πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 363036 | OH | 50 beds | Current EBITDA $6.0M β†’ Pro Forma $7.1M (+$1.1M)
$21.7M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$6.0M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$1.1M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$7.1M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$834K
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

67%
Realization (C)
$1.1M
Modeled Uplift
$765K
Risk-Adjusted
-$378K
Execution Discount
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Net-to-Gross RatioHigher Net-to-Gross Ratio reduces execution likeli
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 67% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Bed Count. Risks: Revenue per Bed, Net-to-Gross Ratio. Risk-adjusted uplift: $0.8M (vs $1.1M 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
$435K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$430K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$264K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$14K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$1.1M

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$435K$435K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$418K$12K$430K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$67K$198K$264K$834K9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$14K$14K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT45.1% 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$109K$217K$326K$435K$435K$435K$435K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$108K$215K$323K$430K$430K$430K$430K
A/R Days Reduction$0$88K$176K$264K$264K$264K$264K$264K
Clean Claim Rate$0$7K$14K$14K$14K$14K$14K$14K
Cumulative$0$311K$623K$927K$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M

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 $1.1M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x46% / 6.6x51% / 7.7x55% / 8.8x56% / 9.4x58% / 9.9x
9.0x41% / 5.5x45% / 6.5x50% / 7.5x51% / 8.0x53% / 8.5x
10.0x36% / 4.7x41% / 5.5x45% / 6.4x47% / 6.8x49% / 7.3x
11.0x32% / 3.9x36% / 4.7x41% / 5.5x43% / 5.9x45% / 6.3x
12.0x27% / 3.3x32% / 4.1x37% / 4.8x39% / 5.2x41% / 5.5x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
7.1x
Pro Forma Leverage
-0.6x
Headroom (turns)
-9%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline -9% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 7.1x, adding 1.4 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$6.0Mβ€”$6.0M27.5%
Year 1$6.2M+$762K$6.9M31.9%
Year 2$6.3M+$1.1M$7.5M34.5%
Year 3$6.5M+$1.1M$7.7M35.4%
Year 4$6.7M+$1.1M$7.9M36.3%
Year 5$6.9M+$1.1M$8.1M37.2%
$59.8M
Entry EV (10x)
$88.9M
Exit EV (11x)
$29.0M
Value Created
$8.1M
Exit EBITDA
$9.5M
Organic Growth
$11.4M
RCM Value Creation
$8.1M
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$217K$326K$435K$522K
Denial Rate Reductio$215K$323K$430K$516K
A/R Days Reduction$132K$198K$264K$317K
Clean Claim Rate$7K$10K$14K$17K
Total$572K$857K$1.1M$1.4M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 110 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin27.5%-13.6%-1.4%10.1%
P95
Net-to-Gross64.7%26.1%35.9%45.1%
P98
Occupancy57.4%27.4%44.9%65.4%
P66
Rev/Bed$435K$386K$950K$1.6M
P29
Exp/Bed$315K$368K$928K$1.8M
P19

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