πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 050528 | CA | 26 beds | Current EBITDA $19.0M β†’ Pro Forma $24.3M (+$5.3M)
$100.9M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$19.0M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$5.3M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$24.3M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$3.9M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

73%
Realization (B)
$5.3M
Modeled Uplift
$3.9M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.4M
Execution Discount
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 73% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Revenue per Bed, Occupancy Rate. Risk-adjusted uplift: $3.9M (vs $5.3M 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
$2.0M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$2.0M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$1.2M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$65K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$5.3M

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$2.0M$2.0M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.9M$55K$2.0M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$310K$918K$1.2M$3.9M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$65K$65K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT60.6% 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$505K$1.0M$1.5M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$500K$999K$1.5M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M
A/R Days Reduction$0$409K$819K$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M$1.2M
Clean Claim Rate$0$32K$65K$65K$65K$65K$65K$65K
Cumulative$0$1.4M$2.9M$4.3M$5.3M$5.3M$5.3M$5.3M

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 $5.3M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x49% / 7.3x53% / 8.4x57% / 9.6x59% / 10.2x61% / 10.8x
9.0x44% / 6.1x48% / 7.2x52% / 8.2x54% / 8.7x56% / 9.2x
10.0x39% / 5.2x44% / 6.1x48% / 7.0x50% / 7.5x51% / 8.0x
11.0x35% / 4.4x39% / 5.3x44% / 6.1x46% / 6.5x47% / 7.0x
12.0x30% / 3.8x35% / 4.5x40% / 5.3x42% / 5.7x44% / 6.1x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
6.6x
Pro Forma Leverage
-0.1x
Headroom (turns)
-2%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline -2% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 6.6x, adding 1.8 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$19.0Mβ€”$19.0M18.8%
Year 1$19.5M+$3.5M$23.1M22.9%
Year 2$20.1M+$5.3M$25.4M25.2%
Year 3$20.7M+$5.3M$26.0M25.8%
Year 4$21.4M+$5.3M$26.7M26.4%
Year 5$22.0M+$5.3M$27.3M27.1%
$189.8M
Entry EV (10x)
$300.4M
Exit EV (11x)
$110.6M
Value Created
$27.3M
Exit EBITDA
$30.2M
Organic Growth
$53.1M
RCM Value Creation
$27.3M
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$1.0M$1.5M$2.0M$2.4M
Denial Rate Reductio$999K$1.5M$2.0M$2.4M
A/R Days Reduction$614K$921K$1.2M$1.5M
Clean Claim Rate$32K$48K$65K$77K
Total$2.7M$4.0M$5.3M$6.4M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 74 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin18.8%-18.0%-6.3%1.8%
P97
Net-to-Gross30.8%29.2%41.6%60.6%
P33
Occupancy60.5%28.4%43.8%67.1%
P69
Rev/Bed$3.9M$720K$2.1M$3.2M
P84
Exp/Bed$3.2M$878K$2.0M$3.2M
P69

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