Success Story
The Cheaper Rebuild They Didn’t Choose: Moving a Nonprofit off Sage Intacct Across Its Year-End, Ahead of the Audit
Treatment Advocacy Center was leaning toward rebuilding its books in QuickBooks Online from last year’s audited trial balance, with history left in spreadsheets. It chose a full transaction migration instead. Here is how SaaS Direct moved the full FY26 year and July 2026 activity in two passes and delivered four days ahead of plan.
Customer Overview
Treatment Advocacy Center (TAC) is a national nonprofit based in Alexandria, Virginia, founded in 1998, working to eliminate barriers to treatment for people with serious mental illness.
Its finance function is small. Payables ran through Bill.com, and credit card activity was imported from Nexonia. In Intacct, TAC used the general ledger, receivables and payables with department and project dimensions, and tracked donor restrictions in a dimension of their own.
The Intacct subscription was the one its former outsourced accountants had used, and TAC planned to discontinue it after the move. The move would span its June 30, 2026 year-end, and the audit would test that year, so whatever it moved had to carry the full year’s activity, not just an opening position.
Organization Snapshot
- Headquarters
- Alexandria, Virginia
- Organization
- National nonprofit
- Founded
- 1998
- Fiscal year
- July to June
- Migration
- Sage Intacct → QBO Adv.
- Deadline
- Audit expected mid-August 2026
The Challenge
For a small nonprofit, rebuilding from the audited trial balance looks sensible: the prior year is closed, the numbers are audited, and a CPA can key opening balances quickly. TAC was leaning that way in early May, on cost and because its financials are not very complex.
The catch is the calendar. The move was planned for July 2026, just after the June 30 year-end, and the audit would test the year that had just closed. In our assessment, an opening-balance rebuild would have put a single starting position in QuickBooks Online and left a full year of invoices, bills, payments and journals to be rebuilt by manual entry, without the links between each invoice and its customer and each bill and its vendor.
From: Sage Intacct
- Subscription held by the former accountants
- GL, AR and AP; departments and projects
- Donor restrictions tracked as a dimension
- Bill.com for payables
- Audit expected in mid-August
To: QuickBooks Online Advanced
- FY26 and July 2026 at transaction level
- Original invoice and bill types preserved
- Departments as classes; projects migrated
- Open AR and AP as of June 30, 2025
- Signed off one day after final delivery
This is not unique to TAC. Any organization that changes systems around a year-end, with an audit of that year still ahead, faces the same choice. An opening-balance rebuild is cheaper at the start, but the cost comes back as re-keyed activity and a thinner audit trail for the year being audited.
What TAC needed
Off the old firm’s subscription
A system of its own, so the Intacct subscription could be discontinued.
Current year intact
Every FY26 transaction in QuickBooks Online, not re-keyed or summarized.
Done before the audit
Go-live no later than July 30, ahead of an audit expected in mid-August.
Is this your situation?
Rebuild or migrate: check before you decide
- You are changing systems around a fiscal year-end
- An audit will test a year you have not yet moved
- Someone has proposed rebuilding from last year’s audited trial balance
- Your current system sits on a subscription you do not control
If two or more apply, the choice between rebuild and migration is the decision that matters, not the software.
Designing the Migration
Six alternatives were considered and set aside, three before the project started and three during it.
| Option considered | Why it was set aside |
|---|---|
| CPA rebuild from the audited June 30, 2025 trial balance, history in Excel | Lower cost. In our assessment, links between invoices and customers and between bills and vendors would not carry over, and a full year of activity would be rebuilt by manual entry before the audit. |
| Opening balances only, with SaaS Direct | Offered as the lower-cost option in the fixed quote. Full history was chosen because it preserves original transaction types and drill-down. |
| Historical package for years before July 2025 | Offered as an add-on, not taken. TAC keeps its own records for prior years, and invoice detail also lives in Bill.com. |
| First cutoff at March 31, 2026 | May was already closed, so the first load moved to May 31 to reduce the volume left for the final load. |
| Deleting inactive duplicate vendors and customers | Some inactive records could have transactions tied to them, and records cannot be deleted once in QuickBooks Online. Instead, only records with transactions in the migration period came across, with a “-1” suffix where names clashed. |
| Entering transactions in QuickBooks Online during the freeze | Declined while the final migration ran. New activity was tracked outside both systems until the freeze ended on July 27. |
Chosen: full transaction history from July 1, 2025, in two passes
Open AR and AP as of June 30, 2025, then every transaction from July 1, 2025 with its original type. The first pass ran through May 31, 2026 and was delivered July 13 for review; the final load, extracted after the last working day in Intacct, added June 1 to July 17 activity and later edits and was delivered July 23. Departments became classes, projects were migrated, and the chart of accounts migrated as-is, with renaming left for after go-live.
