to archiving evaluations. While not an exhaustive checklist, it walks through seven critical evaluation areas, from technical execution to ROI and strategic fit, to help you evaluate vendors with greater confidence and clarity.

1. Foundational Considerations

Before evaluating detailed technical features, security controls, or ROI capabilities, health IT leaders should assess whether a vendor meets core qualifications. Vendors that fall short may struggle with data complexity, workflow integration, and execution.

Core Requirements

Requirement	What to Consider
Expertise Across Hundreds of Systems	Vendors with limited system exposure are more likely to encounter unexpected complexity. Look for a partner with experience across hundreds of clinical, financial, and administrative systems, including deep familiarity with your specific platforms, to ensure proven methodologies and fewer surprises.
Deep Workflow Integration	Vendors that deliver standalone repositories rather than EHR/ERP-integrated archives create friction for clinical and operational users. Look for a partner that enables Single Sign-On directly from the EHR, along with automated indicators within the EHR that signal when legacy records exist for a patient. *See Section 2 and 3 for specific technical capability requirements*
Rigorous Security and Compliance Measures	Vendors without independently validated security controls introduce risk to your patient data and compliance posture. Look for a partner that is HITRUST r2 Certified, maintains SOC 2 Type II facilities, provides 24/7/365 monitoring, and demonstrates mature third-party risk management practices, and more. *See Section 4 for more information and additional security and compliance requirements*
KLAS Track Record	Vendors without independent validation of their performance make it harder to separate claims from results. While no single rating should determine vendor selection, consistent KLAS recognition can substantiate a vendor’s quality, consistency, and long-term partnership value.

What to Consider

Expertise Across Hundreds of Systems

Vendors with limited system exposure are more likely to encounter unexpected complexity. Look for a partner with experience across hundreds of clinical, financial, and administrative systems, including deep familiarity with your specific platforms, to ensure proven methodologies and fewer surprises.

Deep Workflow Integration

Vendors that deliver standalone repositories rather than EHR/ERP-integrated archives create friction for clinical and operational users. Look for a partner that enables Single Sign-On directly from the EHR, along with automated indicators within the EHR that signal when legacy records exist for a patient.

See Section 2 and 3 for specific technical capability requirements

Rigorous Security and Compliance Measures

Vendors without independently validated security controls introduce risk to your patient data and compliance posture. Look for a partner that is HITRUST r2 Certified, maintains SOC 2 Type II facilities, provides 24/7/365 monitoring, and demonstrates mature third-party risk management practices, and more.

See Section 4 for more information and additional security and compliance requirements

KLAS Track Record

Vendors without independent validation of their performance make it harder to separate claims from results. While no single rating should determine vendor selection, consistent KLAS recognition can substantiate a vendor’s quality, consistency, and long-term partnership value.

2. Extraction and Archiving

While many archiving vendors describe similar capabilities, technical execution varies widely in practice. It’s important to evaluate not only what a vendor claims to support, but how reliably those capabilities perform in healthcare environments.

Core Considerations

Evaluation Criteria	What to Evaluate	Why It Matters
Extraction Methodology	The vendor should clearly define their extraction approach, including whether they use full database extraction, application-layer extraction, or a combination, and explain when and why they use each method. It is equally important to understand whether the vendor performs the extraction directly or expects your organization and/or the application vendor to provide the data, as this can impact project costs.	Different methods capture different data. Application-layer extraction is faster but can miss underlying data elements, embedded content, and BLOBs. Full database extraction is more complete but requires greater expertise to execute without disruption. The right approach depends on your scope, timeline, and defensibility requirements — and a strong vendor will make that decision transparently, not by default.
Structured and Unstructured Data Handling	The vendor should support extraction of both structured data (tables, coded values, discrete fields) and unstructured data (clinical documents, scanned forms, images).	Vendors that handle only structured data leave gaps in the legal medical record. Unstructured data often requires separate processes or specialized tooling — and organizations that manage it through multiple vendors introduce handoff risk and normalization gaps that are difficult to detect and costly to fix.
Data Completeness and Validation	The vendor should apply a rigorous validation framework, including reconciliation against a source-of-truth reference copy, and documented chain of custody — before, during, and after extraction.	Extraction is not just about moving data, it is about proving what existed and preserving its integrity. Partial extracts make it difficult to determine whether missing data was never present or simply not captured. A defensible chain of custody is essential for audit, legal, and compliance purposes long after the legacy system is decommissioned.
System Performance During Extraction	The vendor should clearly define how their extraction approach minimizes performance impact on legacy systems that may still be supporting active clinical or operational workflows during the project.	Extraction from a live system introduces real operational risk. Poorly managed extraction processes can degrade system performance, slow clinical workflows, and in the worst cases force unplanned downtime. Look for vendors with documented protocols for throttling extraction activity and coordinating around peak usage periods.

What to Evaluate

Extraction Methodology

The vendor should clearly define their extraction approach, including whether they use full database extraction, application-layer extraction, or a combination, and explain when and why they use each method. It is equally important to understand whether the vendor performs the extraction directly or expects your organization and/or the application vendor to provide the data, as this can impact project costs.

Structured and Unstructured Data Handling

The vendor should support extraction of both structured data (tables, coded values, discrete fields) and unstructured data (clinical documents, scanned forms, images).

Data Completeness and Validation

The vendor should apply a rigorous validation framework, including reconciliation against a source-of-truth reference copy, and documented chain of custody — before, during, and after extraction.

System Performance During Extraction

The vendor should clearly define how their extraction approach minimizes performance impact on legacy systems that may still be supporting active clinical or operational workflows during the project.

Why It Matters

Extraction Methodology

Different methods capture different data. Application-layer extraction is faster but can miss underlying data elements, embedded content, and BLOBs. Full database extraction is more complete but requires greater expertise to execute without disruption. The right approach depends on your scope, timeline, and defensibility requirements — and a strong vendor will make that decision transparently, not by default.

Structured and Unstructured Data Handling

Vendors that handle only structured data leave gaps in the legal medical record. Unstructured data often requires separate processes or specialized tooling — and organizations that manage it through multiple vendors introduce handoff risk and normalization gaps that are difficult to detect and costly to fix.

Data Completeness and Validation

Extraction is not just about moving data, it is about proving what existed and preserving its integrity. Partial extracts make it difficult to determine whether missing data was never present or simply not captured. A defensible chain of custody is essential for audit, legal, and compliance purposes long after the legacy system is decommissioned.

System Performance During Extraction

Extraction from a live system introduces real operational risk. Poorly managed extraction processes can degrade system performance, slow clinical workflows, and in the worst cases force unplanned downtime. Look for vendors with documented protocols for throttling extraction activity and coordinating around peak usage periods.

Expert Notes: System-Specific Considerations

One of the most important factors in selecting a legacy data archiving partner is ensuring the vendor has substantial, proven experience with both the systems being retired and the systems that will remain in use going forward.

While every legacy application presents unique challenges, healthcare organizations should be cautious of vendors that position archiving as a one-size-fits-all exercise. Differences in database architecture, data models, customizations, extraction methods, integrated applications, and historical version changes can significantly impact the completeness, usability, and defensibility of archived data.

Whether the source system is Oracle Health (Cerner), MEDITECH, a departmental application, or another clinical, financial, or operational platform, successful archiving requires expertise that is specific to that environment.

The examples below illustrate how platform-specific knowledge can directly influence project outcomes and long-term access to historical data.

Oracle Health (Cerner) Archiving

Oracle Health (Cerner) environments present a fundamental extraction methodology decision: RMAN (full database extraction, including BLOBs, forms, and images) versus CCL (faster, application-layer extraction that can miss underlying data elements). These approaches are not mutually exclusive, but the choice has long-term consequences for data completeness and defensibility. Look for a vendor that evaluates both methods based on your specific scope and requirements and can clearly explain the trade-offs rather than defaulting to one approach.

MEDITECH Archiving

MEDITECH’s proprietary database architecture requires specialized extraction expertise that is increasingly scarce as the pool of experienced MUMPS developers shrinks. Organizations running older MEDITECH versions — Magic, Client/Server — face additional complexity from years of version evolution and system-specific customizations. Look for a vendor with hands-on MEDITECH experience across versions and commonly integrated systems such as LSS, PTCT, Pyxis, and OnBase, not just general archiving capability applied to MEDITECH environments.

3. Archive Access and Usability

Archived data is only valuable if authorized users can reliably access it when needed from the go-forward application. Evaluate whether the archive supports user access, interoperability, and release of information workflows that align with clinical, HIM, and operational needs.

Core Capabilities

Capability / Feature	Value/Benefit
Single Sign-On (SSO) Integration	Eliminates the need for separate logins, reducing friction for clinicians and authorized staff.
Secure Record Delivery	Enables delivery of archived historical patient data to a designated EHR endpoint.
Legacy Record Indicator	Provides in‑context visibility that archived historical records exist, saving users clicks and increasing efficiency.
MPI/EMPI Backload	Links historical patient records to the enterprise master patient index (MPI/EMPI).
MPI/EMPI Synchronization	Maintains accurate patient identity over time as records are merged or unmerged in the production EHR.
Reporting/Analytics	Enables reporting and insight generation from archived data.
Data Export/Sharing	Enables secure sharing of archived data with downstream systems and partners.
DICOM Viewer	Provides access to historical imaging across multiple modalities.
Destruction/Purge	Enables compliant, auditable data elimination in accordance with organization-specific retention policies.
A/R Wind Down	Supports all ranges of financial account resolution needs after system decommissioning.

Value/Benefit

Single Sign-On (SSO) Integration

Eliminates the need for separate logins, reducing friction for clinicians and authorized staff.

Secure Record Delivery

Enables delivery of archived historical patient data to a designated EHR endpoint.

Legacy Record Indicator

Provides in‑context visibility that archived historical records exist, saving users clicks and increasing efficiency.

MPI/EMPI Backload

Links historical patient records to the enterprise master patient index (MPI/EMPI).

MPI/EMPI Synchronization

Maintains accurate patient identity over time as records are merged or unmerged in the production EHR.

Reporting/Analytics

Enables reporting and insight generation from archived data.

