Microsoft Project Online is retiring: Alternatives and migration checklist
Key Takeaways
Project Online fully retires September 30, 2026. New PWA site creation is blocked from April 1, 2026.
Microsoft Planner is not a like-for-like replacement. It’s built for lightweight task coordination, not portfolio governance, resource leveling, or financial tracking.
If work runs in Jira, planning should too – otherwise plan-vs-actual drift continues in a different tool.
Tempo replaces Project Online natively inside Jira – Structure Advanced for portfolio hierarchy, Capacity Planner for resource forecasting, Timesheets for time tracking, and Financial Manager for financial governance.
Microsoft Project Online is a cloud-based project and portfolio management platform built on SharePoint, used by enterprise PMOs to manage resources, schedules, financial tracking, and reporting. Microsoft ended new license sales on October 1, 2025, and will retire the platform entirely on September 30, 2026 – after which all data access ends. The main alternatives are Microsoft Planner (lightweight, no Jira integration), Project Server SE (on-premise), Dynamics 365 Project Operations (full platform swap), and Jira-native tools like Tempo that keep planning and execution in one system.
If your organization runs delivery in Jira but uses Project Online for portfolio views, resource management, timesheets, or reporting – this is your transition to manage. The real work is getting there without losing the governance and reporting your teams depend on.
This guide covers the retirement timeline, where Microsoft’s newer tools fall short, and how to plan a migration that doesn’t cost you ground.
Microsoft Project Online retirement timeline
Most teams are planning around September 30, 2026 – the date Project Online stops being available entirely. That deadline is real, but it’s not the right one to plan around.
April 1, 2026 was the earlier, more disruptive date. As of that date, Microsoft has blocked creation of new PWA sites, and sites that are unused or empty may lose access before September. Teams still mid-migration are already working against a hard wall.
The timeline:
October 1, 2025: Microsoft ended sales of Project Online-only licenses for new customers.
April 1, 2026: New PWA site creation blocked; unused and empty sites risk early loss of access.
September 30, 2026: Project Online fully retires; all access ends.
The platform technically keeps running until September. But “end of life” has real infrastructure consequences before then. Project Online runs on SharePoint-based components – Project Web App (PWA) workflows, custom integrations, approval chains. When Microsoft stops investing in that architecture, maintaining those processes gets harder fast.
If your PMO runs approvals or financial sync through SharePoint, waiting until late 2026 creates serious bottlenecks. After retirement, PWA data won’t be accessible. Teams that wait risk losing access to project plans, historical data, and workflow configurations they built over the years.
Microsoft’s replacement: Planner and Project for the Web
As Microsoft phases out Project Online, it’s pointing teams toward Microsoft Planner. Project for the Web – Microsoft’s newer cloud-based planning tool – is being folded into Planner as well. The advanced features live in premium tiers: Project Plan 3 and Project Plan 5.
Planner is built for simplicity. It works well with Teams and handles lightweight task coordination. That’s also the tradeoff.
For teams used to structured project hierarchies, dependency-heavy schedules, and portfolio rollups, Planner can feel like a demotion. It’s designed for team-level tasking, not portfolio governance. When you’re tracking thousands of interdependent tasks across multiple programs, a Kanban board isn’t the right tool.
PMOs typically need multi-level project hierarchies, rollups, and structured reporting to keep large initiatives aligned. Planner wasn’t built to do that.
That gap is why enterprise teams are looking outside the Microsoft ecosystem. Tools like Tempo Structure Advanced support the kind of hierarchical planning PMOs built in Project Online – without abandoning the systems where work actually happens.
Technical gaps: Why Microsoft’s successor may fail your PMO
Before choosing a replacement, map what your PMO actually uses today. Not everything Project Online handled carries over into Microsoft’s newer tools.
Task and data limits
Project Online handled massive schedules – thousands of tasks, deep work breakdown structures, multi-level dependencies. Newer Microsoft tools lean toward collaboration and task coordination. According to Atlassian’s 2024 State of Teams report, 93% of knowledge workers say their teams use at least five different tools to manage work – and adding yet another disconnected platform makes that fragmentation worse, not better. For large engineering programs or capital-intensive portfolios, that’s a real problem.
