Tarleton State University (Texas A&M University System) — Office 365 cross-tenant migration (2021)
Contracted — countersignedFirst-pass editionTarleton State University (Texas A&M University System) · 2021 · Project ID EPC-2021-TARLETON-T2T
Evidence record: Tarleton State University (Texas A&M University System) evidence record with redacted documents and SHA-256 hashes
Last updated by Errin O'Connor, Founder & Chief AI Architect, EPC Group
Contracted — countersigned. Tarleton State University (Texas A&M University System) engaged EPC Group (O'Connor Enterprise Group, Inc., doing business as EPC Group) for Office 365 cross-tenant migration — Purchase Order AB0678222 and the university's Addendum to Vendor's Contract Form executed by both parties December 22, 2021 (contract C2022-6466). Project ID EPC-2021-TARLETON-T2T. The engagement was completed and paid in full (EPC Group accounts-receivable record).
First-pass edition. The facts in the verification line and the project-facts table come from the documents named there. The engagement narrative below is written by EPC Group from the engagement type and the documented scope, is marked EPC-reported, and is pending review by Errin O'Connor. Delivery status comes from EPC Group's accounts-receivable record as stated by Errin O'Connor on 2026-10-15; no other result is claimed that the documents or project records do not support.
Summary
In 2021, EPC Group completed Office 365 cross-tenant migration for Tarleton State University (Texas A&M University System) on Microsoft 365, Exchange Online, SharePoint Online, OneDrive, Teams, led by EPC Group's senior architects addressing users, mail and content split across tenants after an organizational change, with duplicated administration and inconsistent policy. The work ran through EPC Group's delivery lifecycle as EPC Group describes its engagements: assess, modernize, govern, operate, enable. The client accepted the deliverables and paid in full, per EPC Group's accounts-receivable record; EPC Group reports that its objectives for the engagement were met. Verification: Contracted — countersigned; Delivered — paid in full (EPC Group accounts-receivable record; EPC-reported). What the documents establish, and what they do not, is stated in Evidence and limitations below.
Project facts
| Field | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Client | Tarleton State University (Texas A&M University System) | document |
| Industry | Higher education | document / public record |
| Engagement date | December 21–22, 2021 | document |
| Work | Office 365 cross-tenant migration (788-hour statement of work) | document |
| Microsoft products | Microsoft 365; Exchange Online; SharePoint Online; OneDrive; Teams | document / scope |
| Scope unit | Purchase Order AB0678222 and the university's Addendum to Vendor's Contract Form executed by both parties December 22, 2021 (contract C2022-6466) | document |
| EPC Group role | Consulting and delivery under the instrument named above | document |
| Lead architect | EPC Group senior architects (the published instrument does not name the lead; EPC-reported) | EPC-reported |
| Delivery status | Completed; invoiced and paid in full. Source: EPC Group's accounts-receivable record (paid invoices on file, not published because they carry commercial terms), stated by Errin O'Connor on 2026-10-15. EPC Group treats payment as acceptance; no client acceptance record is published for this engagement. | EPC AR record (EPC-reported) |
| Verification class | Contracted — countersigned; Delivered — paid in full (EPC Group accounts-receivable record; EPC-reported) | Evidence Center convention |
| Evidence record | https://www.epcgroup.net/evidence/tarleton-state-university-office-365-cross-tenant-migration-2021 | — |
| External source | none published yet | — |
| Project ID | EPC-2021-TARLETON-T2T | EPC Group |
What the document states
Purchase Order AB0678222 (December 21, 2021; revision 1 December 22, 2021), line item 'Tenant Migration' per EPC Group's 788-hour Office 365 cross-tenant migration statement of work; the Addendum to Vendor's Contract Form executed by both parties on December 22, 2021.
Starting environment (EPC-reported, first pass)
An engagement of this type begins with two Microsoft 365 tenants with separate identities, domains, mailboxes, OneDrive and SharePoint content, Teams, licensing and security configuration, and a university's requirement to keep services available through the move. The specific inventory for this engagement is held in EPC Group's project records and will replace this paragraph when published.
Business problem (EPC-reported, first pass)
Users, mail and content split across tenants after an organizational change, with duplicated administration and inconsistent policy.
EPC Group's responsibility
Cross-tenant migration planning and execution under the contracted statement of work: identity and domain moves, mailbox migration, OneDrive and SharePoint content migration, Teams migration, security and compliance alignment, cutover support and knowledge transfer.
Technical decisions (EPC-reported, first pass)
The decisions this kind of engagement turns on are domain and identity cutover sequencing, mailbox and content migration tooling and batching, Teams and channel mapping, license and policy alignment in the target tenant, and coexistence during the move. The decisions actually taken for Tarleton State will be stated here from the project record.
Delivery sequence (EPC-reported, first pass)
Typical sequence for this engagement type: discovery and inventory → identity and domain plan → pilot → mailbox waves → OneDrive and SharePoint waves → Teams → domain cutover → source-tenant retirement. Dates and acceptance for this engagement will be stated from the project record.
Results
| Metric | Baseline | Observed result | Period | Source | Verification class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scope delivered against the instrument | as contracted | Completed; invoiced and paid in full | engagement period | EPC AR record (paid invoices on file; not published) | Delivered — paid in full (EPC Group accounts-receivable record; EPC-reported) |
| Client acceptance | — | Deliverables accepted; EPC Group's objectives met | close-out | payment in full + EPC-reported | Delivered — paid in full (EPC Group accounts-receivable record; EPC-reported) |
| Primary technical outcome (migration completeness, platform live, deliverable detail) | pending | pending project record | — | project record | pending |
| Service interruption during cutover (where applicable) | planned window | pending | cutover | cutover log | pending |
Completion, acceptance and payment are stated from EPC Group's records; the technical rows stay pending until the project record is published. No figure is invented.
Client perspective
The client accepted the deliverables and paid every invoice in full. No client quotation is published on this page; where a client has given a written statement or a review, it is linked from the evidence record.
Evidence and limitations
The evidence record at https://www.epcgroup.net/evidence/tarleton-state-university-office-365-cross-tenant-migration-2021 publishes the document(s) with redacted page images and SHA-256 hashes. The instrument establishes the client, the supplier, the service and the date as stated above. It does not by itself establish delivery dates, volumes, acceptance or outcomes; those require the project records referenced in the Results table. Completion and payment in full are established by EPC Group's accounts-receivable record (paid invoices on file; not published because they carry commercial terms).
Lessons for similar organizations (EPC-reported)
- Map every workload to a target before moving any of them; the cutover order is the project.
- Domain moves are the riskiest step; rehearse them.
- Policy alignment in the target tenant is not optional cleanup — it is the point.
Related service
Microsoft 365 tenant-to-tenant migration ·Talk to a senior architect
Author: Errin O'Connor, Founder & Chief AI Architect, EPC Group · Published: 2026-10-15 · Substantively updated: 2026-10-15.