Data Export/Sharing

Enables secure sharing of archived data with downstream systems and partners.

DICOM Viewer

Provides access to historical imaging across multiple modalities.

Destruction/Purge

Enables compliant, auditable data elimination in accordance with organization-specific retention policies.

A/R Wind Down

Supports all ranges of financial account resolution needs after system decommissioning.

4. Security and Compliance

Legacy data archiving can significantly reduce security exposure by enabling the decommissioning of outdated, vulnerable systems. Archiving solutions, however, introduce new third-party pathways to sensitive data. Key third‑party risks include:

Expanded attack surface. Each third-party vendor granted access to your system creates another potential entry point for attackers.
Outdated security practices. Vendors operating with unpatched systems and vulnerable technology can increase your security risks.
Superficial compliance practices. Vendors that lack substantive security assessments can also increase your security risks.

Expert Note

Nearly one‑third of healthcare security breaches originate from third parties, including technology vendors, making vendor security posture a critical component of any archiving decision.

Core Principles

Security Principle	What It Means for Your Organization
HITRUST r2 Certification	The vendor meets the highest level of healthcare security and privacy controls, validated by third-party audit.
Mature GRC Foundation	The vendor maintains a mature governance, risk, and compliance program that includes HIPAA compliance, SOC 2 Type II facilities, enterprise risk management, third-party risk management, and formal security policies.
Data Protection	The vendor protects patient and business data through encryption, data loss prevention (DLP), secure storage, backup protections, and governance controls that reduce the risk of data exposure.
24/7/365 Network, Identity, and Endpoint Monitoring	The vendor engages in proactive threat detection and response.
Strong Identity Security Controls	The vendor protects access through least privilege principles, MFA, account takeover prevention, continuous authentication controls, and in-depth access governance.
Vulnerability Management	The vendor ensures continuous identification and timely remediation of security weaknesses.

What It Means for Your Organization

HITRUST r2 Certification

The vendor meets the highest level of healthcare security and privacy controls, validated by third-party audit.

Mature GRC Foundation

The vendor maintains a mature governance, risk, and compliance program that includes HIPAA compliance, SOC 2 Type II facilities, enterprise risk management, third-party risk management, and formal security policies.

Data Protection

The vendor protects patient and business data through encryption, data loss prevention (DLP), secure storage, backup protections, and governance controls that reduce the risk of data exposure.

24/7/365 Network, Identity, and Endpoint Monitoring

The vendor engages in proactive threat detection and response.

Strong Identity Security Controls

The vendor protects access through least privilege principles, MFA, account takeover prevention, continuous authentication controls, and in-depth access governance.

Vulnerability Management

The vendor ensures continuous identification and timely remediation of security weaknesses.

5. Return on Investment (ROI)

Cost reduction is a top driver of legacy data archiving projects, but not all vendors can deliver on that promise. Use the following criteria to distinguish vendors with a track record of measurable, reliable ROI from those relying on theoretical or oversimplified projections.

Key Considerations

Evaluation Criteria	What to Look For
Speed to ROI	Capabilities that accelerate extraction, migration, and archiving—enabling faster implementation and earlier ROI. Clear demonstration of how technology drives these efficiencies.
Proven ROI Consistency	Credible customer references that consistently demonstrate ROI across similar organizations.
Operational Efficiency	Key capabilities that reduce ongoing effort, such as Single Sign-On, unified access across legacy systems, fast search, and AI-assisted workflows.
Scalable Decommissioning	A repeatable approach that enables efficient, multi-system decommissioning over time, even in complex environments.

What to Look For

Speed to ROI

Capabilities that accelerate extraction, migration, and archiving—enabling faster implementation and earlier ROI. Clear demonstration of how technology drives these efficiencies.

Proven ROI Consistency

Credible customer references that consistently demonstrate ROI across similar organizations.

Operational Efficiency

Key capabilities that reduce ongoing effort, such as Single Sign-On, unified access across legacy systems, fast search, and AI-assisted workflows.

Scalable Decommissioning

A repeatable approach that enables efficient, multi-system decommissioning over time, even in complex environments.

6. Project Execution

Health IT leaders should assess execution capabilities as rigorously as technical and security requirements, as weaknesses in this area are a common cause of stalled or over‑budget archiving initiatives.

Key Considerations

Execution Factor	What to Evaluate
Timeline Discipline	The vendor should clearly define expected timelines based on organizations and projects of similar size and complexity and demonstrate a consistent record of on‑time delivery.
Impact on Current Systems	The vendor should clearly define an extraction approach that minimizes performance impact on legacy systems that may still support active clinical or operational workflows.
Communication Cadence	The vendor should provide a main point of contact, regular status reporting, clear escalation paths — and should proactively identify potential risks or challenges before they affect timelines or outcomes.
Ongoing Support	The vendor should provide a clearly documented support model, including response time commitments, dedicated contacts, and in‑house support resources.
Change Management Support	The vendor should provide training resources and user documentation tailored to clinical, HIM, and operational users, and should demonstrate a structured approach to adoption that accounts for varying levels of technical comfort across roles.

What to Evaluate

Timeline Discipline

The vendor should clearly define expected timelines based on organizations and projects of similar size and complexity and demonstrate a consistent record of on‑time delivery.

Impact on Current Systems

The vendor should clearly define an extraction approach that minimizes performance impact on legacy systems that may still support active clinical or operational workflows.

Communication Cadence

The vendor should provide a main point of contact, regular status reporting, clear escalation paths — and should proactively identify potential risks or challenges before they affect timelines or outcomes.

Ongoing Support

The vendor should provide a clearly documented support model, including response time commitments, dedicated contacts, and in‑house support resources.

Change Management Support

The vendor should provide training resources and user documentation tailored to clinical, HIM, and operational users, and should demonstrate a structured approach to adoption that accounts for varying levels of technical comfort across roles.

7. Long-Term Impact

The strongest archiving partners are consultative and collaborative. During initial meetings, they will ask about future plans and goals, including those related to consolidation and AI, to help build the most effective strategy for your needs.

M&A Readiness

Healthcare consolidation continues to accelerate, and legacy data archiving is almost always a critical workstream in the event of a merger, acquisition, or divestiture. Vendors that lack experience can introduce data integrity risk, delays, and added internal burden.

Execution Factor	What to Evaluate
Multi-Facility and Multi-System Experience	The vendor should have experience working across complex, multi-entity environments with disparate EHRs and ancillary systems, and should be able to reference prior M&A-related engagements of similar scale and complexity.
Patient Record Reconciliation	The vendor should have a clearly defined approach to patient mapping and record reconciliation across legacy and go-forward systems, ensuring data integrity is maintained throughout and after a consolidation event.
Redundant System Decommissioning Strategy	The vendor should present a clear, repeatable strategy for coordinated archiving and systematic decommissioning across all affected systems, including a defined process for identifying and resolving duplicate or unnecessary platforms post-merger.

What to Evaluate

Multi-Facility and Multi-System Experience

The vendor should have experience working across complex, multi-entity environments with disparate EHRs and ancillary systems, and should be able to reference prior M&A-related engagements of similar scale and complexity.

Patient Record Reconciliation

The vendor should have a clearly defined approach to patient mapping and record reconciliation across legacy and go-forward systems, ensuring data integrity is maintained throughout and after a consolidation event.

Redundant System Decommissioning Strategy

The vendor should present a clear, repeatable strategy for coordinated archiving and systematic decommissioning across all affected systems, including a defined process for identifying and resolving duplicate or unnecessary platforms post-merger.

AI and Analytics Readiness

When properly structured and accessible, archived data can support population health analytics, quality reporting, risk stratification, and AI development. Health IT leaders should evaluate whether a vendor’s archiving approach preserves data in forms that support future analytical use, in addition to long‑term retention.

AI/Analytics-Related Needs	What to Seek Out in a Vendor
A Foundation for Population Health and Quality Reporting	Complete, structured, and query-able historic data across patient populations.
A Foundation for Risk Stratification and Care Management	Longitudinal patient data spanning multiple EHR generations and care settings.
A Foundation for AI Model Training and Validation	Accurately transformed and complete data with defined governance controls.
A Foundation for Reporting and Analytics	Easy, auditable access to historical data for reporting, analytics, and downstream data export/interoperability requirements.

What to Seek Out in a Vendor

A Foundation for Population Health and Quality Reporting

Complete, structured, and query-able historic data across patient populations.

A Foundation for Risk Stratification and Care Management

Longitudinal patient data spanning multiple EHR generations and care settings.

A Foundation for AI Model Training and Validation

Accurately transformed and complete data with defined governance controls.

A Foundation for Reporting and Analytics

Easy, auditable access to historical data for reporting, analytics, and downstream data export/interoperability requirements.

Expert Note: AI in Archiving – A Value-Driven Approach

Vendors are increasingly incorporating AI into archiving solutions. Organizations should prioritize vendors that embed purpose-built AI directly into core workflows, ensuring it drives meaningful, measurable outcomes rather than adding complexity without clear return. AI in an archive should be evaluated by its ability to deliver against clearly defined business KPIs, such as reducing operational effort, lowering costs, or increasing efficiency.

Final Recommendations

Your archiving vendor decision will shape how your organization manages risk, controls costs, and accesses critical data for years to come. The vendors that deliver the most value understand the complexity, have walked this path with organizations like yours, and can demonstrate results.

Health IT leaders who approach vendor selection with rigor, are well positioned to execute successful projects that free up budget, reduce risks, and set their organization up for a successful, long-term health data management strategy.

Use the evaluation criteria in this guide as your RFP foundation, and look for a vendor with answers that reflect real operational experience, not just a polished pitch.

Helpful resources and next steps:

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

How Large Hospitals and Health Systems Successfully Completed Archiving Initiatives Executive Summary Large hospitals and health systems are supported by complex ecosystems of clinical, financial, and business platforms. As these environments evolve through growth, consolidation, and modernization, legacy data accumulates and carries long‑term clinical, operational, and regulatory obligations. The hospitals and health systems featured in...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

How Large Hospitals and Health Systems Successfully Completed Archiving Initiatives

Executive Summary

Large hospitals and health systems are supported by complex ecosystems of clinical, financial, and business platforms. As these environments evolve through growth, consolidation, and modernization, legacy data accumulates and carries long‑term clinical, operational, and regulatory obligations.

