Imports and migration

How to route migration-certainty questions conservatively

The safest route depends on whether the question is still general migration interpretation or has become a consequence-heavy certainty question that needs guided review.

Who this is for: Users deciding whether a migration question still belongs in help content or now needs a narrower route.

Last reviewed 2026-04-30 · Source of truth: broader help library · Languages: en, es

Article metadata

Product area: imports and migration

Owner: Migration and import workflows

Parity reviewer: Bilingual launch review

Retrieval-ready: Yes

What to expect next

Use help to interpret migration uncertainty categories, then switch lanes when the next answer depends on church-specific evidence or consequence.
Choose the narrowest truthful route that preserves migration risk clearly instead of stretching broad help beyond what it can support.

When help content is still enough

Stay in help when the question is still about general migration posture, readiness framing, or how to interpret ordinary uncertainty without forcing a church-specific decision too early.

Help is useful for reading the category of uncertainty more correctly, not for pretending a church-specific mapping or cleanup judgment is already complete.

When the question needs a narrower route

Move into guided evaluation or structured follow-up when the migration question now depends on export shape, mapping consequence, cleanup burden, or stakeholder confidence that public help cannot safely settle on its own.

The right route should preserve the real consequence clearly without implying complete downstream migration maturity behind the scenes.

Escalation path

If the migration question now needs church-specific certainty, move into guided review and preserve the exact decision risk instead of implying public help is enough.

Related next steps

Read migration review basics Read how to route a product-gap question Open Spanish version Back to help center