Before July 1, 2025
Prior years kept in TAC’s own records; open AR and AP carried in at June 30, 2025
July 2025 to May 2026
First pass: delivered July 13 for review
June 1 to July 17, 2026
Final load, plus later edits: delivered July 23
The Solution
The engagement ran on a paid assessment, written decisions, and two passes against a freeze. Five working disciplines carried it:
Complexity Assessment
Two Priced Options
Before quoting, SaaS Direct profiled the Intacct company: 146 accounts, 486 customers, 431 vendors, 39 departments, 26 projects, a donor restriction dimension and 6,381 transaction records from July 1, 2025. The result was a fixed-fee quote with two options, opening balances only or full transaction history.
Extraction Package
With Written Discussion Points
The extraction package went to the client June 16 with written discussion points on duplicates, inactive records, unneeded accounts and aging differences. It was re-issued June 23 on May 31 data and reviewed with the client on June 25.
Decisions in Writing
Confirmed July 2
The client confirmed each design decision in writing: which records to carry, how to treat unneeded accounts and how to handle duplicate names.
Two Passes and a Freeze
Review Load, Then Final Load
The first load was delivered July 13. July 17 was the last working day in Intacct and the final extraction ran July 18. The freeze held until July 27, and the final load was delivered July 23.
Post Go-Live Guidance
Answers in Writing
After go-live we answered the client’s follow-up questions in writing, including how to track donor restrictions and fiscal-year settings in QuickBooks Online.
Commercial structure
Paid complexity assessment, then a fixed-fee quote with two options: opening balances only, or full transaction history. Milestone billing tied to client sign-off on the extraction package and approval of the QuickBooks Online test environment.
Obstacles, and How We Resolved Them
Five things went wrong or needed a decision. How a migration partner handles those is a better guide than a clean story, so here they are in full.
Extraction access sat with the former accountants
Intacct extraction runs through custom reports. The client’s own admin rights could not enable them; the former outsourced accountants, who administered the subscription, had to.
Resolution. Enabled May 26, about a week after we raised it. The assessment findings followed the next day.
The first cutoff moved
The agreed scope put the first cutoff at May 31, with March 31 as a fallback if May was not closed. The first extraction package used March 31 data.
Resolution. Once the client confirmed May was closed, the package was re-issued on May 31 data. The extraction package date shifted by three days; the freeze and final delivery dates held.
Historical data changed after extraction
After the first extraction, adjustments were made to historical data in Intacct, which created reconciliation differences during validation.
Resolution. Flagged on July 9. TAC stopped editing pre-cutoff periods, the changes were picked up in the final load, and the client signed off on the final trial balance and schedules on July 24.
We left the wrong fiscal year in QuickBooks Online
QuickBooks Online was set to a January to December fiscal year, so the FY26 trial balance showed the wrong period. The client caught it on final delivery.
Resolution. Corrected to July to June the same day. The client re-ran the FY26 trial balance and confirmed it matched.
Donor restrictions had no direct QuickBooks Online equivalent
Intacct tracked donor restrictions in a dimension of their own. QuickBooks Online has no standard field for it.
Resolution. Not migrated. After go-live we set out two workarounds in writing, locations or custom fields, with the limits of each.
Validation
On the first load, TAC sampled transactions between Intacct and QuickBooks Online and confirmed it was ready to proceed. On the final load, the client reviewed the trial balance and related schedules before signing off.
Differences between the Intacct AP and AR agings and the trial balance were explained by the client in the discussion points: timing of credit card activity imported from Nexonia, and an auditor deferred-revenue entry reversed in July.
Checks on each load
- Trial balance, Intacct against QBO, at June 30, 2025
- Balance sheet at each fiscal year-end
- Income statement at each fiscal year-end
- AR and AP agings at June 30, 2025 and at each cutoff: May 31 and July 17, 2026
- Final load: FY26 trial balance for July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026, re-run after the fiscal-year fix
FY26+ July 2026
July 1, 2025 through July 17, 2026 at transaction level with original types; open AR and AP as of June 30, 2025; chart of accounts as-is; customers and vendors with transactions in the period; departments as classes; projects; terms.
Pre-FY26own records
Years before July 2025 were not migrated and no archive was purchased; TAC keeps its own records. Employee data, custom fields and the donor restriction dimension were outside the migration.
The Results
Live Before the Audit
TAC is running its books in QuickBooks Online Advanced, delivered inside its July 30 go-live commitment and ahead of the audit expected in mid-August.