The hospitals and health systems featured in this report demonstrate how archiving can move beyond basic retention and become a strategic enterprise capability within large organizations. Each organization approached legacy data archiving with clear intent, aligning it with core priorities such as clinician efficiency, operational continuity, security readiness, and long-term data stewardship.

Collectively, these case studies show how large hospitals and health systems can:

Establish scalable, repeatable, enterprise‑level archiving strategies
Support clinicians, HIM, and compliance teams with efficient legacy data access
Consolidate fragmented legacy environments without disrupting care delivery
Strengthen security, auditability, and overall compliance posture across retained data
Create a sustainable foundation for future EHR, ERP, and other enterprise system upgrades

Archived Massive Data Volumes at Scale to Support an Enterprise-Wide Epic Transition

Organization: Large, integrated health system operating 15 hospitals, more than 150 clinic sites, and dozens of retail pharmacies.

Challenge:

As part of a large-scale transition from Cerner to Epic, the organization faced an
extraordinary volume of legacy data, including 32 terabytes of records, 75 terabytes of images, and 34 million scanned documents.
The scale and complexity of the data, combined with enterprise-wide access
requirements and zero tolerance for downtime, demanded a comprehensive and
highly scalable archiving approach.
The organization partnered with Harmony Healthcare IT to implement an archiving
strategy capable of supporting thousands of users, meeting retention requirements, and providing a stable foundation beyond the EHR migration.

Results:

Deployed one of the largest healthcare data archives in the U.S., supporting tens of
terabytes of legacy records, images, and documents.
Enabled enterprise-wide access to historical data for thousands of users, with
intuitive usability and strong adoption across clinical and operational teams.
Implemented the archive on time and on budget, delivering significant ROI through
system retirement, improved operational efficiency, and reduced legacy risk.

“Our archive is an enterprise-wide win that exceeded our expectations. It takes only minutes to learn how to use it and it will provide accessible and secure data storage forever. Best yet, there is significant ROI.”

Aligned Migration and Archiving Strategies to Support a Large-Scale Epic Conversion

Organization: Large, integrated health system operating seven hospitals and multiple practices.

Challenge:

As part of a large-scale conversion to Epic from Cerner and eClinicalWorks, the organization needed both a migration partner to move data into Epic and an archiving partner to securely consolidate and retain legacy data.
Given the size and complexity of the project—including the need to provide secure archive access to thousands of clinicians—the organization required a highly experienced partner capable of supporting both migration and long-term data access.
The organization selected Harmony Healthcare IT to support both migration and archiving needs.

Results:

Successful Epic migration, including 6TB of data migrated on time and on budget.
Migration of critical historical data into an active archive, with key capabilities such as A/R wind-down support and Single Sign-On.
Established a scalable, repeatable archive framework to support future EHR, ERP, and ancillary system retirements.

“As part of our EMR transition, the data conversion and archive were critical components to our success. Harmony Healthcare IT managed multiple projects, sometimes with changing requirements, and delivered the results we needed on time.”

Archived an Archive to Eliminate Legacy Risk and Accelerate ROI

Organization: Large, integrated delivery network with six hospitals and 230 ambulatory locations.

Challenge:

Following the acquisition of five hospitals and a systemwide Epic conversion, the organization was managing more than 300 legacy data silos across multiple platforms, including Cerner, Allscripts, GE Centricity, and Kronos.
At the same time, the organization’s previously selected archiving vendor was failing to meet critical deadlines. A major Cerner Millennium archive project was at risk, exposing the organization to $1.4M in recurring monthly fees if legacy data was not migrated on time.
The organization engaged Harmony Healthcare IT to take over the Cerner archiving effort and archive the previous vendor’s archive into a single, long‑term solution.

Results:

Successfully completed a large‑scale Cerner Millennium archive within a short, fixed deadline, avoiding ongoing legacy system fees.
Delivered a significant return on investment in the mid six figures over five years, excluding additional savings related to infrastructure, staffing, and maintenance.
Established a single, centralized repository for legacy data by archiving the previous vendor’s archive, creating a scalable foundation for future system retirements.

With the Harmony Healthcare IT archive, the organization benefits from comprehensive A/R wind‑down support, with billing interfaces maintained for re‑billing, collections, reporting, and compliance, and long‑term access to financial records preserved.

Responded to Urgent M&A Data Needs with a Centralized Archiving Strategy

Organization: Not‑for‑profit health system serving patients across 25 hospitals, more than 200 clinics, and a network of over 25,000 providers.

Challenge:

When the organization adopted Epic as its go‑forward EHR, it needed to retire and archive its legacy MEDITECH environment.
Ongoing M&A activity also introduced new data types and systems, including large volumes of historical gGastro EHR imaging data that were at risk of losing read‑only access under tight timelines.
The organization partnered with Harmony Healthcare IT to establish a centralized, long‑term archiving strategy that could adapt to evolving data retention needs while supporting secure access and regulatory compliance.

Results:

Established a centralized, scalable archiving strategy to support legacy system retirement following Epic adoption and continued M&A activity.
Enabled rapid response to emergent archiving needs, completing a gGastro EHR imaging archive ahead of schedule within two weeks and preserving access to historical patient data.
Strengthened data retention and governance through a long‑term partnership that reduced costs, improved security, and supported compliant access to archived records.

M&A activity can introduce urgent and unexpected archiving needs. A centralized archiving strategy and an experienced partner can help preserve access to legacy data and avoid disruption under tight timelines.

Franciscan Health

Modernized Legacy Archiving to Meet 21st Century Cures Act Requirements and Enhance Efficiency

Organization: Franciscan Health, a non-profit healthcare system with 12 hospitals and numerous clinics serving Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan.

Challenge:

The organization was operating with multiple regions functioning independently and relying on a homegrown, on‑premise archive.
While the archive had supported past needs, it was labor‑intensive, costly to maintain, and lacked the functionality required to support future compliance, interoperability, and patient access expectations.
The organization partnered with Harmony Healthcare IT for a modern, cloud‑based archiving strategy that could archive the current archive while also establishing a standardized approach for application rationalization.

Results:

Implemented a cloud‑based archive capable of archiving the existing homegrown archive and approximately 85 legacy applications, establishing a scalable foundation for lifecycle data management.
Enabled compliance with 21st Century Cures Act requirements through improved archive functionality, standardized application rationalization, and secure record delivery integration with Epic and MyChart.
Created a more sustainable, future‑ready data strategy by reducing internal maintenance burden and aligning archived data with broader analytics and reporting initiatives.

“We benefit from Harmony Healthcare IT’s mature guidance. With this guidance, we have become more disciplined and sharpened our focus to standardize our data management efforts. We are seeing outstanding results.”

Consolidated More than 100 Legacy Systems into a Single Enterprise Archive after Years of M&A

Organization: Large health system with 11 hospitals and more than 400 ambulatory locations.

Challenge:

After decades of growth through mergers and acquisitions, the organization was managing more than 100 legacy EHR and ancillary systems, including Cerner Millennium, MEDITECH, NextGen, Cerner Envision, OBIX fetal monitoring, and blood bank systems.
To improve efficiency and maximize return on investment, the organization sought to consolidate clinical, financial, and business records into a single, comprehensive archive while maintaining secure and compliant access to historical data.
The organization selected Harmony Healthcare IT to support a long-term archiving strategy focused on efficiency, compliance, and cost reduction.

Results:

Simplified clinician and HIM workflows, with secure access to historical records via Epic Single Sign‑On and more efficient, accurate release of information processes.
Improved security posture by retiring legacy systems and applications, reducing audit risk and limiting unauthorized access through centralized controls.
Achieved measurable cost savings by eliminating ongoing legacy system maintenance and upgrade expenses.
Established a future‑ready foundation to support evolving interoperability requirements and patient record access under the 21st Century Cures Act.

Eliminated $2M in Ongoing Legacy System Costs by Implementing an Active Archiving Strategy

Organization: Large, integrated health system with seven hospitals and approximately 500 locations.

Challenges:

After acquiring four hospitals and 83 physician practices, the organization was incurring significant ongoing costs from redundant legacy systems maintained solely for historical access.
With large volumes of legacy data spread across multiple vendor platforms, maintaining the status quo was not a sustainable long‑term strategy.
The organization engaged Harmony Healthcare IT to implement an active archiving strategy that would reduce costs, improve access to historical data, and support long‑term data governance.

Results:

Achieved more than $2M in cost savings to date by migrating legacy data into an active archive and reducing vendor management and IT support expenses.
Preserved continuity of care during rapid growth by consolidating legacy data into a single archive with Epic Single Sign‑On, enabling efficient access to historical patient records.
Consolidated and secured legacy data across 55+ acute and ambulatory sources, including more than 450,000 documents and 182TB of data.

To ensure record integrity, the organization validated data migrated from multiple legacy systems using Harmony’s built‑in customer validation tools. This streamlined a typically time‑intensive process.

Main Line Health

Simplified Legacy Data Management During a Dual EHR Period Following an Epic Migration

Organization: Nonprofit health system operating five hospitals and more than 200 ambulatory practices.

Challenges:

As part of a system‑wide EHR transition from Cerner to Epic, Main Line Health needed a clear strategy for managing legacy clinical, financial, and business records.
For a full year following the Epic migration, Cerner and Epic were used in tandem, increasing operational complexity and driving additional costs.
Main Line Health partnered with Harmony Healthcare IT to address its archiving needs, including support for accounts receivable wind‑down.

Results:

Successfully rationalized and archived more than 50 legacy applications following the Cerner‑to‑Epic transition, enabling system decommissioning and streamlining the IT portfolio.
Preserved access to complete historical legal medical records through integration with Epic, supporting clinical, financial, and compliance workflows.
Strengthened security and long‑term data governance by implementing an active archive with role‑based access controls, archived audit trails, and support for A/R wind‑down activities.

If your organization is pursuing M&A activity, engage an archiving partner as early as possible. Early guidance on time‑sensitive activities can help prevent unexpected delays during integration.

