Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF MICHIGAN 2026-04-26 09:53 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — CHILDRENS HOSPITAL OF MICHIGAN
CCN 233300 | MI | 227 beds | Current EBITDA $-1.4M → Pro Forma $19.3M (+$20.7M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$393.0M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-1.4M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$20.7M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$19.3M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$15.1M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

69%
Realization (C)
$20.7M
Modeled Uplift
$14.2M
Risk-Adjusted
-$6.5M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Payer DiversityHigher Payer Diversity increases execution likelih
Revenue per BedRevenue per Bed has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 69% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Payer Diversity. Risks: Commercial Payer %, Bed Count. Risk-adjusted uplift: $14.2M (vs $20.7M 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
$7.9M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$7.8M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$4.8M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$251K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$20.7M

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$7.9M$7.9M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$7.6M$216K$7.8M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$1.2M$3.6M$4.8M$15.1M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$251K$251K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT35.1% 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$2.0M$3.9M$5.9M$7.9M$7.9M$7.9M$7.9M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$1.9M$3.9M$5.8M$7.8M$7.8M$7.8M$7.8M
A/R Days Reduction$0$1.6M$3.2M$4.8M$4.8M$4.8M$4.8M$4.8M
Clean Claim Rate$0$126K$251K$251K$251K$251K$251K$251K
Cumulative$0$5.6M$11.3M$16.8M$20.7M$20.7M$20.7M$20.7M

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 $20.7M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
9.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
10.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
11.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
12.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x

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

99.0x
Entry Leverage
-0.6x
Pro Forma Leverage
7.1x
Headroom (turns)
109%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 109% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 99.0x to -0.6x, adding 99.6 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$-1.4M$-1.4M-0.4%
Year 1$-1.4M+$13.8M$12.4M3.1%
Year 2$-1.5M+$20.7M$19.2M4.9%
Year 3$-1.5M+$20.7M$19.2M4.9%
Year 4$-1.6M+$20.7M$19.1M4.9%
Year 5$-1.6M+$20.7M$19.1M4.9%
$-13.8M
Entry EV (10x)
$209.8M
Exit EV (11x)
$223.6M
Value Created
$19.1M
Exit EBITDA
$-2.2M
Organic Growth
$206.7M
RCM Value Creation
$19.1M
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$3.9M$5.9M$7.9M$9.4M
Denial Rate Reductio$3.9M$5.8M$7.8M$9.3M
A/R Days Reduction$2.4M$3.6M$4.8M$5.7M
Clean Claim Rate$126K$189K$251K$302K
Total$10.3M$15.5M$20.7M$24.8M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 52 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-0.4%-14.1%-7.2%-0.5%
P75
Net-to-Gross30.2%26.2%30.7%35.1%
P45
Occupancy60.9%60.2%68.4%79.6%
P31
Rev/Bed$1.7M$1.0M$1.4M$1.9M
P67
Exp/Bed$1.7M$1.0M$1.4M$2.1M
P62

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