The Audited Year at Transaction Level
FY26 and July 2026 activity came across with original invoice and bill types, not re-keyed from an opening balance.
Delivered Four Days Early
The final load was delivered July 23 against a July 27 plan, and the freeze ended on schedule on July 27.
Signed Off in a Day
The client signed off on the final trial balance and schedules on July 24, one day after delivery.
Project timeline
Agreement signed June 2, final load delivered July 23, four days ahead of plan and inside the July 30 go-live commitment.
Donor restrictions were not migrated; we set out two workarounds in writing after go-live.
- April 16First discovery call
- May 8TAC orders the complexity assessment
- May 26Custom reports access enabled
- May 27Assessment findings and fixed quote
- June 1Full transaction history chosen
- June 2Agreement signed
- June 16Extraction package and discussion points
- June 25Revised package reviewed with client
- July 2Design decisions confirmed in writing
- July 13First pass delivered
- July 17Last working day in Intacct
- July 23Final load delivered (plan: July 27)
- July 24Client sign-off
- July 27Freeze ends; live in QuickBooks Online
Why It Worked
Making the Rebuild Trade-Off Explicit
Before TAC committed, the cost of an opening-balance rebuild was set against what it would lose for the year being audited.
A Fixed Quote with Options
The assessment produced two priced options, so TAC chose the scope knowing the price of each.
Cutting the First Load at the Last Closed Month
Moving the first cutoff to May 31 left about seven weeks of new activity for the final load.
A Client Who Answered Fast
Design decisions came back in writing, often the same day, which kept a small team’s project on schedule.
Owning Our Mistake
When the fiscal-year setting was wrong, it was fixed the same day and the trial balance re-run.
Weighing a Rebuild from Your Audited Trial Balance?
Talk to us before you decide. We will show you what a transaction migration keeps that an opening-balance rebuild loses.
Download
Download the Case Study
Keep this story as a PDF. The case study summary is built for sharing with your team; the full case study covers every design decision, obstacle and validation step.
Case Study Summary
The problem, the solution, how we validated it and the result, on two pages.
Download PDFFull Case Study
The complete account: starting position, the options we set aside and why, obstacles and how we resolved them, validation and timeline.
Download PDFFrequently asked questions
Rebuild from audited trial balance or migrate full-year transactions before an audit?
If the audit will test the year you are moving, migrate the transactions. An opening-balance rebuild is cheaper at the start, but the year being audited then has to be re-keyed. TAC was leaning toward a rebuild in early May, then chose full transaction history from July 1, 2025 so its FY26 activity arrived with original invoice and bill types.
What audit-trail risk does an opening-balance rebuild create?
A rebuild puts a single starting position in QuickBooks Online and leaves a full year of invoices, bills, payments and journals to be re-entered by hand, without the links between each invoice and its customer and each bill and its vendor. That is a thinner audit trail for exactly the year the auditors will test.
How do you migrate Sage Intacct across a June 30 year-end into QBO Advanced?
Carry open AR and AP at the prior year-end, then every transaction since, in two passes. For TAC, the first pass ran through May 31, 2026, and the final load added June 1 to July 17 activity after the last working day in Intacct. The final FY26 trial balance, July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026, was checked against Intacct before sign-off.
What happens to donor-restriction dimensions that QBO doesn’t have?
QuickBooks Online has no standard field for an Intacct donor-restriction dimension, so at TAC it was not migrated. After go-live we set out two workarounds in writing, locations or custom fields, with the limits of each.
How quickly can a nonprofit sign off after final load?
TAC signed off on the final trial balance and schedules on July 24, one day after the final load was delivered on July 23, four days ahead of the July 27 plan.
About SaaS Direct
SaaS Direct is a financial systems migration specialist helping businesses and accounting firms transition between legacy and modern platforms. With a proprietary migration code repository spanning 88+ platforms and a disciplined delivery methodology, SaaS Direct handles the technical complexity of accounting transitions so finance teams and advisory firms don’t have to.
Changing Systems Around a Year-End, with an Audit Ahead?
Talk to us before you decide between a rebuild and a migration. The year being audited is the one that has to come across intact. The destination in this story is QuickBooks Online Advanced, not Intuit Enterprise Suite.
Related: Sage Intacct migrations · QuickBooks Online migrations · All success stories · BLP Intacct story · Metro Denver Homeless Initiative Intacct story · Sage Intacct exit checklist
Book a Sage Intacct Migration Review
Pick a time that suits you. You will speak with a migration lead who has moved this exact path, not a call center.