Archived an Archive to Eliminate Legacy Risk and Accelerate ROI

Organization: Large, integrated delivery network with six hospitals and 230 ambulatory locations.

Challenge:

Following the acquisition of five hospitals and a systemwide Epic conversion, the organization was managing more than 300 legacy data silos across multiple platforms, including Cerner, Allscripts, GE Centricity, and Kronos.
At the same time, the organization’s previously selected archiving vendor was failing to meet critical deadlines. A major Cerner Millennium archive project was at risk, exposing the organization to $1.4M in recurring monthly fees if legacy data was not migrated on time.
The organization engaged Harmony Healthcare IT to take over the Cerner archiving effort and archive the previous vendor’s archive into a single, long‑term solution.

Results:

Successfully completed a large‑scale Cerner Millennium archive within a short, fixed deadline, avoiding ongoing legacy system fees.
Delivered a significant return on investment in the mid six figures over five years, excluding additional savings related to infrastructure, staffing, and maintenance.
Established a single, centralized repository for legacy data by archiving the previous vendor’s archive, creating a scalable foundation for future system retirements.

“It’s been a true partnership working with Harmony Healthcare IT. Everything is 100% transparent. The energy, effort, and support from everyone involved is outstanding.”

Common Success Characteristics

Across the organizations featured in this report, large hospitals and health systems demonstrated several shared characteristics that enabled archiving initiatives to succeed at scale:

Recognition that legacy data archiving must evolve beyond basic retention to support enterprise‑wide clinical, operational, and compliance needs.
Early alignment with experienced partners capable of extracting, validating, and migrating complex legacy data volumes without disrupting care delivery.
Deep integration with go‑forward EHR platforms, including Single Sign-On with SMART on FHIR, Legacy Record Indicator, and MPI Management.
Efficiency-enhancing capabilities, such as Keyword Search and Secure Record Delivery, and automated processes that reduce manual effort for HIM, compliance, and revenue cycle teams.
Archiving strategies designed for repeatability and scale, supporting ongoing M&A activity, system modernization, and future technology initiatives.

Next Steps:

If your organization is navigating growth, consolidation, or system modernization, legacy data management remains a critical responsibility. The right archiving vendor can help you meet your security and compliance goals, while also enhancing efficiency and ensuring optimal clinical care.

Contact us to learn how organizations like yours have successfully made the switch.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

Introduction Top of mind for many health IT leaders and CIOs is transitioning to a modern ERP—an initiative that often coincides with broader EHR transitions. As organizations make these transitions, they also face pressure to reduce IT costs while maintaining secure, compliant access to legacy business records across HR, finance, and supply chain. For many...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

Legacy ERP Archiving & Decommissioning: A Guide for Healthcare Organizations

Introduction

Top of mind for many health IT leaders and CIOs is transitioning to a modern ERP—an initiative that often coincides with broader EHR transitions. As organizations make these transitions, they also face pressure to reduce IT costs while maintaining secure, compliant access to legacy business records across HR, finance, and supply chain.

For many healthcare organizations, archiving legacy ERP systems represents a significant opportunity in this regard. In fact, legacy ERP applications such as PeopleSoft, Lawson, and SAP often remain active long after organizations transition to a new ERP. This consumes valuable resources, creates security vulnerabilities, and results in unnecessary maintenance costs.

Over the past year alone, we’ve experienced a significant increase in the number of healthcare IT leaders who are asking: How can we retire our legacy ERP and eliminate the ongoing costs associated with it, without jeopardizing compliance with record retention requirements? This report provides answers.

Legacy System Decommissioning: A Growing Priority

80% of healthcare IT leaders say their budget for data management initiatives has increased over the past three years.
71% say legacy system consolidation/data archiving is among their top 3 data management priorities.

Source: November 2025 Survey of CHIME members.

ERP Archiving: Why Now?

ERP archiving projects are often driven by forcing events, such as mergers, acquisitions, or system replacements that result in redundant legacy systems. In other cases, organizations decide to act after years of maintaining legacy ERPs. They tally up the annual costs and security risks, and realize they’re allocating significant money and resources to maintain systems that deliver minimal value.

Regardless of the trigger, once organizations examine the numbers and benefits of ERP archiving, the business case is typically straightforward. Each legacy system requires ongoing:

Licensing costs
Infrastructure costs, including servers and storage
IT labor costs, including ongoing maintenance and security monitoring

Combined, these costs can reach hundreds of thousands of dollars annually for large healthcare systems.

Beyond direct financial costs, legacy ERP systems expose organizations to significant security and compliance risks. Outdated systems are more vulnerable to cyberattacks and less likely to support compliance needs, creating liability that grows more serious with each passing year. Other risks include workflow fragmentation, lost data access or control, and operational continuity problems.

We often find that hospitals and health systems have been paying maintenance on legacy ERPs for years without realizing the cost savings that can be achieved by archival. When we explore the total cost of keeping their old system running, that’s often the moment when decommissioning becomes a priority with a very quick return on investment.

The ERP Arching Process: What to Expect

Archiving a legacy ERP system is a structured process and knowing what to expect at each stage makes it much easier to plan, resource, and execute. While every organization’s environment is unique, most ERP archiving projects follow three key phases.

Discovery

During this process, your ERP archiving partner will thoroughly explore your legacy system and the data within it. This process includes:

Data volume analysis — How many years of data are involved? How many tables and records?
Data type inventory — What discrete and non-discrete data exists? What types? HR records, payroll history, benefits, credentialing, workforce management, materials management, supply chain, others?
Data strategy — Which data needs to be migrated to a new ERP (if applicable), which should be archived, and which should be purged?
Customization review — What custom fields, workflows, or modules need to be considered?
Access method determination — How will data be accessed and extracted for migration or archival?

ERP systems that have been in place a long time are likely to have accumulated several customizations, workarounds, and undocumented processes that can impact data extraction, so thorough discovery and assessment is crucial.

Extracting, mapping, and validating

Each ERP platform stores information differently and requires platform-specific expertise to ensure complete migration and archiving. Critical steps during this phase include:

Establishing search indexes across key fields
Configuring role-based access controls
Migrating data to a new ERP and validating data within it (if applicable)
Moving data to the archive and validating the data is represented correctly and completely
Testing search and retrieval functionality

Deployment and decommissioning

Once the archive is validated and users are trained, the legacy ERP system can be decommissioned.

Four Key Benefits of ERP Archiving:

Cut Costs — Eliminate licensing, maintenance, and infrastructure costs.
Bolster Security — Retire outdated, unsupported applications.
Increase Efficiency — Give authorized users instant access to historical data.
Maintain Compliance — Meet audit and regulatory requirements.

Selecting Your ERP Archiving Partner

Choosing the right archiving partner is one of the most important decisions in the ERP archiving process. Not all vendors have the technical depth or expertise required for a streamlined and successful project. The wrong choice can lead to delays, data integrity issues, and compliance gaps. When evaluating potential partners and solutions, seek out these core capabilities:

Capability

What to Look For

Capability

Long-term, secure data preservation

What to Look For

End-to-end encryption during data transfer and at rest
Secure, controlled, audit-ready storage
Version control and data integrity verification

Capability

User-friendly access & search

What to Look For

Intuitive, browser-based access
Categorization by topic and data type (HR records, financial transactions, supply chain data, etc.)
Robust search capabilities across multiple data points (employee name, ID number, date of birth, Social Security number, vendor name, transaction date, and more)
Sorting and filtering options to quickly narrow down results
SSO integration so users can access the archived application alongside active systems (when supported)

Capability

Compliance & audit readiness

What to Look For

HITRUST certification and HIPAA compliance
Role-based access and features
Comprehensive audit logging that tracks who accessed which records and when
Compliance with record retention requirements mandated by the IRS, Fair Labor Standards act (FLSA), U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and various state-level agencies

Capability

Experience & track record

What to Look For

More than 15 years experience specializing in healthcare data management
Chosen by top healthcare organizations for migration and archiving
Strong references from similar organizations with the same ERP
Proficiency across hundreds of software platforms, including ERP, EHR, and revenue cycle systems
Ability to handle financial, business, administrative, and clinical information

Looking for more guidance? Read “How to Select the Right ERP Archiving Partner: 16 Questions to Ask.”

Best Practices for ERP Archiving Success

While every ERP archiving project is unique, certain practices consistently make a measurable difference in outcomes. As you embark on your project, keep these best practices in mind:

Start early. The best time to engage with archiving specialists is when you begin considering an ERP transition or replacement, not when you see that a legacy system contract is coming up for renewal. Early engagement allows for proper discovery, planning, and execution without rushed timelines.
Think beyond a single system. If you’re archiving one legacy ERP, consider whether other systems (clinical, financial, and/or administrative) should also be retired and consolidated into the same archive platform. Economies of scale make multi-system projects more cost-effective. A strong archiving partner can help support these decisions.
Involve stakeholders early and often. The departments that rely on historical ERP data — including HR, finance, supply chain, and compliance — should have input on archive requirements, search capabilities, and access controls throughout the project.
Plan for the unexpected. Discovery almost always reveals data complexities or customizations that weren’t initially apparent. Partnering with a strong and highly experienced archiving vendor can help ensure unexpected findings have a minimal impact on your project and timeline.
Prioritize user experience. An archive that’s difficult to use will generate ongoing support burden and user frustration. Seek out an archiving platform that has an intuitive interface and Single Sign-On (SSO) capabilities.

We see a lot of organizations start with one ERP system and then realize they’ve got three, four or more other legacy applications that can be archived. With an effective archive platform in place, the process of decommissioning these systems becomes very streamlined.

Final Thoughts

Legacy ERP systems present a significant risk-reduction and cost-savings opportunity. These applications consume valuable IT resources and create security risks. By following a proven archiving approach, partnering with an experienced specialist, and leveraging best practices, you can successfully decommission your legacy ERP while maintaining compliant, accessible historical records.

Harmony Healthcare IT has supported hundreds of healthcare organizations through successful legacy system decommissioning and data archiving projects. Our team brings deep technical expertise across 715+ applications including ERP and EHR platforms, proven methodologies, and a track record of completing projects on time and within budget with the highest standards of quality.

