πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 033041 | AZ | 40 beds | Current EBITDA $1.9M β†’ Pro Forma $2.8M (+$950K)
$18.1M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$1.9M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$950K
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$2.8M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$693K
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

ML model predicts what fraction of the bridge is achievable (accuracy: 60%, n=5,839)

71%
Realization (B)
$950K
Modeled Uplift
$671K
Risk-Adjusted
-$280K
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Net-to-Gross RatioHigher Net-to-Gross Ratio reduces execution likeli
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 71% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Bed Count. Risks: Revenue per Bed, Net-to-Gross Ratio. Risk-adjusted uplift: $0.7M (vs $1.0M modeled).

EBITDA Bridge β€” 7 RCM Levers

Each bar shows the annual EBITDA impact at full run-rate. Revenue levers increase top-line; cost levers reduce operating expense; cash acceleration releases working capital. Calibrated to published research bands (Denial 12%β†’5% = $8-15M on $400M NPR).

Cost to Collect
Cost Savings | 12mo ramp
$361K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$358K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$220K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$12K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$950K

Lever Detail

Each value shows its data source. SELLER = seller data room, DEFAULT = model default, BENCHMARK = P75 peer benchmark.

LeverCurrentTargetRevenueCostEBITDAWCRamp
Cost to Collect4.5% DEFAULT2.5% BENCHMARK$0$361K$361K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$348K$10K$358K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$55K$164K$220K$693K9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$12K$12K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT51.7% BENCHMARK$0$0$0$018mo
CDI / Case Mix Index135.0% DEFAULT142.0% BENCHMARK$0$0$0$018mo

Implementation Timing Curve

Linear ramp to full run-rate per lever. Month 0 = close date. Partners should expect 60-70% of total uplift realized by month 12.

LeverM0M3M6M9M12M18M24M36
Cost to Collect$0$90K$181K$271K$361K$361K$361K$361K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$89K$179K$268K$358K$358K$358K$358K
A/R Days Reduction$0$73K$147K$220K$220K$220K$220K$220K
Clean Claim Rate$0$6K$12K$12K$12K$12K$12K$12K
Cumulative$0$259K$518K$771K$950K$950K$950K$950K

Returns Sensitivity (IRR / MOIC)

5-year hold, 5.5x leverage, 3% organic growth, 10%/yr debt paydown. Green = exceeds 20% IRR hurdle. Amber = 15-20%. Red = below hurdle or loss. RCM uplift of $950K is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x55% / 9.0x60% / 10.3x64% / 11.7x65% / 12.4x67% / 13.1x
9.0x50% / 7.6x55% / 8.8x59% / 10.0x60% / 10.6x62% / 11.2x
10.0x46% / 6.5x50% / 7.6x54% / 8.7x56% / 9.2x58% / 9.8x
11.0x41% / 5.7x46% / 6.6x50% / 7.6x52% / 8.1x54% / 8.6x
12.0x37% / 4.9x42% / 5.8x46% / 6.7x48% / 7.2x50% / 7.6x

Covenant Headroom (at 10x Entry, 6.5x Max Leverage)

8.5x
Entry Leverage
5.6x
Pro Forma Leverage
0.9x
Headroom (turns)
14%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 14% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 5.6x, adding 2.9 turns of cushion.

5-Year Value Creation Waterfall

EBITDA trajectory: 3% organic growth + RCM uplift ramp (full run-rate at month 18).

Base EBITDARCM UpliftTotalMargin
Entry$1.9Mβ€”$1.9M10.3%
Year 1$1.9M+$634K$2.5M14.1%
Year 2$2.0M+$950K$2.9M16.1%
Year 3$2.0M+$950K$3.0M16.5%
Year 4$2.1M+$950K$3.0M16.8%
Year 5$2.1M+$950K$3.1M17.2%
$18.5M
Entry EV (10x)
$34.1M
Exit EV (11x)
$15.6M
Value Created
$3.1M
Exit EBITDA
$3.0M
Organic Growth
$9.5M
RCM Value Creation
$3.1M
Multiple Expansion

Achievement Sensitivity

What if we only achieve a fraction of each lever? 50% = conservative, 75% = base management case, 100% = plan, 120% = stretch.

Lever50%75%100%120%
Cost to Collect$181K$271K$361K$434K
Denial Rate Reductio$179K$268K$358K$429K
A/R Days Reduction$110K$165K$220K$264K
Clean Claim Rate$6K$9K$12K$14K
Total$475K$713K$950K$1.1M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 54 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin10.3%-10.1%-0.8%5.3%
P85
Net-to-Gross73.6%19.5%36.5%51.7%
P91
Occupancy74.1%27.4%42.3%66.3%
P83
Rev/Bed$452K$297K$581K$1.2M
P40
Exp/Bed$405K$348K$844K$1.7M
P28

Bridge Methodology

Coefficients calibrated to published research bands: denial 12%β†’5% = $8-15M on $400M NPR. Current metrics estimated from HCRIS public data and ML predictions. Target metrics set at P75 peer benchmarks with 60% gap closure assumption. Revenue levers use NPR Γ— delta Γ— avoidable share. Cost levers use claims volume Γ— cost per reworked claim. Working capital from AR reduction is one-time cash (not included in recurring EBITDA). Returns assume 5.5x leverage, 3% organic growth, 10%/yr debt paydown.

📄 Download ExcelValue TrackerFund LearningHospital ProfileML AnalysisPE ReturnsDCFLBO ModelDeal Screener
Data: HCRIS FY2022 | 6,123 hospitalsSources: HCRISML