Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — ST. VINCENT HOT SPRINGS 2026-04-26 03:59 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — ST. VINCENT HOT SPRINGS
CCN 040026 | AR | 220 beds | Current EBITDA $17.1M → Pro Forma $30.7M (+$13.6M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$258.6M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$17.1M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$13.6M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$30.7M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$9.9M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

70%
Realization (B)
$13.6M
Modeled Uplift
$9.5M
Risk-Adjusted
-$4.1M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Revenue per BedRevenue per Bed has minimal effect on execution
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 70% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate. Risks: Bed Count. Risk-adjusted uplift: $9.5M (vs $13.6M modeled).

EBITDA Bridge — 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%→5% = $8-15M on $400M NPR).

Cost to Collect
Cost Savings | 12mo ramp
$5.2M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$5.1M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$3.1M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$166K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$13.6M

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$5.2M$5.2M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$5.0M$142K$5.1M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$794K$2.4M$3.1M$9.9M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$166K$166K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT31.9% 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$1.3M$2.6M$3.9M$5.2M$5.2M$5.2M$5.2M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$1.3M$2.6M$3.8M$5.1M$5.1M$5.1M$5.1M
A/R Days Reduction$0$1.0M$2.1M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M
Clean Claim Rate$0$83K$166K$166K$166K$166K$166K$166K
Cumulative$0$3.7M$7.4M$11.0M$13.6M$13.6M$13.6M$13.6M

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 $13.6M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x62% / 11.1x66% / 12.6x70% / 14.2x72% / 15.0x74% / 15.8x
9.0x57% / 9.5x61% / 10.9x65% / 12.3x67% / 13.0x69% / 13.7x
10.0x52% / 8.2x57% / 9.5x61% / 10.7x63% / 11.4x64% / 12.0x
11.0x48% / 7.2x53% / 8.3x57% / 9.5x59% / 10.0x60% / 10.6x
12.0x44% / 6.3x49% / 7.3x53% / 8.4x55% / 8.9x57% / 9.5x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
4.7x
Pro Forma Leverage
1.8x
Headroom (turns)
28%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 28% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 4.7x, adding 3.8 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$17.1M$17.1M6.6%
Year 1$17.6M+$9.1M$26.7M10.3%
Year 2$18.1M+$13.6M$31.7M12.3%
Year 3$18.7M+$13.6M$32.3M12.5%
Year 4$19.2M+$13.6M$32.8M12.7%
Year 5$19.8M+$13.6M$33.4M12.9%
$170.9M
Entry EV (10x)
$367.6M
Exit EV (11x)
$196.7M
Value Created
$33.4M
Exit EBITDA
$27.2M
Organic Growth
$136.1M
RCM Value Creation
$33.4M
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$2.6M$3.9M$5.2M$6.2M
Denial Rate Reductio$2.6M$3.8M$5.1M$6.1M
A/R Days Reduction$1.6M$2.4M$3.1M$3.8M
Clean Claim Rate$83K$124K$166K$199K
Total$6.8M$10.2M$13.6M$16.3M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 25 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin6.6%-11.9%0.7%6.6%
P72
Net-to-Gross24.5%21.4%24.6%31.9%
P44
Occupancy69.4%45.6%54.9%70.2%
P68
Rev/Bed$1.2M$742K$1.0M$1.4M
P56
Exp/Bed$1.1M$846K$1.1M$1.4M
P48

Bridge Methodology

Coefficients calibrated to published research bands: denial 12%→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 × delta × avoidable share. Cost levers use claims volume × 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.

Data: HCRIS FY2022 | 6,123 hospitalsSources: HCRISML