If you are interested in exploring an ERP archiving project, schedule a consultation with our team. We’ll help you learn more about the opportunity and how it would benefit your organization.

FAQs

Why should hospitals prioritize legacy ERP archiving and system decommissioning?

Legacy ERPs consume significant budgets through licensing, maintenance, infrastructure, and IT labor — with costs sometimes reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars annually for large health systems. Legacy ERPs also pose cybersecurity and compliance risks due to outdated technology and unsupported software. Decommissioning legacy ERPs reduces cost, eliminates security vulnerabilities, and preserves compliant access to historical data.

What data from a legacy hospital ERP typically needs to be archived?

Common datasets include HR and payroll history, benefits information, workforce management records, financial transactions, supply chain and materials management data, and credentialing information.

How long does a hospital ERP archiving and decommissioning project usually take?

Timelines vary by system age, size, customization, and data complexity. Contact Harmony Healthcare IT to discuss your specific needs.

How do hospitals access data after a legacy ERP is shut down?

Users access historical data through a secure, browser-based archive platform with role-based permissions, search capabilities, and audit logging.

What security standards should an ERP archiving partner meet?

Healthcare organizations should look for partners that support HITRUST certification, HIPAA compliance, end-to-end encryption, role-based access, and comprehensive audit logging at a minimum.

How does ERP archiving support compliance and audit readiness?

A properly structured archive ensures long-term access to historical records and supports retention requirements from regulatory bodies. Audit trails document who accessed which data, ensuring organizations remain compliant even after the system is retired.

Can multiple legacy systems be consolidated into one archive platform?

Yes. Many hospitals that start with one ERP soon recognize the benefits of consolidating other clinical, financial, or administrative systems into the same archive platform. Multi-system consolidation reduces cost, simplifies data access, and standardizes audit reporting.

What should hospitals look for when selecting a legacy ERP archiving partner?

Key considerations include healthcare-specific expertise, experience across hundreds of platforms, validated methodologies, and strong client references.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

Executive Summary Healthcare organizations rarely revisit archiving decisions, until something goes wrong. Missed deadlines, incomplete extractions, poor usability, weak EHR integration, and security or compliance gaps often reveal that an archiving vendor is not meeting enterprise needs. The case studies in this report demonstrate that switching archiving vendors is not only possible—but transformational when executed...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

Executive Summary

Healthcare organizations rarely revisit archiving decisions, until something goes wrong. Missed deadlines, incomplete extractions, poor usability, weak EHR integration, and security or compliance gaps often reveal that an archiving vendor is not meeting enterprise needs.

The case studies in this report demonstrate that switching archiving vendors is not only possible—but transformational when executed with speed, experience, and a disciplined approach. Across health systems facing failed archive implementations, home-grown platforms that can’t scale, or vendors unable to support complex data types or Epic integration, these organizations reset their strategies and achieved stronger outcomes.

Together, these examples illustrate how health systems can:

Recover stalled or failed archiving initiatives
Consolidate and modernize legacy access without disruption
Improve clinician and HIM usability
Strengthen security, compliance, and auditability
Accelerate time to ROI while reducing ongoing system costs

Parkview Health: Switched Archiving Vendors to Get a Legacy Data Program Back on Track

Organization: Parkview Health, a not-for-profit community-based system with 15 hospitals and multiple locations in Indiana and northwest Ohio.

Switch trigger:

An initial archiving vendor failed to deliver on timelines, usability, and scope, leaving the organization dissatisfied with the process and outcome.
Rising legacy costs and long-term data-retention risk increased pressure to stabilize access.
The organization restarted its archive strategy by partnering with Harmony Healthcare IT to execute immediately and scale over time.

Results:

Consolidation of 50+ legacy systems into a single archive.
ROI achieved within 18 months.
Established a foundation to archive additional systems.

Key Takeaway: If an archiving initiative lacks structure, repeatability, or clear progress after implementation begins, switching vendors can be the fastest path to restoring momentum and long-term value.

AltaMed: Switched Archiving Vendors Mid-Project to Preserve Record Access

Organization: AltaMed Health Services, one of the nation’s largest independent FQHCs with multiple locations throughout California.

Switch trigger:

During a NextGen-to-Epic migration, the incumbent archiving vendor encountered implementation failures, including data accuracy issues and an inability to support specialized clinical imagery.
As the legacy EHR support agreement neared expiration, the organization risked losing access to historical records.
Leadership halted the project and transitioned to Harmony Healthcare IT.

Results:

Successfully decommissioned the legacy EHR without interruption to clinical or HIM access.
Enabled fast, in–context access to historical records through Epic Single Sign–On and intuitive workflows.
Strengthened cybersecurity posture by consolidating legacy data into a HITRUST environment.

Key Takeaway: If a vendor cannot confidently handle the full scope of your legacy data during implementation, it’s a signal to reassess before gaps, delays, or rework become unavoidable.

Franciscan Health: Switched from a Homegrown Archive to Modernize Compliance and Integration

Organization: Franciscan Health, a non-profit healthcare system with 12 hospitals and numerous clinics serving Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan.

Switch trigger:

Internally built archive that supported dozens of legacy applications became expensive to maintain, difficult to scale, and misaligned with evolving regulatory requirements.
Regional inconsistency and limited integration capabilities further complicated governance, privacy, and compliance needs.
The organization turned to Harmony Healthcare IT for a modern solution that could archive and supporting future application rationalization.

Results:

Migrated 85+ previously archived systems into a cloud-based active archive.
Enabled Epic and patient–portal integration for historical data access.
Achieved ROI with expanded functionality unavailable in the prior solution.

Key Takeaway: If an exiting archive can no longer scale, integrate, or support evolving compliance requirements, it’s a sign that a vendor change is needed.

Large IDN in the Northeast: Switched Archiving Vendors to Hit a Hard Deadline and Avoid Escalating Costs

Organization: A large, regional integrated delivery network with six hospitals and 230 ambulatory locations in the Northeast.

Switch trigger:

Acquisition of five hospitals and a transition to Epic created 300+ legacy data silos across clinical, financial, and administrative systems.
A hard deadline to migrate a large Cerner Millennium environment introduced $1.4 million in monthly fee risk if data was not archived on time.
The incumbent archiving vendor failed to meet delivery expectations, prompting the health system to pivot to Harmony Healthcare IT.

Results:

Met a non-negotiable deadline to archive Cerner Millennium, avoiding $1.4 million in monthly fees.
Achieved a mid six–figure ROI while consolidating multiple legacy systems into a single archive.
Enabled seamless Epic Single Sign–On access and supported accounts receivable wind-down within a centralized, secure platform.

Key Takeaway: If archiving timelines are tied to financial risk – such as legacy system decommissioning deadlines – vendor underperformance can quickly drive up costs and signal the need for change.

Common Success Characteristics

Across all four examples, health systems shared several defining traits that enabled successful vendor transitions:

Willingness to change course when an archive solution no longer met enterprise needs.
Experienced partners capable of extracting, validating, and migrating legacy data under time pressure.
Deep EHR integration capabilities, including Single Sign-On and patient context sharing.
Security and compliance treated as foundational requirements, not an add-on.
Clear financial outcomes achieved through aggressive legacy system retirement.

Execution models designed for repeatable processes, not one-time migrations.

Next Steps

If your organization is struggling with a legacy archive vendor—or managing an archive that no longer supports your clinical, compliance, or financial goals—these case studies show that change is both possible and practical.

A disciplined vendor transition can restore confidence, accelerate ROI, and position archiving as a strategic enabler for future growth, modernization, and M&A.

Contact us to learn how organizations like yours have successfully made the switch.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

EHR migration projects are extremely difficult to navigate, and unfortunately, even minor missteps can result in significant challenges. As with any project your hospital or health system takes on, knowing the key mistakes to avoid can significantly increase the likelihood of a streamlined and successful initiative. This guide is designed to arm you with that...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

9 Migration Missteps and How to Solve Them

This guide is designed to arm you with that knowledge. Developed based on our experience supporting hospitals and health systems of all sizes through migration projects and input from several of our customers, it identifies nine missteps that consistently threaten project success.

Whether you’re planning your first migration or recovering from a challenging previous experience, understanding these common pitfalls will help you navigate your next project with greater confidence and better results.

Looking for more resources to support your EHR migration project? Check out our Five EHR Migration Best Practices.

Misstep #1: The Late Engagement Trap

Migration projects fueled by EHR transitions have many moving parts, and project leaders sometimes kick off with their go-forward EHR vendor before consulting a migration partner. However, not involving a migration partner early often contributes to unrealistic timelines and unnecessary delays later.

Recommended Approach: Have an initial consultation with your migration partner before your EHR implementation planning begins. Your migration partner will help formulate a more comprehensive and detailed project timeline that aligns with your unique challenges, opportunities, legacy EHR(s) and other systems, and go-forward system.

Key Benefits:

Avoid setting yourself up for unrealistic deadlines or resource crunches
Identify internal and external staffing needs before they become bottlenecks
Complete time-sensitive activities before they cause project delays
Ensure data availability and any source vendor data requirements or nuances

Starting your EHR project without migration expertise is like diagnosing a patient without reviewing their medical history. You’re going to miss essential information required for an optimal outcome.

Misstep #2: The Cross-Department Blind Spot

Time and resources are strained at most hospitals and health systems, so everyone is searching for ways to streamline processes. Still, it’s critical to involve cross-department leaders in project planning. In fact, not involving these individuals can lead to significant blind spots that contribute to unexpected issues, changes, or additional scope throughout your project.

Recommended Approach: Form a cross-department migration team and begin meeting with them regularly before your project begins. This will result in a more comprehensive project plan, more proactive resource planning, and greater buy-in across departments.

Key Benefits:

Incorporate each department’s unique challenges, requirements, and specifications into your migration plan
Understand which staff members will be needed when, preventing last-minute scrambling
Ensure department owners feel heard, involved, and engaged

The most successful migrations are achieved when stakeholders actively contribute to designing the plan, rather than simply executing it.

Misstep #3: The Data Governance Team Disconnect

Most hospitals and health systems already have a data governance team in place — typically tasked with crafting organization-wide data policies, security requirements, and compliance standards. Still, some project leaders underestimate how critical early input from this team is to overall migration project success. When data governance teams are brought in late to projects and feel like secondary participants that often leads to slower question resolution and project delays.

