Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — SANFORD BEMIDJI 2026-04-26 03:41 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — SANFORD BEMIDJI
CCN 240100 | MN | 94 beds | Current EBITDA $-61.4M → Pro Forma $-44.9M (+$16.4M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$312.6M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-61.4M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$16.4M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-44.9M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$12.0M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

72%
Realization (B)
$16.4M
Modeled Uplift
$11.9M
Risk-Adjusted
-$4.6M
Execution Discount
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % increases execution like
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution
Bed CountBed Count has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 72% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Revenue per Bed, Occupancy Rate. Risk-adjusted uplift: $11.9M (vs $16.4M 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
$6.3M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$6.2M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$3.8M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$200K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$16.4M

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$6.3M$6.3M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$6.0M$172K$6.2M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$959K$2.8M$3.8M$12.0M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$200K$200K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT42.7% 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$1.6M$3.1M$4.7M$6.3M$6.3M$6.3M$6.3M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$1.5M$3.1M$4.6M$6.2M$6.2M$6.2M$6.2M
A/R Days Reduction$0$1.3M$2.5M$3.8M$3.8M$3.8M$3.8M$3.8M
Clean Claim Rate$0$100K$200K$200K$200K$200K$200K$200K
Cumulative$0$4.5M$9.0M$13.3M$16.4M$16.4M$16.4M$16.4M

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 $16.4M 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$-61.4M$-61.4M-19.6%
Year 1$-63.2M+$11.0M$-52.3M-16.7%
Year 2$-65.1M+$16.4M$-48.7M-15.6%
Year 3$-67.1M+$16.4M$-50.6M-16.2%
Year 4$-69.1M+$16.4M$-52.6M-16.8%
Year 5$-71.1M+$16.4M$-54.7M-17.5%
$-613.7M
Entry EV (10x)
$-601.8M
Exit EV (11x)
$12.0M
Value Created
$-54.7M
Exit EBITDA
$-97.8M
Organic Growth
$164.4M
RCM Value Creation
$-54.7M
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$3.1M$4.7M$6.3M$7.5M
Denial Rate Reductio$3.1M$4.6M$6.2M$7.4M
A/R Days Reduction$1.9M$2.9M$3.8M$4.6M
Clean Claim Rate$100K$150K$200K$240K
Total$8.2M$12.3M$16.4M$19.7M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 24 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-19.6%-10.0%-6.3%-0.4%
P0
Net-to-Gross38.7%35.4%38.7%42.7%
P48
Occupancy57.8%41.7%57.1%70.4%
P58
Rev/Bed$3.3M$1.7M$2.2M$3.4M
P70
Exp/Bed$4.0M$1.7M$2.2M$3.3M
P75

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