Cost of Delay Modeler Guide for Arizona

What this calculator does

Run this scenario in DocketMath using the Cost Of Delay calculator.

DocketMath’s Cost of Delay Modeler (Arizona) helps you estimate how the timing of a case decision (or another milestone) can affect the total cost of delay using a structured, spreadsheet-like approach.

In plain terms, it lets you model:

• Start and end dates for the period you care about
• A daily cost rate (or break-out costs you roll into a daily rate)
• Optional interest/discount assumptions (if you choose to include the time value of money in your model)
• A timing overlay tied to Arizona’s criminal statute of limitations framework (where relevant to your use case)

Statute-of-limitations overlay used in this guide (Arizona)

If your model includes timing tied to statute-of-limitations risk, the Arizona framework referenced here is:

• A.R.S. § 13-107(A): 2-year SOL period (with an exception referred to as O2 in this guide’s jurisdiction data)
• A.R.S. § 13-107: 3-year SOL period (with an exception referred to as P3 in this guide’s jurisdiction data)

Source (for overview of statute language and period summary):
https://www.findlaw.com/state/arizona-law/arizona-criminal-statute-of-limitations-laws.html?utm_source=openai

You’ll see this reflected in the “Common scenarios” section so you can decide when to incorporate the SOL overlay versus when to model delay purely in business terms.

When to use it

Use DocketMath’s Cost of Delay Modeler when you need a repeatable way to translate “days/weeks/months” into dollar impact—especially when multiple stakeholders interpret delay differently.

You’ll likely get the most value if you’re dealing with at least one of these situations:

• Case management planning

  • Comparing “early resolution” vs “later resolution” outcomes
  • Quantifying cost differences between scheduling windows
• Budgeting for investigation and pre-trial work

  • Modeling staff hours, vendor fees, and operational overhead by time period
• Policy or training analytics

  • Teaching teams how time affects downstream costs and resource allocation
• **Statute-of-limitations related timelines (planning-focused)

  • When you want to stress-test a timeline against the 2-year baseline in A.R.S. § 13-107(A) or consider the 3-year baseline in A.R.S. § 13-107 (per this guide’s exception labels)

Quick decision checklist

Step-by-step example

This example shows how delay modeling changes outputs as you adjust dates and daily costs—using the tool flow from DocketMath’s Cost of Delay setup: Cost of Delay Modeler (Arizona).

Scenario: “Resolution in 60 days vs 120 days”

Imagine a project team is tracking costs from “today” until a target disposition date.

1. Choose the model period

   • Start date (Delay begins): 2026-03-22
   • Compare two end dates:

     • Option A: Resolution in 60 days → 2026-05-21
     • Option B: Resolution in 120 days → 2026-07-20

2. Set your daily cost

   • Daily cost rate (combined): $250/day
   • This might represent estimated administrative overhead, staffing time, and opportunity cost.

3. Compute baseline cost for each option

   • Option A (60 days):

     • Cost = 60 × $250 = $15,000
   • Option B (120 days):

     • Cost = 120 × $250 = $30,000

4. **Compute cost of delay (difference)

   • Delay difference = 120 − 60 = 60 days
   • Cost of delay = 60 × $250 = $15,000

How the output changes when inputs change

Here are three quick adjustments you can test in the calculator to see sensitivity.

Adjustment 1: Daily cost doubles

• Daily cost: $500/day instead of $250/day
• Option A: 60 × 500 = $30,000
• Option B: 120 × 500 = $60,000
• Cost of delay: $30,000 (double the original)

Adjustment 2: Resolution slips by 30 more days

Keep daily cost at $250/day:

• New Option B: 150 days
• Option A: 60 days → $15,000
• Option B: 150 × 250 = $37,500
• Cost of delay: 90 days × 250 = $22,500

Adjustment 3: Add a discount rate (optional modeling approach)

If your DocketMath configuration includes time value assumptions, you’ll see that later costs may be discounted. Practically:

• Higher discount rates generally reduce the present-value impact of longer delays.
• The biggest differences show up for long horizons (e.g., many months beyond the baseline).

SOL overlay add-on (Arizona timing planning)

If your “end date” is tied to a statute-of-limitations risk window, you can run side-by-side timelines anchored to the SOL periods cited in this guide:

• 2-year SOL period under A.R.S. § 13-107(A) (guide exception label: O2)
• 3-year SOL period under A.R.S. § 13-107 (guide exception label: P3)

For example, if you’re stress-testing when delay could become operationally unacceptable:

• Track the delay against a 2-year window first (A.R.S. § 13-107(A))
• Then run an alternate timeline against the 3-year window (A.R.S. § 13-107) if that’s the track you’re modeling

Common scenarios

DocketMath’s calculator is especially useful when delay affects cost in predictable ways. Below are common scenarios in an Arizona context, including when to incorporate the SOL periods from A.R.S. § 13-107(A) and A.R.S. § 13-107.

1) Staff and overhead costs tied to time

Inputs

• Daily cost rate: $X/day (staff time + overhead)
• Start date: when work begins
• End date: expected resolution or key hearing

Model behavior

• Output scales linearly with days if you keep daily rate constant
• Small schedule changes create measurable cost deltas

SOL overlay use

• Optional. Best for operational budgeting rather than legal risk analysis.

2) “Decision deadline” modeling (internal governance)

Some teams create internal deadlines shorter than external timelines.

Inputs

• Start date
• Two end dates:

  • Internal deadline
  • Expected actual resolution

Model behavior

• Outputs show how much it “costs” to miss an internal milestone
• Useful for prioritization and escalation planning

SOL overlay use

• Generally optional unless the internal deadline is derived from A.R.S. § 13-107(A) or A.R.S. § 13-107 timing.

3) Statute-of-limitations planning (Arizona)

Here the model acts as a timeline risk amplifier—useful for planning, reporting, and scenario analysis.

Arizona SOL periods referenced in this guide

• 2 years under A.R.S. § 13-107(A) (exception label O2)
• 3 years under A.R.S. § 13-107 (exception label P3)

How to model

• Run two scenarios:

  • Scenario A: anchor “latest acceptable” timeline to the 2-year track
  • Scenario B: anchor to the 3-year track
• Compare the “cost of delay” between earlier and later resolution dates

Practical use

• Present stakeholders with:

  • Cost consequences of compressing timeline
  • Cost differences between “ideal” and “risk-adjacent” resolution windows

4) Multi-stage delay (triage → motions → hearing)

If delay occurs in stages, you can reduce modeling error by breaking the total timeline into segments.

Example segments

• Investigation/tracking: 20 days
• Motion practice prep: 35 days
• Waiting for hearing: 25 days

Approach

• Use either:

  • One blended daily cost rate for the full span, or
  • Separate daily rates per stage (e.g., hearings-related costs differ from investigation labor)

Output behavior

• With separate stage rates, longer “high-cost” stages drive disproportionate totals.

5) Sensitivity planning (range-based inputs)

Instead of one daily rate, model a band:

• Low: $150/day
• High: $350/day

Then calculate:

• Low-cost total
• High-cost total
• Difference between them

Why this matters

• Delay estimates are rarely exact. A band gives you a more defensible planning window.

Tips

Related reading

• Cost of Delay Modeler Guide for Alabama
• Cost of Delay Modeler Guide for California
• Cost of Delay Modeler Guide for Colorado