Recommended Approach: As soon as your organization begins considering a migration project, set up a dedicated meeting with your data governance team. Ask them to share their preferred partnership strategies and recommended best practices. The team will appreciate your forethought and consideration, which will help foster strong engagement throughout the initiative.

Key Benefits:

Get faster responses to unexpected data anomalies that emerge during analysis
Make more informed decisions regarding aligning data needs and workflows across care settings
Ensure all data-related processes meet your organization’s internal standards

Data governance isn’t just about policies — it’s about having the right people ready to make critical decisions quickly. Without a highly engaged team, every data question can become a project delay.

Misstep #4: The Archive Afterthought

The top priority during migration projects is efficiently and securely migrating data to the go-forward EHR. But project leaders sometimes become so focused on migration that they overlook key decision-making related to data archiving. Failing to craft a strong data archiving strategy at the outset can lead to decreased user confidence, an incomplete and less intuitive data experience, and project inefficiencies.

Recommended Approach: Develop your legacy data archiving strategy at the same time you develop your data migration plan. This will support more proactive and informed discussions related to your archiving approach. Working with a migration partner that also specializes in legacy data archiving will help ensure optimal decision-making throughout your project.

Key Benefits:

Streamline workflows by aligning data analysis, decisions, and planning across both initiatives
Ensure regulatory compliance while maintaining efficient access to historical records
Enhance user confidence through clear communication about data availability and archive access

When any hospital makes the decision to move forward with a new EHR, the discussion around what data will be converted versus what needs to be archived must be at the forefront of decision-making.

Misstep #5: The Scope Evaluation Trap

The migration and archiving vendor market has expanded significantly, giving organizations multiple partners and approaches to consider — each with different levels of comprehensiveness, maturity, and expertise. While some vendors offer accelerated approaches, they may exclude certain data types, such as treating unstructured documents like scans and images as a different workstream. More limited approaches may even result in lost data that can never be recovered.

Recommended Approach:

Look for a partner that can help you identify the best approach for your unique needs. If one vendor’s timeline is significantly shorter than others, ask how they achieve those results and what trade-offs are involved.

Key Benefits:

Find a partner that provides realistic project timelines and costs
Benefit from comprehensive approach that meets your unique needs
Avoid hidden fees and timeline delays

Look under the hood when evaluating partners. Some overpromise on capabilities and timelines, while others present quotes with hidden fees that surprise you later. It’s a good sign when a potential partner is asking you lots of questions during initial meetings — that means they’re considering all factors to give you a comprehensive project estimate.

Misstep #6: The Internal Resource Surprise

Migration projects impact multiple departments beyond IT — including clinical, HIM, legal, and compliance. Missteps in communicating resource needs and timing to these departments often lead to project delays because critical staff are unavailable during key phases.

Recommended Approach: Map out your internal staffing resource needs by project phase and department. Then, communicate those requirements to department leaders well in advance. Also, regularly update them throughout the project regarding upcoming needs.

Key Benefits:

Ensure milestones are completed on schedule
Enable department leaders to plan more proactively around migration needs
Foster more project buy-in among department leaders and their teams

When you give department leaders weeks or months of notice about their or their team members’ involvement, they can plan accordingly. When you give them days, they have to scramble.

Misstep #7: The Skills Shortage Gamble

Many organizations underestimate the specialized skills and bandwidth required for successful EHR migrations. Failing to adequately plan for external resource needs and support, however, often results in project delays and quality issues.

Recommended Approach: Work with your migration partner to identify all required skills and specialized roles needed. Then, ask for their recommendations regarding how to fill any internal gaps with external expertise.

Key Benefits:

Avoid delays caused by learning curves or resource bottlenecks
Access specialized expertise that may not exist internally,
Allow internal teams to concentrate more on their core responsibilities

There has definitely been a shift to single sourcing migration and data archive partners vs. using internal or labor augmentation for migration separate to archive. This makes complete sense as there is definitely efficiency gained in selecting a single partner who becomes knowledgeable about the systems and data to be migrated and ultimately decommissioned post archival.

Misstep #8: The External Hosting Slowdown

Many organizations opt to have their migration partner host the data conversion working environment externally within their partner’s own infrastructure. This approach, however, often results in longer project timelines due to data transfer delays and system compatibility issues.

Recommended Approach: Set up the migration data conversion working environment within your own infrastructure as close to your production infrastructure as possible. An effective migration partner can work with you to ensure proper setup and configuration so that everything goes smoothly.

Key Benefits:

Eliminate data transfer delays between external systems
Work directly within your network environment for optimal compatibility and performance
Maintain greater control over your data throughout the conversion process

Every data transfer introduces incremental time, which accumulates significantly in later migration rounds as data volumes grow or files require adjustments. Streamlining the process by removing extra steps is essential for maintaining speed and efficiency.

Misstep #9: The Blindsided Leadership Problem

Migration projects follow predictable patterns, with certain phases consistently presenting greater difficulties than others. Not preparing stakeholders for these more challenging project phases — ahead of time — often results in unnecessary anxiety and resistance when issues arise.

Recommended Approach: Work with your migration partner to identify which project phases are most likely to generate complications, then proactively communicate these expectations to key stakeholders.

Key Benefits:

Ensure temporary setbacks are seen as normal parts of the process
Keep leadership calm and informed during more challenging phases
Approach challenges constructively rather than reactively

Small-scale or initial testing almost always presents technical opportunities during migration projects to learn and adapt from. When stakeholders know this upfront, they see problems as expected challenges rather than failures.

Ready to Avoid These Migration Missteps?

Whether you’re in the early planning stages of an EHR migration or need support with a project already underway, our team has the experience to help you sidestep these common pitfalls and ensure your project goes smoothly from start to finish.

Contact us today to discuss your migration needs and learn how our expertise can help ensure your project achieves the outcomes your organization deserves.

FAQs

How early should we engage a migration partner in our EHR project?

Ideally, you should consult with a migration partner during your EHR vendor selection process, not after. This allows them to help shape realistic timelines and identify potential challenges before contracts are signed.

What's the biggest difference between archiving and migrating data?

Migration moves data into your new EHR system where it’s actively accessible, while archiving stores data in a separate system for compliance and reference purposes. Archiving is typically faster and less complex than full conversion and migration.

How do we know if a migration vendor is making unrealistic promises?

Be suspicious of vendors whose timelines are significantly shorter than others or who claim they can complete everything by go-live. Ask specific questions about unstructured document handling and comprehensive backup procedures.

Which departments should be involved in migration planning beyond IT?

Include clinical leadership, Health Information Management (HIM), legal, compliance, finance, and any departments that heavily rely on specific data workflows. Each brings unique requirements that impact project success.

Should we host the migration environment internally or externally?

Internal hosting typically provides better performance and faster data transfers, reducing overall project timelines. However, it requires adequate infrastructure and technical resources to set up properly.

What's the most challenging phase of a typical migration project?

Small-scale testing consistently presents technical hurdles because it’s the first-time converted data is tested in real-world scenarios. Preparing stakeholders for this challenging phase prevents unnecessary concern.

How much external expertise do we typically need for a migration project?

This varies by organization size and internal capabilities, but most projects require specialized skills in data mapping, conversion programming, and testing that don’t typically exist internally. Your migration partner can help assess your specific needs.

What happens if we don't involve our data governance team early enough?

Late engagement typically results in slower decision-making, potential rework to meet compliance standards, and frustrated team members who feel excluded from important decisions. Early involvement prevents these issues and accelerates project timelines.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

Introduction Healthcare is entering a period of significant system transition, with nearly 4 in 10 hospital IT leaders reporting that their hospitals are planning an EHR migration project in 2026. That’s according to a late 2025 survey of 21 CHIME members. EHR migrations represent some of the highest-stakes projects hospital IT leaders undertake. Done well,...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

Introduction

Healthcare is entering a period of significant system transition, with nearly 4 in 10 hospital IT leaders reporting that their hospitals are planning an EHR migration project in 2026. That’s according to a late 2025 survey of 21 CHIME members.

EHR migrations represent some of the highest-stakes projects hospital IT leaders undertake. Done well, they can improve clinical workflows, enhance data accessibility, and increase efficiencies. Done poorly, they can result in cost overruns, data loss, compliance problems, and patient safety risks.

The survey findings suggest that while hospital IT leaders understand what’s at stake, many are heading into these projects with concerning gaps in confidence and preparation.

Read on to learn what’s driving EHR migration activity, where confidence gaps exist, and how hospital IT leaders can ensure successful transitions.

Key Findings

Migration Activity

62% of all respondents cite EHR implementations, conversions, and migrations as one of their top 3 data management priorities in 2026.

Nearly 40% of hospital IT leaders are planning an EHR migration project in 2026. Another 24% are planning one in 2027.

Confidence Gaps

Only 57% are confident they can complete projects on budget.

Only 48% are confident they can complete projects without major problems.

Top 3 Project Concerns

#1. Cost
#2. Staff resources
#3. Data integrity/loss

Methodology

The survey of 21 CHIME members took place in October and November 2025. Respondents included CIOs, CTOs, CISOs, and other IT leaders from academic medical centers, integrated delivery networks, community hospitals, and health systems ranging from under $500M to over $10B in annual net patient revenue.

Migration Activity and Drivers

Nearly 40% of hospital IT leaders are planning EHR migration projects in 2026, and of those, about half anticipate their initiative will begin in the first half of the year.

When will your next EHR migration/transition project occur?

In the first six months of 2026: 19%
In the final six months of 2026: 19%
In 2027: 24%
In 2028: 10%
After 2028: 29%

What do you think will most drive the need for that project?

Merger and/or acquisition: 38%
New EHR implementation: 33%
Other: 29%

Other responses included system optimization and related enterprise software initiatives.

Overall, 62% of all respondents cite EHR implementations, conversions, and migrations as one of their top 3 data management priorities in 2026 — reflecting not just the 38% actively executing projects this year, but also the 24% planning for 2027 migrations.

