How we add value

Four ways FoxLAD changes the numbers that matter.

From the candidate’s experience to the science behind every result, here’s where a FoxLAD program adds measurable value to yours.

A hand pointing a pen at a laptop screen showing total savings, labor efficiency, quality scores and on-time completion metrics, beside printed performance reports.

FoxLAD vs. traditional testing

See the difference, area by area.

A general comparison against typical urine-based, lab-processed drug testing programs—not any specific vendor.

Value area	Traditional / Urine-Based Testing	FoxLAD Oral-Based Testing
01Better Experience	Traditional / urine-basedRestroom or specialized collection facility required; a same-gender collector is often required.	FoxLADNon-invasive oral fluid collection—no restroom needed, no same-gender collector requirement.
02Faster Results	Traditional / urine-basedCandidates travel to a collection site; results wait on lab and courier logistics.	FoxLADInstant screening options, with testing completed where the candidate already is.
03Lower Cost Per Test	Traditional / urine-basedIndustry benchmark starts around $30+ per test, often layered with collection, no-show, rescheduling and processing fees.	FoxLADNo collection, no-show, rescheduling or processing fees—FoxLAD’s cost sits below the industry standard for urine-based testing.
04Quality & Detection	Traditional / urine-basedA broader detection window; collection is not always directly observed.	FoxLADA recent-use focus, with collection that can be directly observed.

SAMHSA notes oral-fluid collections are observed/monitored and do not require a same-sex collector, while urine collection requires specialized restroom facilities.
SAMHSA reports oral fluid can detect drugs from minutes after use up to approximately 2 days, depending on the drug, versus urine’s broader window ranging from hours to as long as two weeks. Quest notes that drugs generally become detectable in oral fluid sooner than in urine.
Oral fluid collection can be directly observed, substantially reducing opportunities for substitution, dilution, or adulteration. A systematic review found oral fluid has particular potential for detecting recent marijuana use compared with urine.
Quest’s 2024 general-workforce data showed 10.4% marijuana positivity in oral-fluid testing, although this should not be presented as a direct apples-to-apples sensitivity comparison with urine because the tested populations and testing circumstances can differ.
The $30+ industry benchmark reflects typical published base pricing for urine-based lab drug testing and does not include fees some providers add separately, such as collection, no-show, rescheduling or processing fees.

Try it yourself

See your own numbers.

This calculator is illustrative only. The starting numbers are examples—replace the ones you can edit with your own. FoxLAD’s figures are fixed averages. Actual pricing and savings depend on program design, services, locations and volume.

Your current process

Annual drug testsApproximate number per year

Current cost per drug test ($)What you pay today, on average

Current wait time per traditional drug test (minutes)Average time from a candidate’s arrival to a completed collection

FoxLAD (fixed averages)

FoxLAD estimated cost per oral drug testAverage, not adjustable

FoxLAD estimated time per oral drug testEstimate, not adjustable

Illustrative annual savings

Expected cost savings$0per year

Expected time savings0 hoursper year

Annualized, based on the values you entered.

Cost saved per drug test: $0
Time saved per drug test: 0 minutes

Expected cost savings = annual drug tests × (current cost per test − $15). Expected time savings = annual drug tests × (current wait time − 10 minutes) ÷ 60, shown in hours. FoxLAD figures are averages. Not a quote or a guarantee.