IRB+ migration

Move active IRB work out of IRB+ without losing the institutional record.

A credible migration starts with the actual operating surface: studies, users, forms, letters, reviewer work, determinations, training dates, fees, devices, drugs, reportable events, audit context, and the data your team still needs for inspection readiness.

Target the IRB+ buyer moment

Replacing legacy workflow

Move from database-plus-email operations to a modern review portal.

Online submission upgrade

Offer PI intake, admin triage, reviewer routing, and packet generation.

Migration path

Bring over studies, people, documents, forms, letters, and audit context.

Migration scope

What should move, what should map, and what should stay archived.

The goal is not a blind database copy. The goal is a validated working system where active studies can move forward, historical context remains accessible, and administrators can explain every status transition after cutover.

Source grounding

This comparison uses public IRB+ pages reviewed on May 26, 2026. Product fit and pricing should be confirmed directly with each vendor before purchase.

Active and archived study records

PI, coordinator, reviewer, chair, admin, and read-only users

Submission forms and local intake fields

Determination letters and reusable templates

Continuing reviews, amendments, adverse events, and reportable events

Training dates, conflict data, fees, devices, drugs, HUDs, and audit context

Migration process

A controlled cutover beats a rushed replacement.

Step 1

Inventory

Map active studies, users, roles, forms, determinations, templates, fees, training dates, and export needs.

Step 2

Normalize

Clean spreadsheet and document exports into ConductCompliance study, review, document, and audit structures.

Step 3

Parallel run

Run a pilot board, reviewer queue, and PI submission flow before cutting active traffic over.

Step 4

Cutover

Move active submissions, preserve historical reference data, and keep the legacy archive accessible during validation.

Validation

Prove the migration with one real board cycle.

Run a pilot with a representative mix of new submissions, continuing reviews, amendments, adverse events, letter generation, reviewer assignments, and administrative reports. Keep status mapping explicit so old and new terms are explainable.

For institutions replacing IRB+ online submission, validate PI intake and coordinator triage before broad rollout. For institutions using IRB+ mainly as an admin database, validate reporting and audit retrieval first.

See why ConductCompliance is a modern IRB+ alternative

Migration intake

Send a sample export, your active study count, reviewer/user count, and whether online submission is already live. We will map the first import plan around your real workflow.

Start the conversation

Bring one export. We will map the first migration slice.

Start with active studies and the few reports your administrators use every week. That is enough to expose the real mapping decisions.

Migration plan