Peer Insights

When asked to share their top migration project advice with peers, many survey respondents offered feedback that underscores the importance of thorough and early planning. One counseled: “Plan early. Make sure you optimize timelines.” Another emphasized: “Bring all stakeholders to the table as soon as possible to identify risks and objectives.”

Where Confidence Falls Short

Hospital IT leaders express reasonable confidence in their ability to meet migration timelines, but that confidence erodes when asked about budgets and avoiding major problems.

How confident are you that you can complete migration projects ….

On-time:

Highly confident: 71%
Somewhat confident: 24%
Not at all confident: 5%

On-budget:

Highly confident: 57%
Somewhat confident: 33%
Not at all confident: 10%

Without major problems:

Highly confident: 48%
Somewhat confident: 38%
Not at all confident: 14%

Only 48% are highly confident they can complete migrations without encountering problems such as unexpected downtime, data loss, or compliance issues — meaning most hospital IT leaders are heading into high-stakes projects expecting significant challenges.

The budget confidence gap is also concerning, with only 57% highly confident they can stay on-budget. That’s particularly notable given that 81% report their budgets for health data management initiatives have increased over the past three years. The persistent budget concerns, even amid increased investment, reflect the escalating complexity of EHR migrations and the specialized expertise they require.

Peer Insights

Hospital IT leaders stressed the importance of careful migration partner selection. One survey respondent advised: “Get an experienced partner.” Another was more specific: “Grill the vendor on their migration processes and experiences.”

81% of hospital IT leaders report their budgets for health data management initiatives—including data consolidation, migration, and archiving projects — have increased over the past three years, with one-third reporting significant increases of more than 10%.

Cost, Resource, and Integrity Concerns

When hospital IT leaders identify their top concerns about migration projects, three challenges dominate: cost, staff resources, and data integrity.

What are your top 3 migration project concerns?

Cost: 100%
Staff resources: 86%
Data integrity/loss: 62%
Downtime: 33%
Compliance: 19%

Every hospital IT leader surveyed cited cost as one of their top 3 concerns. Costs tend to spiral for reasons that include unexpected vendor fees for additional work or services, increased internal resource demands, and delays that prevent timely legacy system decommissioning.

Staff resource concerns, cited by 86% of respondents, rank nearly as high. Migration projects require support from not just IT, but from clinical, HIM, legal, and compliance teams, all while these individuals manage their day-to-day workloads.

Data integrity and loss concerns, cited by 62% of respondents, reflect the high-stakes nature of these projects. Incomplete or inaccurate data migrations can create confusion, inefficiencies, and jeopardize patient care.

Peer Insights

Survey respondents emphasized the critical role of strong organizational structure in addressing cost, resource, and data integrity concerns. One stated: “Ensure you have multidisciplinary project teams with tight governance structure.” Another advised: “Gain executive support, identify your organizational owners, and assist them with execution.”

57% of hospital IT leaders say their organization is increasing spend on EHR-focused projects, such as implementations, migrations, and upgrades, in 2026.

How to Navigate the Top Migration Challenges

The survey reveals where hospital IT leaders face the greatest challenges during migration projects. Based on these findings, here are four strategies to enhance confidence and address the most common concerns:

Partner Right to Stay on Budget

If you’re among the 100% of hospital IT leaders with cost as a top concern: Seek out an experienced migration partner that can provide realistic cost expectations based on your unique needs and circumstances. When evaluating potential partners, ask about their approach to scope management and how they prevent unexpected costs from emerging later in the project. Also ask references if and why they experienced any unexpected costs during their projects.

Plan Ahead to Address Resource Constraints

If you’re among the 86% concerned about staff resources, work with your migration partner to create detailed documentation of internal and external resources required during each phase of your project. Once that information is compiled, discuss external resource needs with your migration partner and provide regular updates to department leaders to help them plan internal resources around competing demands.

Prioritize Partners That Ensure Data Quality

If you’re among the 62% with data integrity concerns, prioritize partners that can provide detailed information on their data integrity strategies. Ensure the partner has deep experience with your specific source and go-forward EHRs, follows proven validation processes, and provides transparency into data quality issues if they emerge.

Engage Migration Partners Early

If you’re among the 52% who aren’t highly confident about avoiding major problems, consult with a migration partner as early as possible. Early partner engagement helps identify time-sensitive activities — like vendor data release requests that can take months to fulfill — before they become project delays. Experienced partners can also help you communicate more effectively with stakeholders about upcoming challenging phases, maintaining confidence and buy-in throughout the project.

Looking for more guidance on EHR migrations? Read our new report: EHR Migration Best Practices: 5 Proven Strategies to Complete Your Project On-Time and On-Budget.

About Harmony Healthcare IT

Harmony Healthcare IT is a data management firm that transforms critical data into secure, compliant, and accessible assets — whether that is converting data to a new platform or securing it in an archive. Since 2006, we have worked with over 700 healthcare software platforms across clinical, financial, and administrative systems. Our commitment to reliability and innovation empowers healthcare organizations to manage their data with confidence.

Learn more.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

Summary

Introduction: Hospitals and health systems are increasingly moving to decommission legacy systems and archive decades of historical data. A recent survey of CHIME members found that 43% say their organization will undertake a legacy data archiving project in 2026 — with projects often driven by cost reduction pressures, security concerns, and the need to optimize...

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Tips, Guides, News & More

Sign Me Up

Introduction:

Hospitals and health systems are increasingly moving to decommission legacy systems and archive decades of historical data. A recent survey of CHIME members found that 43% say their organization will undertake a legacy data archiving project in 2026 — with projects often driven by cost reduction pressures, security concerns, and the need to optimize IT resources.

For organizations planning to archive data from MEDITECH legacy systems, these archiving initiatives present unique complexities. MEDITECH’s proprietary architecture, decades of version evolution, and extensive customization capabilities — particularly in older MEDITECH platforms — require specialized expertise spanning both extraction and archiving processes.

This report outlines five critical considerations for hospitals planning MEDITECH archiving projects — insights that will help you avoid common pitfalls and position your project for success.

Insights Grounded in MEDITECH Expertise

This report draws on perspectives from extraction, conversion, and archiving specialists at Harmony Healthcare IT and Blue Elm, a Harmony Healthcare IT company that specializes in MEDITECH data solutions. The combined expertise offers readers a comprehensive view of MEDITECH data extraction challenges and healthcare archiving best practices.

Referenced survey data come from a survey of CHIME members commissioned by Harmony Healthcare IT and conducted independently by CHIME in November 2025.

Consideration #1: Proprietary Architecture

The proprietary nature of MEDITECH systems makes data extraction fundamentally different from other EHR platforms, in which data access is more open. Older MEDITECH versions in particular (MAGIC and Client/Server) have a hierarchical data structure.

“MEDITECH systems are built differently than other EHRs,” explains John Mackey, Founder and President of Blue Elm, a Harmony Healthcare IT Company. “The proprietary data structures and hierarchical organization mean you can’t use standard extraction approaches that work with other platforms.”

This affects every aspect of a MEDITECH data archiving project, from extraction to conversion to archiving. Organizations that underestimate this fundamental difference often experience repeated extraction failures and delays before recognizing the need for a specialized partner.

Many organizations have reached out to us after spending months struggling to extract data because they didn’t partner with specialists with the necessary depth of MEDITECH knowledge and specialized extraction tools.

Consideration #2: Hidden Data Complexity

Extracting data for archival purposes is challenging enough on its own, but the scope of data involved in these projects makes it even more complex. In many cases, MEDITECH migrations include decades of data accumulated across multiple versions, such as Client/Server, MAGIC, 6.x, and Expanse. Organizations must also account for archival packs, archived data and reports, and even data stored on optical disks.

“Many MEDITECH hospitals have 20 to 30-plus years of data spanning multiple versions,” says Alex Walker, VP of Development at Blue Elm. “Hospitals often underestimate the technical challenge involved in extracting data cleanly from these systems. All of this needs to be extracted and converted into a consistent format within the legacy data archive.”

Another hidden data complexity involves the archiving of data from ancillary systems that interface with MEDITECH, such as LSS, PTCT, and Picis, and OnBase, says Jennifer Fortin, EVP of Business Development at Blue Elm. “End users see the data as MEDITECH data, but behind the scenes, our extraction pulls from a variety of areas.”

When you’re archiving data from MEDITECH systems that have been in place for decades, legacy storage formats like tape can be part of that landscape. Our team specializes in understanding, extracting and preserving MEDITECH data to ensure access and compliance.

Consideration #3: Unstructured Content

A major data complexity in MEDITECH platforms is the sheer volume of unstructured content — things like free-text documentation, clinical reports, and scanned documents. These require specialized handling during extractions and conversions.

“There’s structured information like a patient’s name or field data, but there’s also a lot of unstructured information like free text in reports,” Walker explains. “Being able to navigate that and make it useful is extremely important during these projects.”

MEDITECH-specific document types — such as those stored in MEDITECH Text and Document (MTDD) or MEDITECH Text Archive (MTA) formats — require particular expertise, says Amanda Mais, FACHDM, VP of Data Integration at Harmony Healthcare IT.

“These formats combine scanned content with text-based documentation in ways that are unique to MEDITECH environments,” she explains. “With MEDITECH’s unique document formats, you need experts who understand exactly how to extract and preserve that content.”

Our goal is to preserve the look and feel of unstructured content so archive users see it as it appeared in the native MEDITECH system. If a lab tech is looking at an inquiry report, the content and layout should closely match the MEDITECH output.

Case Study: Magnolia Regional Health Center

When Magnolia Regional Health Center in Mississippi upgraded from MEDITECH MAGIC to 6.1, it faced more than 20 years of legacy data across multiple MEDITECH versions, eight legacy applications, and 350,000+ patient records.

The organization partnered with Harmony Healthcare IT to implement an active archive solution providing patient-centric access with single sign-on from its current MEDITECH system. The solution also included A/R wind-down capabilities, eliminating manual data entry for legacy financial records.

“Harmony’s project management methodology is stellar in the industry,” said Brian Davis, Magnolia Regional Health Center’s CIO. “The team is knowledgeable and passionate about what they do.”

