Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — DUKE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL 2026-04-26 05:01 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — DUKE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
CCN 340030 | NC | 1048 beds | Current EBITDA $-142.4M → Pro Forma $23.7M (+$166.1M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$3.16B
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-142.4M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$166.1M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$23.7M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$121.1M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

68%
Realization (C)
$166.1M
Modeled Uplift
$113.6M
Risk-Adjusted
-$52.5M
Execution Discount
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 68% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Revenue per Bed. Risks: Bed Count, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $113.6M (vs $166.1M 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
$63.1M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$62.5M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$38.4M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$2.0M
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$166.1M

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$63.1M$63.1M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$60.8M$1.7M$62.5M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$9.7M$28.7M$38.4M$121.1M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$2.0M$2.0M$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT31.2% 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$15.8M$31.6M$47.3M$63.1M$63.1M$63.1M$63.1M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$15.6M$31.3M$46.9M$62.5M$62.5M$62.5M$62.5M
A/R Days Reduction$0$12.8M$25.6M$38.4M$38.4M$38.4M$38.4M$38.4M
Clean Claim Rate$0$1.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M
Cumulative$0$45.2M$90.4M$134.7M$166.1M$166.1M$166.1M$166.1M

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 $166.1M 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
-50.8x
Pro Forma Leverage
57.3x
Headroom (turns)
882%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 882% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 99.0x to -50.8x, adding 149.8 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$-142.4M$-142.4M-4.5%
Year 1$-146.6M+$110.7M$-35.9M-1.1%
Year 2$-151.0M+$166.1M$15.0M0.5%
Year 3$-155.6M+$166.1M$10.5M0.3%
Year 4$-160.2M+$166.1M$5.8M0.2%
Year 5$-165.0M+$166.1M$1.0M0.0%
$-1.42B
Entry EV (10x)
$11.4M
Exit EV (11x)
$1.43B
Value Created
$1.0M
Exit EBITDA
$-226.7M
Organic Growth
$1.66B
RCM Value Creation
$1.0M
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$31.6M$47.3M$63.1M$75.8M
Denial Rate Reductio$31.3M$46.9M$62.5M$75.0M
A/R Days Reduction$19.2M$28.8M$38.4M$46.1M
Clean Claim Rate$1.0M$1.5M$2.0M$2.4M
Total$83.0M$124.5M$166.1M$199.3M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 12 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-4.5%-5.9%-4.4%-0.8%
P42
Net-to-Gross31.4%26.9%30.3%31.2%
P75
Occupancy87.9%75.9%79.2%88.7%
P67
Rev/Bed$3.0M$1.6M$1.8M$2.7M
P83
Exp/Bed$3.1M$1.6M$2.0M$2.8M
P92

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