Advanced resource leveling
Project Online could automatically rebalance schedules when people were overallocated. Without that, resource managers fall back to spreadsheets – and the allocation errors PMOs worked to avoid come right back. Tempo Capacity Planner fills this by surfacing availability and skills-based allocation alongside live Jira data.
The double-entry problem
Many PMOs currently run delivery in Jira but use Project Online for portfolio views and reporting. That split means project managers are manually syncing two systems, chasing sync failures, and working with data that’s always slightly stale.
Tempo’s 2026 State of SPM report found that 1 in 3 enterprise projects fail to deliver expected ROI due to data silos. Moving planning into the same place execution happens eliminates that overhead. Leadership gets real visibility instead of a report that’s already out of date.
Workflow paralysis risk
Many PMOs have built governance on SharePoint and PWA – intake workflows, approval chains, budget sign-offs. When that infrastructure disappears mid-migration, reporting stalls and decisions back up.
Those delays are expensive: Industry benchmarks from PMI show that organizations lose roughly 10% of project value due to poor performance during platform shifts.
Delayed projects typically add 15–20% per quarter to total project costs through lost productivity and rework. Map your workflows before you migrate, not after.
Alternative paths for complex project teams
When Microsoft asks teams where to go next, a few paths come up. Most don’t actually solve the problem.
Microsoft Project Online alternatives
Microsoft Planner: Works well for Microsoft-first teams. For organizations where delivery already happens in Jira, Planner moves planning back into a separate system. That’s the same plan-vs-actual drift that made Project Online frustrating. Different silo, same problem.
Project Server SE: Keeps the on-premise architecture, keeps the admin overhead, stays separate from Jira execution. It preserves what you have without fixing what’s broken.
Dynamics 365 Project Operations: A full platform transformation. That might be right for some organizations, but if Jira is already your delivery system, it’s almost certainly overkill. The implementation lift is significant, and the ROI only makes sense if you’re running deep across the D365 stack.
Project Desktop: Standalone schedules don’t solve collaborative tracking, capacity scenarios, or time approvals at scale. It’s a scheduling tool, not a PMO replacement.
The right question for any of these options is: How do you prevent plan-vs-actual drift when planning lives outside Jira? That question rules out most of the list.
If your teams execute in Jira, planning belongs there too – not in a system that requires a separate sync process to stay current.
The Jira-native approach works because planning and execution live in the same place. PMOs plug specialized tools for roadmapping, capacity planning, and financial tracking into their delivery system directly, instead of bolting on a separate planning layer.
If time tracking drives billing or cost reporting, you need data you can trust. Timesheets captures real delivery activity directly in Jira, with audit-ready reporting for delivery and finance. Not reconstructed estimates. Actual hours.
Migrating to an agile ecosystem with Tempo
Leaving Project Online is rarely just a platform swap. For most PMOs, it’s a chance to stop splitting work between two systems and consolidate into a single environment.
A 2025 House of PMO survey found that PMOs are increasingly adopting planning tools that plug directly into their delivery systems rather than sitting alongside them.
Tempo’s suite works within Jira to cover what Project Online handled:
Structure Advanced rebuilds complex work breakdown structures across multiple projects, synchronized with Jira issues. It includes Gantt-based scheduling, so teams keep the visual planning they relied on without leaving Jira.
Capacity Planner handles resource forecasting and workload balancing – so leaders see realistic delivery timelines, not just current snapshots.
Tempo Financial Manager adds budget tracking and financial governance alongside execution data, so cost visibility doesn’t require a separate finance system.
Each tool connects directly to Jira data. No sync layer, no separate export process.
Creating your software migration project plan
With April 1, 2026 having already blocked new PWA site creation and September 30 ending all access, you need a clear transition timeline – not a vague plan to “figure it out before the deadline.”
Most PMOs run a redirect strategy: Gradually shift active planning into the new environment while keeping Project Online running in read-only mode for legacy reference. It’s cleaner than a hard cutover and gives teams time to adjust.
