Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — UNIVER.OF CINCINNATI MED CENTER LLC 2026-04-26 08:04 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — UNIVER.OF CINCINNATI MED CENTER LLC
CCN 360003 | OH | 542 beds | Current EBITDA $35.9M → Pro Forma $104.1M (+$68.3M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$1.30B
Net Revenue HCRIS
$35.9M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$68.3M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$104.1M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$49.8M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

70%
Realization (B)
$68.3M
Modeled Uplift
$48.1M
Risk-Adjusted
-$20.2M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 70% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Revenue per Bed. Risks: Bed Count, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $48.1M (vs $68.3M 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
$26.0M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$25.7M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$15.8M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$831K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$68.3M

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$26.0M$26.0M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$25.0M$714K$25.7M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$4.0M$11.8M$15.8M$49.8M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$831K$831K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT32.6% 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$6.5M$13.0M$19.5M$26.0M$26.0M$26.0M$26.0M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$6.4M$12.9M$19.3M$25.7M$25.7M$25.7M$25.7M
A/R Days Reduction$0$5.3M$10.5M$15.8M$15.8M$15.8M$15.8M$15.8M
Clean Claim Rate$0$415K$831K$831K$831K$831K$831K$831K
Cumulative$0$18.6M$37.2M$55.4M$68.3M$68.3M$68.3M$68.3M

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 $68.3M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x80% / 19.2x85% / 21.6x89% / 24.1x91% / 25.4x93% / 26.6x
9.0x76% / 16.7x80% / 18.9x84% / 21.1x86% / 22.2x88% / 23.3x
10.0x71% / 14.7x76% / 16.7x80% / 18.7x81% / 19.7x83% / 20.6x
11.0x67% / 13.1x72% / 14.9x76% / 16.7x77% / 17.6x79% / 18.5x
12.0x64% / 11.7x68% / 13.3x72% / 15.0x74% / 15.8x76% / 16.7x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
2.9x
Pro Forma Leverage
3.6x
Headroom (turns)
55%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 55% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 2.9x, adding 5.5 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$35.9M$35.9M2.8%
Year 1$36.9M+$45.5M$82.5M6.4%
Year 2$38.0M+$68.3M$106.3M8.2%
Year 3$39.2M+$68.3M$107.5M8.3%
Year 4$40.4M+$68.3M$108.6M8.4%
Year 5$41.6M+$68.3M$109.9M8.5%
$358.5M
Entry EV (10x)
$1.21B
Exit EV (11x)
$849.9M
Value Created
$109.9M
Exit EBITDA
$57.1M
Organic Growth
$683.0M
RCM Value Creation
$109.9M
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$13.0M$19.5M$26.0M$31.2M
Denial Rate Reductio$12.9M$19.3M$25.7M$30.8M
A/R Days Reduction$7.9M$11.8M$15.8M$19.0M
Clean Claim Rate$415K$623K$831K$997K
Total$34.1M$51.2M$68.3M$82.0M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 30 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin2.8%-10.9%0.1%6.5%
P59
Net-to-Gross24.9%21.9%27.7%32.6%
P31
Occupancy78.1%62.7%68.4%77.7%
P73
Rev/Bed$2.4M$1.5M$1.9M$2.3M
P76
Exp/Bed$2.3M$1.5M$2.0M$2.3M
P73

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