You have a quote from the new vendor for the software subscription, and somewhere in the proposal is a line for "data migration" that is either suspiciously cheap or suspiciously vague. You want to know what the real number looks like before the partners vote.
We do not publish a price list for case management migrations because the honest answer is a range, and the range depends on five things you can assess yourself. Here is what they are, how each one moves the number, and how to read a quote once you have one.
The five variables that set the price
Record volume. The count of contacts, matters, tasks, calendar entries, time entries, and invoices. Volume matters less than people expect for the transfer itself and more for the reconciliation, because every table has to tie out. A firm with a few thousand matters and a firm with fifty thousand pay for very different amounts of checking.
Custom fields and matter types. This is the biggest driver. A firm running one practice area with a handful of custom fields is a standard job. A firm with a dozen matter types, each with dozens of custom fields accumulated over years, is paying for mapping work that no script can do. Each field is a decision, and each decision is a conversation.
Document storage. Where documents live, how many there are, and how well folder names correspond to matters. Migrating linked cloud storage is cheaper than migrating native storage, and both are cheaper than untangling a server share with no naming convention.
Number of integrations. Every connected tool (intake CRM, accounting, e-signature, calendar sync, automation platform, phone system) has to be reconnected and retested against the new platform. Some will need to be rebuilt because the new system exposes different triggers.
Data cleanup. Duplicates, orphaned records, inconsistent status values, and unreconciled trust balances. Cleanup is billed by the hour almost everywhere, and it is the variable a firm has the most control over before the project starts.
Why data cleanup is the line nobody budgets for
Vendor migration quotes usually assume clean data. They will load what you give them into the fields you tell them, and if the source has three versions of the same client, the destination will too. The cleanup either happens before the migration, during it as a change order, or after it as an ongoing annoyance that staff work around forever.
The cheapest option is before. Run duplicate reports in the old system, close matters that are actually closed, fix the matter types that were entered as free text, and reconcile trust to the penny. Some of that is work your own staff can do with a spreadsheet and a few afternoons. It reduces the migration bill directly, and it shortens the schedule we describe in how long a case management migration takes.
Vendor migration versus independent migration
Most platforms offer a migration service, sometimes included with an annual subscription and sometimes priced separately. What is included is usually the transfer of standard fields from a known source system: contacts, matters, calendar, tasks, and often documents. What is usually not included is custom-field design, integration rebuilds, trust reconciliation, staff training, and post-launch fixes.
An independent consultant charges for the parts the vendor does not do, and often coordinates the vendor's part as well. The value is in the mapping decisions, the reconciliation, and having someone accountable for the whole project rather than for one data load. For a simple move with clean data, the vendor service alone may be enough. For a firm with years of custom configuration, the vendor load is the easy half.
Firms considering a move like MyCase to Clio often ask which path fits, and the answer usually turns on how many custom fields and integrations they have built up.
Where firms overspend and where they underspend
Overspending tends to happen on migrating everything. Every closed matter from fifteen years ago, every document, every email that was ever filed. Much of that can be archived to PDF and CSV for a fraction of the cost and still satisfy retention and conflict-check needs.
Underspending tends to happen on reconciliation and hypercare. Skipping the line-by-line trust comparison to save a few hours is how firms end up with a bar complaint. Cutting the post-launch support window is how a field that mapped wrong stays wrong for six months because nobody owned fixing it.
The other common underspend is training. A perfectly migrated system that staff do not know how to use produces the same complaints as a bad migration, and the firm blames the data.
Reading a migration quote
Ask the quote to name the source system and the destination, list the data types included, and state whether documents and email are in scope. Ask whether the price covers one test migration or several, and what a second round costs. Ask whether custom fields are mapped one-to-one or redesigned, and who makes those decisions.
Ask what happens if the trust ledger does not reconcile, whether integrations are included, and how long post-launch support runs. A quote that cannot answer those questions is not cheap, it is incomplete. The same discipline applies to any professional services quote a firm evaluates, including the questions we suggest in how much law firm SEO costs.
Questions we get
Is it cheaper to migrate only open matters?
Usually, yes, and often substantially. Closed matters get exported for retention and conflict checks, and only active work moves into the new system with full fidelity. The saving comes from less mapping, less reconciliation, and fewer documents to transfer. The trade-off is that staff cannot pull up an old matter inside the new platform without going to the archive.
Can we do the migration ourselves to save money?
Some firms do, especially small ones with a single practice area and a tech-comfortable administrator. The risk is not the import button. It is the decisions around it: how fields map, what gets cleaned, and whether trust ties out. If you go that route, at least have someone independent check the reconciliation before you turn off the old system.
Why do quotes for the same migration vary so much?
Because they are quoting different scopes. One includes cleanup, mapping workshops, three test loads, and a month of support. Another is a single data transfer. Line the scopes up side by side before comparing the numbers.
If you want an honest read on what your migration would involve, tell us what you are working with.