Data migrations become hardest when historical evidence must remain both usable and appropriately constrained.
A fixed retirement date can conflict with the depth of verification needed before old records disappear.
Who you’d be doing this for
“If we can’t show where a report detail came from, ‘migrated’ isn’t good enough.”
Bianca Cardoso · Compliance Program Manager
Supports employer screening programs that need defensible handling of criminal-report records and correction history.
What is at stake
The old encrypted store retires on a fixed date, but 6.9% of historical artifacts can't yet be tied to a source record and a retention decision. You have to weigh speed against proof that reports stay reproducible.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- retirement deadline vs. verification depth
- consolidated access vs. least privilege
- bulk transformation vs. report reproducibility
- automated reconciliation vs. independent proof
- legacy shutdown vs. exception resolution
Why Checkr
At Checkr, this can matter because criminal-report artifacts may need to remain explainable across changing systems and retention obligations.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 5 more at Checkr, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.