How much did we spend on that project last month?
Simple question. But your export contains dozens of ways the same project name gets entered. Abbreviations, typos, partial names, initials. A raw report splits cost across all of them.
In January, 14 active projects appear as 69 distinct name variants in the raw export. Whychus Creek is sitting at #3. Toggle to Clean — it moves to #2. A project rename three years ago left two legacy names still in active use.
What's our cost on a specific work type across all active projects?
Filter by cost code and you get the right rows — but only if every entry for the same project is grouped together. When project names are fragmented, the ranking of who's spending the most changes.
Iron Creek Ranch is #3 in raw view. It's actually #1. $125K of its spend is scattered across five aliases. Toggle to Clean and watch it move to the top.
A raw erosion control report filtered on "Iron Creek Ranch" misses $125,267 sitting under those five entries.
Which vendors are we most dependent on?
The same vendor enters your system under a different name every time a different person keys it in. Your raw spend-by-vendor report is a fragmented list — the same company appearing multiple times under different spellings.
Red Rock Pipe & Supply is #6 in raw view. In Clean it's #9 — its spend is split across four name variants. Oregon Erosion Control is the mirror: raw #8, clean #5. Toggle to Clean to see who you actually depend on most.