The decision

What this pack runs.

A consent decree, a consent order, a deferred prosecution agreement, a settlement with conditions: the money is agreed, and so is a change in how the company runs, for a stated term, checked by someone the order names. The money is paid once. The change is paid for every year of the term, and every year a finding adds to it. But the order is negotiated by lawyers against a fine and read by the business against a headline, and no accounting line carries the cost of an order, so by the time the plan for running under it reaches an agenda the order has usually become a fine with paperwork attached, and the proposal on the table is the minimum that satisfies the letter. That is not the comparison. This pack turns it into a subtraction and the years. What running under the order costs a year in full, less what the minimum costs, across the term and discounted, is what the minimum saves. Against it: the fine once, plus every year a finding adds, at the full cost of running under the order, because a checker who has found you short will insist on the full version for every added year. What settles it is how many years a finding adds, so the whole question reduces to the break-even extension, how many years a finding would have to add to the term before the minimum stops paying, read beside what the order says a finding adds. Nine sourced undertakings hold the frame: one reached the mechanism and stood, three were broken or extended, one was never checked until a regulator did, one touched the decoration, one was never accepted, one was never agreed, and one names its checkers and its term. It stops on two halts: no one has costed running under the order in full, and no one has read what a finding triggers.

The organizing test
whether the company has costed what the undertaking changes, for how long, and who checks, and whether doing the minimum is cheaper than doing it in full once a finding is priced
What it resolves to
The break-even extension
How many years a finding can add before the minimum stops paying.
The evidence behind it

The casebooks these cases come from.

The pack reads nine sourced decisions through the framework. They are drawn from these casebooks, each one a set of verified records on a single decision type.

CasebookVerified records
Crisis Response71

A verified record has passed a mechanical claim-versus-source check, a second model's read, and human approval. The count is what exists today, not a target.

Loading the rest of the sample…

16 files for this one decision.

The extract holds one case of the nine, and the number without the model that produces it. $499, one-time.

See the full pack →