River
Y CombinatorBacked by Y Combinator
FREE TEMPLATE

Legal Department Reporting Template

Three documents and three sheets that split each matter type's cycle time into legal's own hours against the counterparty's turnaround, then price the headcount gap.

Free download  ·  No account needed

Cycle Time by Matter Type  ·  Thornbury Systems Inc. legal department  ·  Q1 2026

An elapsed-days number cannot say who caused the wait. The ratio can.

Every matter type carries two figures here: the elapsed time from intake to completion, and the attorney hours actually spent on it. Divide one by the other and you get the cycle time ratio, the share of the wait that is actually legal's own work.

Matter typeElapsedLegal's active hoursRatioWhat it means
NDA2 business days0.5h3.1%Almost all counterparty turnaround
Employment matter6 business days17h35.4%Legal is the bottleneck

Same report, opposite answer, and only one row justifies a new hire

NDAs and employment matters can sit on the same generic days-to-close report looking like two ordinary rows. The ratio says a new attorney would not touch the NDA number at all, and would cut directly into the employment matter number, which is exactly the distinction a department-wide average erases.

Most legal department reports state a median days-to-close and call it cycle time. CLOC's own metrics framework defines cycle time as a ratio instead: time taken to do the work against time taken to return the work, measured from receiving instructions to completing them. That ratio, not the elapsed days alone, is what tells you whether a matter took eight days because a signature took eight days to come back, or because an attorney was working it the whole time. Only one of those two matters gets faster if you add a lawyer.

Split every matter type's active hours from its elapsed time and the two rarely move together. NDAs in this pack's worked example close in two days with half an hour of legal work, a 3.1% ratio; employment matters close in six days with seventeen hours, a 35.4% ratio. Summed only across the high-ratio types, the hours gap becomes a headcount case scoped to one queue, not a department-wide plea. A peer benchmark like the 2026 ACC Law Department Management Benchmarking Report's 367-employees-per-lawyer median is useful context. It does not say which queue to staff.

The same overflow that produces a high ratio on one matter type usually already shows up as an outside counsel spend line. In the worked example the numbers reconcile: employment matter overflow run-rates to $168,600 a year, a 91% offset against a $185,000 fully loaded hire. Client intake decides what enters the pipeline, and the per-matter budget prices it once open. This report rolls those same matters up for whoever funds the department, alongside the deadlines already running against them and the guidelines that outside spend itself has to satisfy.

One quarter, one department, and the arithmetic behind a headcount ask that names a queue

Cycle Time by Matter Type, the headcount math, and the outside counsel offset.

Cycle Time by Matter Type

Four matter types tracked for cycle time. This quarter's 3 litigation matters stay with outside counsel end to end and are excluded, no in-house active hours to ratio.

Matter typeElapsedActive hoursRatioHours this quarter
NDA2 business days0.5h3.1%55.0h
Vendor / procurement contract8 business days5h7.8%190.0h
MSA / customer agreement14 business days16h14.3%384.0h
Employment matter6 business days17h35.4%272.0h

901 active hours required this quarter, across four matter types

MSAs and employment matters are 21% of this quarter's tracked matter volume and 73% of the active hours required. That is the bucket a new hire gets scoped against, not the caseload in general.

The Headcount Math

Demand from the high-ratio matter types against the team's actual current capacity for that work.

Hours / quarter
Active hours required (MSA + employment)656.0h
Active hours required (NDA + vendor, low ratio)245.0h
Total active hours required901.0h
Current matter-facing capacity (GC at 20%, two attorneys at 70% each, 400h/quarter baseline)640.0h
Shortfall261.0h / quarter

261 hours a quarter is 1,044 hours a year, 0.65 of a full-time attorney

The ask is one attorney, scoped to MSAs and employment matters specifically. Scoping it to contracts generally risks the hire landing on the NDA queue, where the ratio already shows added headcount buys nothing.

Outside Counsel Offset

The same employment matter overflow that shows up as a high in-house ratio also shows up as a standing outside counsel line.

FirmHandlesQ1 2026 spend
Halvorsen Reyes LLPLitigation, fully outsourced$186,400
Camborne Whitfield PLLCEmployment matter overflow$42,150
Iversby Law GroupMSA escalations$28,900

$168,600 a year in employment overflow against a $185,000 fully loaded hire

That is a 91% offset before counting a single hour of the cycle time this hire also buys back. The business case is a specific dollar figure, from a spend line that already exists, against the cost of the specific hire being requested.

What's in the pack

01

Cycle Time by Matter Type

Every matter type's elapsed time and legal's own active hours, converted to the same unit and divided into the ratio that shows who caused the wait.

02

Matter Volume by Type

This quarter's and last quarter's volume by matter type, with the change, so a reader sees what actually grew before reading the hours behind it.

03

Outside Counsel Spend by Firm

Spend by firm and matter type with the quarter-over-quarter change, so an overflow line can be checked against the in-house ratio for the same matter type.

04

Report Narrative

The version written for the business audience this report actually goes to, leading with the recommendation rather than working up to it.

05

Spend Analysis Note

The firm-by-firm detail behind the spend total, with a named cause for every meaningful change rather than one blended trend line.

06

Legal Operations Dashboard

The one-page live view pulling every figure from the sheets themselves, so the dashboard and the underlying data cannot silently disagree.

How to use it

  1. 1

    Open in River, or take it blank

    Open the pack in River and hand it this quarter's matter list, time records and outside counsel invoices, or download the Word documents and CSV sheets from the template library and run it yourself.

  2. 2

    Record active hours next to elapsed time, not instead of it

    A median days-to-close alone cannot say whether legal caused the wait. Both figures, converted to the same unit, are what the ratio needs.

  3. 3

    Sum demand only across the high-ratio matter types

    A department-wide average hides exactly the variation that says where a new hire would actually help.

  4. 4

    Check the spend sheet for an offset before asking for budget

    An outside counsel overflow line on the same matter type turns a headcount ask into a cost-neutral one.

Frequently asked questions

Is this template free?

Yes, no account or card required. The download is Word documents and CSV sheets in a zip. Edit with AI is the second half: the agent builds the volume and cycle time record from your own matter data and drafts the narrative around it.

What am I actually downloading?

Three Word documents and three CSV sheets, zipped. The sheets open in Excel, Numbers or Google Sheets straight off the download, and the narrative and spend note open in Word or Pages. Nothing in the zip needs River to be useful.

What does the cycle time ratio actually mean?

The share of a matter's elapsed time that is legal's own active work, rather than a counterparty's or a business stakeholder's turnaround. A low ratio means the wait is mostly out of legal's hands. A high ratio means legal's own work is the largest share of the clock, and is where added headcount actually helps.

We don't track time by matter type. Can we still use this?

Yes. Where exact time entries don't exist, estimate the active hours per matter type and flag the figure as an estimate rather than presenting it with false precision. The ratio is directionally useful even from a rough estimate, and gets more precise as real time entries accumulate.

Why exclude litigation from the headcount math?

Because matters fully handled by outside counsel generate no in-house active hours to measure. Their volume still belongs on the volume sheet and their spend still belongs on the spend sheet; they are excluded only from the ratio and the hours-based headcount calculation.

How does this fit with the other legal packs?

Intake decides what enters the pipeline, and the per-matter budget prices each one once open. This report rolls those same matters up by type for a business audience, and the same billing narrative discipline that gets an invoice paid is what makes the active-hours figure behind the ratio trustworthy in the first place.

Report the ratio, not just the average

Take the Word documents and CSV sheets blank, or open this exact pack in River and hand it this quarter's matter list and invoices.

Edit with AI