What determines the cost of a workplace investigation?
A short complaint can require substantial fact-finding, while a longer account may concern one clearly bounded event. Pricing should follow the questions to be resolved and the work needed to evaluate them. Neither employee count nor the length of the complaint is a reliable price calculator.
| Cost driver | Why it changes the work | Question for the proposal |
|---|---|---|
| Issues and relevant period | Several separate concerns may need different evidence | Which questions and dates are included? |
| Witnesses and availability | Interviews need preparation, scheduling, notes, and possible follow-up | What interview assumptions underpin the quote? |
| Records and systems | Messages, schedules, policies, and other records require organized review | Who collects records and what formats are expected? |
| Locations and delivery | Travel, access arrangements, or interpretation may affect scope | Which external expenses are separate? |
| Reporting and follow-up | A chronology, evidence summary, and findings require different effort | What written output and follow-up are included? |
Holt lists direct investigation services and process coaching by custom quote. This guide does not offer a market-average rate or imply a minimum case fee. Acceptance depends on fit, capability, impartiality, and applicable requirements. Matters requiring specialist expertise or legal review are referred appropriately.
Begin with intake, independence, and appropriate expertise
Start by identifying the type of concern, affected work locations, broad timeframe, relevant decision-makers, and the assistance requested. Do not send employee names, allegations, or personnel records through Holt’s public inquiry form. Agree on a suitable information channel before sharing sensitive details.
The provider should evaluate relationships and responsibilities that could affect impartiality, the expertise needed, and whether outside legal or other specialist involvement is appropriate. Fact-finding is not a substitute for any urgent safety response or applicable reporting obligation. Address those needs through the appropriate responsible people while arranging a suitable review.
What does a scoped fact-finding process look like?
- Define the questions. Record the matters included, relevant period, authority, and reporting recipient.
- Plan the evidence. Identify records, interviews, access, collection responsibilities, and practical dependencies.
- Gather information. Conduct the agreed interviews and document review while recording relevant follow-up questions.
- Evaluate the information. Distinguish accounts, supporting material, conflicts, and unresolved limitations using the agreed approach.
- Document findings. Explain what was reviewed and the basis and limits of the conclusions.
- Hand off decisions. The authorized employer reviews employment actions and follow-up, with appropriate legal input.
This is an operational planning framework, not a universal procedure for every matter. The EEOC’s employer resources emphasize prompt, thorough, impartial handling of harassment complaints, privacy to the extent possible, and protection against retaliation. The particular facts and applicable obligations determine the needed response.
Why there is no single reliable completion time
Timing depends on access to records, witness schedules, the scope, and whether information raises additional relevant questions. Agree on an initial plan, progress updates, and a process for reviewing obstacles. A provider should explain what can proceed while a dependency is resolved rather than letting a matter disappear into an undefined queue.
Do not treat an illustrative project schedule as permission to delay an appropriate response. There is no fixed completion promise in Holt’s published investigation offering. The scope and communication plan must fit the matter.
A practical way to discuss scope changes
Illustrative scenario: the initial plan addresses one reported event, an agreed set of interviews, and a defined body of records. An interview identifies a separate allegation in another location. The provider documents the new issue and reviews whether it changes the questions, expertise, evidence, independence assessment, fee, or schedule.
Define how new issues are escalated without presuming they are either irrelevant or automatically included. Written scope changes make responsibilities visible. They should not be used to ignore information that requires an appropriate response.
What should the employer receive?
The proposal should identify the written output, intended recipients, findings approach, and limits. Depending on scope, outputs can include a chronology, description of work performed, evidence considered, findings, and identified limitations. The employer should understand what was not reviewed as well as what supports a conclusion.
Do not assume a consulting engagement creates attorney-client privilege or guarantees a particular outcome. Clarify information handling and legal involvement before work begins. For the division of responsibilities, read coaching versus direct investigations and review Holt’s employee-relations and investigation services.
Frequently asked questions
How much does Holt charge for a workplace investigation?
Holt provides a custom quote after evaluating the matter, scope, required expertise, independence, evidence, and deliverables. No universal investigation fee is published.
Is investigation coaching automatically cheaper than direct fact-finding?
It can involve a different allocation of work, but price depends on the actual scope. Coaching also requires capable internal staff time, evidence collection, interviews, and findings by the employer.
Can an investigator promise complete confidentiality?
Do not assume complete confidentiality. Information may need to be shared for a thorough review and appropriate action. Define access and explain privacy limits rather than promising secrecy.
Does the outside investigator decide whom to discipline?
The employer retains employment decisions. Holt’s direct service supplies the independently scoped fact-finding and documented findings for an accepted matter.
Primary resources
Sources checked October 30, 2026. Agency resources support the specific points identified above; the buying frameworks, examples, and scope recommendations are Holt’s operational guidance.
General HR planning information, not legal or tax advice. Published fees describe Holt services and are subject to the agreed scope. Confirm applicable obligations with qualified advisers. Illustrative scenarios are not client results.
A practical next step
Define the right support for a sensitive workplace matter
Holt offers employee-relations advice, employer-led investigation process coaching, and direct fact-finding for suitable accepted matters.
Services are custom-quoted. Fit, independence, responsibilities, information handling, and deliverables are reviewed before work begins.
Request a free introductory conversationReview investigation and advisory options →