πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 050235 | CA | 332 beds | Current EBITDA $-110.7M β†’ Pro Forma $-86.6M (+$24.2M)
$459.4M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-110.7M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$24.2M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-86.6M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$17.6M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

67%
Realization (C)
$24.2M
Modeled Uplift
$16.3M
Risk-Adjusted
-$7.9M
Execution Discount
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 67% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate. Risks: Bed Count. Risk-adjusted uplift: $16.3M (vs $24.2M 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
$9.2M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$9.1M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$5.6M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$294K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$24.2M

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$9.2M$9.2M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$8.8M$253K$9.1M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$1.4M$4.2M$5.6M$17.6M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$294K$294K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT28.9% 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$2.3M$4.6M$6.9M$9.2M$9.2M$9.2M$9.2M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$2.3M$4.5M$6.8M$9.1M$9.1M$9.1M$9.1M
A/R Days Reduction$0$1.9M$3.7M$5.6M$5.6M$5.6M$5.6M$5.6M
Clean Claim Rate$0$147K$294K$294K$294K$294K$294K$294K
Cumulative$0$6.6M$13.2M$19.6M$24.2M$24.2M$24.2M$24.2M

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 $24.2M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
9.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
10.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
11.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
12.0xLossLossLossLossLoss

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

99.0x
Entry Leverage
99.0x
Pro Forma Leverage
-92.5x
Headroom (turns)
0%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 0% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 99.0x to 99.0x, adding 0.0 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$-110.7Mβ€”$-110.7M-24.1%
Year 1$-114.1M+$16.1M$-97.9M-21.3%
Year 2$-117.5M+$24.2M$-93.3M-20.3%
Year 3$-121.0M+$24.2M$-96.8M-21.1%
Year 4$-124.6M+$24.2M$-100.5M-21.9%
Year 5$-128.4M+$24.2M$-104.2M-22.7%
$-1.11B
Entry EV (10x)
$-1.15B
Exit EV (11x)
$-38.9M
Value Created
$-104.2M
Exit EBITDA
$-176.4M
Organic Growth
$241.7M
RCM Value Creation
$-104.2M
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$4.6M$6.9M$9.2M$11.0M
Denial Rate Reductio$4.5M$6.8M$9.1M$10.9M
A/R Days Reduction$2.8M$4.2M$5.6M$6.7M
Clean Claim Rate$147K$221K$294K$353K
Total$12.1M$18.1M$24.2M$29.0M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 167 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-24.1%-15.0%-3.6%4.5%
P14
Net-to-Gross18.6%17.5%22.8%28.9%
P29
Occupancy58.2%54.0%65.4%75.3%
P35
Rev/Bed$1.4M$1.3M$1.8M$2.6M
P31
Exp/Bed$1.7M$1.4M$2.0M$2.6M
P43

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