Consideration #4: Customization Management

Beyond the challenges of proprietary architecture, version evolution, and unstructured content, there’s another hurdle: customization. MEDITECH systems, particularly older versions, are highly customizable in terms of workflows, clinical documentation, and data structures. While this flexibility benefits system users, it complicates extraction and archiving projects.

“Organizations can really tailor the types of workflows within Meditech — everything from lab ordering processes to radiology exam impressions,” says Walker. “All of that needs to be accounted for when extracting and converting to an archive.”

The Harmony Healthcare IT and Blue Elm teams have encountered creative examples of this customization challenge. In one case, a hospital had repurposed a field in a patient listing screen to track whether patients had a knee replacement or other device implant. The field’s original purpose had nothing to do with medical devices, but staff had developed a workaround to ensure this information could be captured and viewed in patient encounters.

“Depending on the amount of customization applied within the legacy system, extraction and archiving efforts may require additional requirements gathering, development work, and validation,” says Mais. “This ensures custom workflows and data structures are properly captured and represented in the archive.”

We often say, ‘If you’ve seen one MEDITECH hospital, you’ve seen one MEDITECH hospital.’ We find something different in every system.

Consideration #5: Institutional Knowledge

One key consideration when embarking on MEDITECH archiving projects is the amount of institutional knowledge regarding how the system was configured, customized, and is currently used. As systems age and staff turnover, the team members familiar with these topics often leave or retire, taking that critical knowledge with them. This is especially problematic for systems that haven’t been actively used in years.

“There’s often the question of how people are actually using the MEDITECH system today,” says Walker. “It may end up being just one person in the medical records department, for example, who knows how to log into the system and knows the five things they do with it. The broader institutional knowledge becomes lost.”

To address this challenge, archiving project leaders should combine whatever internal knowledge remains with deep system expertise from a highly experienced archiving partner. Those combined insights can then help determine the optimal archiving approach.

“Gather any internal subject matter experts or institutional knowledge, and then provide system access to your archiving partner,” Mais recommends. “Your archiving partner’s specialists will have extensive experience navigating these systems and can investigate to understand what data exists, where it exists, and what other systems are connected.”

CIOs or CFOs may see the line item for what they’re paying for the legacy system, and they may see the security risk of keeping it around, but they may not fully understand the implications of offlining that system — including who’s using it and in what capacities.

Positioning Your Hospital for Success

Archiving legacy data from MEDITECH systems presents unique complexities that require specialized expertise and careful planning. Organizations that approach these initiatives with a clear understanding of these needs, and that partner with vendors with proven experience, are much more likely to experience a streamlined project.

The most effective MEDITECH extraction and archiving partners offer end-to-end services, from initial assessment and extraction through conversion, archive implementation, and legacy system decommissioning. This comprehensive approach ensures continuity and accountability throughout the initiative.

“One of the biggest advantages of working with a partner experienced in both MEDITECH extraction and archiving is the seamless handoff between project phases,” explains Liddell. “When the same team understands both your source system and your archive requirements, you avoid errors and delays that can occur when working with multiple vendors.”

Ready to discuss your MEDITECH archiving project? Contact Harmony Healthcare IT today to learn how our expertise in MEDITECH extraction, conversions, and archiving can help your organization achieve a successful transition.

Eight Key Questions to Ask When Evaluating Vendors

How many MEDITECH archiving projects have you completed across different versions?
What extraction methodology do you use — proprietary tools, manual reporting, or RPA?
Do you extract directly from transactional environments or rely solely on the data repository?
How will users access archived MEDITECH data from our current EHR?
What is your approach to data validation and ensuring extraction quality?
How do you manage system resources during extraction to avoid disrupting operations?
Can you provide references from organizations with similar MEDITECH environments?
What is your typical timeline for a MEDITECH archiving project of this size and complexity?

Survey Snapshot: The Growing Case for Legacy Data Archiving

The benefits of a well-executed MEDITECH archiving project extend far beyond compliance and cost savings. Organizations gain improved data accessibility, reduced IT maintenance burden, and the ability to fully decommission legacy systems with confidence. A Q4 2025 survey of 21 CHIME members underscores the growing recognition of legacy data archiving’s value:

When do you anticipate your next legacy data archiving project will take place?

In 2026: 43%
In 2027: 14%
In 2028: 10%
After 2028: 33%

Does decommissioning legacy applications represent a cost savings opportunity for hospitals and health systems?

Yes – Significant or some cost savings opportunity: 19%
Yes – Some savings opportunity: 52%
Yes – Minimal savings opportunity: 10%
No – No savings opportunity: 19%

What are the top factors driving your legacy data archiving decisions?

Cost reduction efforts: 67%
Data access and interoperability concerns: 57%
Security concerns: 52%
IT labor burden concerns: 52%
Compliance concerns: 43%
Inefficient release of information processes: 29%

Source: Q4 2025 Survey of 21 CHIME members commissioned by Harmony Healthcare IT and conducted independently by CHIME.

FAQS

Why is MEDITECH data archiving more complex than other EHR archiving projects?

MEDITECH data archiving is more complex because MEDITECH uses a proprietary architecture with hierarchical data structures that require specialized extraction tools and expertise. Unlike more open EHR platforms, MEDITECH’s unique data formats, particularly in older versions like MAGIC and Client/Server, demand partners who understand the system’s intricacies at a technical level. Standard extraction approaches that work with other EHR systems cannot be used for MEDITECH environments.

How long does a MEDITECH archiving project take?

MEDITECH archiving project timelines vary significantly based on data volume, number of MEDITECH versions involved, level of customization, and ancillary systems that need to be addressed. Organizations with 20-30+ years of data across multiple MEDITECH versions should expect longer timelines.

What should I look for in a MEDITECH archiving partner?

When selecting a MEDITECH archiving partner, look for proprietary extraction tools (not RPA), production environment extraction capabilities, comprehensive understanding of MEDITECH-specific data types (including MTDD and MTA formats), user-friendly archive access with role-based permissions, and integrated archive capabilities with single sign-on (SSO) and EHR integration. Partners should have extensive experience across multiple MEDITECH versions and ideally include former MEDITECH employees on their team.

Can users access archived MEDITECH data from a new EHR system?

Yes, users can access archived MEDITECH data from a new EHR system with the right archive solution. Look for vendors that offer single sign-on (SSO) capabilities and direct integration with your current EHR (such as Epic or Cerner), allowing clinicians to access historical MEDITECH data with a single click from within their current workflow. This integration transforms the archive from a compliance obligation into a valuable clinical tool.

What are MTDD and MTA files in MEDITECH?

MTDD (MEDITECH Text and Document) and MTA (MEDITECH Text Archive) are MEDITECH-specific document formats that combine scanned content with text-based documentation in ways unique to MEDITECH environments. These formats require specialized expertise to extract and preserve properly, as they don’t exist in other EHR systems. Without proper handling, organizations risk losing access to decades of scanned records and clinical documentation.

Should MEDITECH data be extracted from production or the data repository?

MEDITECH data should be extracted directly from production environments rather than relying solely on the MEDITECH data repository (DR). Production environment extraction ensures complete data capture, including information that may not exist in the DR. This approach is considered the most effective extraction methodology by MEDITECH specialists.

What is the difference between proprietary extraction tools and RPA for MEDITECH?

Proprietary extraction tools are specifically developed software designed for MEDITECH environments, offering efficient and accurate data extraction with minimal infrastructure requirements. RPA (robotic process automation) approaches typically involve screen scraping or mimicking user actions, which are more error-prone, time-consuming, require more infrastructure, and increase the chance of incomplete extractions. MEDITECH archiving specialists recommend proprietary tools over RPA.

How much money can hospitals save by decommissioning legacy MEDITECH systems?

Hospitals can save significantly by decommissioning legacy MEDITECH systems through reduced ongoing maintenance fees, server infrastructure costs, IT support resources, and security management expenses. According to a November 2025 survey of hospital CIOs, 65% view decommissioning legacy applications as a cost savings opportunity, up from 58% in 2023. The exact savings vary by organization based on system complexity and age.

Healthcare IT tips, guides, news & more delivered to your inbox

Learn More

New System Implementation

Technology Consolidation

A/R Wind Down

Cybersecurity

Data Interoperability

Altera & Veradigm (Allscripts)

athenahealth

eClinicalWorks

Epic

ERP Systems

Greenway

Lab and Pathology

MEDITECH

MEDHOST

NextGen

Oracle Health (Cerner)

TruBridge (CPSI)

Other Archives

Information Technology

Finance

Clinical

Health Information Management

Accounts Receivable

Research

Legal & Compliance

Human Resources

Mergers & Acquisitions

MEDICAL FACILITIES/SPECIALTIES OVERVIEW

Acute - Hospitals & Health Systems

Ambulatory Surgery Centers

Blood Banks & Laboratories

Correctional Health Facilities

Dental & Oral Surgery

Emergency Medical Services

Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHC)

Imaging Centers

Infectious Disease

Mental & Behavioral Health

Occupational Therapy

Payer

Pediatric Health

Perinatal and Fetal Monitoring

Physician Groups

Post-Acute - Home Health, Hospice

Post-Acute - Long-term Care/SNF

Radiation and Oncology

Retail Pharmacy

Rural Health Providers

Specialty Pharmacy

Student Health

Telehealth

Vision

Women's Health

Extraction

Migration / Conversion

Hot Storage - Active Archive

Warm Storage

Cold Storage

Managed Care Oversight

Data Contributors

AI Developers

Researchers

resources

EHR Migration Best Practices: 5 Proven Strategies to Complete Your Project On-Time and On-Budget

Article

10 Data Management Steps for Success Before, During and After M&A

resources

Health Data Management: Parkview Health aims to enhance efficiency with archiving solutions

resources

EHR Migration Best Practices: 5 Proven Strategies to Complete Your Project On-Time and On-Budget

Summary

Join Fellow Healthcare IT Pros

Is Your Archive Keeping Up?

Ten Common Signs that Indicate Vendor Underperformance

How to Determine Whether Your Archiving Approach Meets Modern Standards

Understanding the Difference Between a Vendor and a Strategic Partner

What a True Partner Provides

Rethinking Common Vendor Switch Concerns

The Cost of Staying Put

What to Expect During an Archiving Vendor Transition