One decision to make early: Do you actually need to migrate historical project data, or is export and archive enough? For most organizations, audit-accessible exports of past projects are sufficient. You don’t need to recreate every old project plan in Jira. That distinction alone can cut migration scope significantly.
Structure Advanced helps track the migration itself. It organizes work across projects and rolls up progress so leadership can see where things stand.
Microsoft Project Online migration checklist
Phase 1: Inventory and audit
Before migrating anything, get a clear picture of what’s in your current environment.
Categorize all projects stored in Project Web App.
Separate active initiatives that need full migration from legacy projects that can be archived or exported for compliance.
Migrate only the projects you actually need.
Clean up your resource pool: Remove inactive users, update contractor profiles, confirm skill tagging reflects current roles.
Review data quality before you migrate. Moving outdated or inconsistent data creates messy reporting and poor performance in the new platform.
Evaluate existing SharePoint-specific custom fields and decide whether they still serve a purpose in your updated workflow.
Audit every integration that reads from or writes to Project Online – ERP platforms, financial systems, reporting tools, CRM. These connections break at retirement and need to be mapped early.
Phase 2: Schema mapping
Microsoft Project and Jira organize data very differently.
Map your Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) hierarchy to Jira’s issue structure: Epics, Tasks, Sub-tasks.
Align legacy custom fields with their Jira equivalents. CapEx codes or department tags, for example, may map to Jira custom fields or Tempo account categories.
Review how planning philosophy changes between platforms. Microsoft Project encourages linear planning; Jira environments support more adaptive approaches.
If your team needs deep hierarchical visibility, plan to use Structure Advanced to recreate nested hierarchies that Jira doesn’t support natively.
Phase 3: The pilot and import
Don’t migrate everything at once. Start with a pilot project.
Select a moderately complex project as your test case.
Run a live import using tools that support MPP imports, including Structure’s Microsoft Project import tool for direct .mpp file ingestion.
Validate that task dependencies transferred correctly: Finish-to-Start (FS), Start-to-Start (SS), Finish-to-Finish (FF), and lead and lag times.
Choose an appropriate migration method: CSV exports for simpler datasets, or dedicated connectors and APIs for large project histories.
Enforce a configuration freeze in Project Online during testing. Don’t create new custom fields or workflows in the legacy system until migration is complete.
Phase 4: Enablement and reporting
Once data migration is complete, the focus shifts to adoption.
Rebuild reporting dashboards that previously lived in Project Web App or Power BI.
Use Custom Charts for Jira to create real-time portfolio views based on live project data.
Run user acceptance testing (UAT) with project managers and stakeholders to confirm they can manage capacity, track budgets, and monitor dependencies.
Training should cover the tool and the workflow shift. Agile and hybrid delivery models change how teams plan and report – that adjustment takes longer than learning the software.
Solving the “integration domino effect”
Project Online often sits at the center of a larger integration network. ERP platforms, financial systems, reporting tools, CRM – many of these exchange data with Project Online through custom connections built up over years.
When the platform retires, those connections break.
That’s why migration planning needs to include a full integration audit. Identify every system that reads from or writes to Project Online before you start migrating anything else.
Most enterprise systems already have connectors for Jira. Rebuilding integrations in a Jira-native environment is usually simpler than starting from scratch with an unfamiliar platform.
A side benefit: many teams simplify their reporting stack along the way. Instead of routing data through Power BI, portfolio dashboards can run straight from Jira data.
Summary: Move planning to where work happens
September 2026 is a hard stop. But the teams that use the next few months well won’t just be migrating data – they’ll be closing the gap between where plans live and where work actually happens.
Most PMOs are running two parallel systems right now. The real cost isn’t the license fee. It’s the constant reconciliation, the stale data, the reports that are already out of date by the time they’re read.
Start with an honest audit. What’s in Project Online, which projects need full migration, which integrations will break when the platform retires? That inventory determines everything else.
From there, map your options and choose a replacement that fits how your teams actually work. If you want to see what a Jira-native planning environment looks like, start a free trial with Tempo.
Sign up for a demo
Request Demo
