Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — OAKWOOD SPRINGS 2026-04-26 14:13 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — OAKWOOD SPRINGS
CCN 374025 | OK | 72 beds | Current EBITDA $-1.5M → Pro Forma $-606K (+$876K)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$16.7M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-1.5M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$876K
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-606K
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$639K
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

70%
Realization (B)
$876K
Modeled Uplift
$618K
Risk-Adjusted
-$259K
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Bed CountBed Count has minimal effect on execution
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 70% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate. Risks: Revenue per Bed. Risk-adjusted uplift: $0.6M (vs $0.9M 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
$333K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$330K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$203K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$11K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$876K

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$333K$333K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$321K$9K$330K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$51K$152K$203K$639K9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$11K$11K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT35.3% 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$83K$167K$250K$333K$333K$333K$333K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$82K$165K$247K$330K$330K$330K$330K
A/R Days Reduction$0$68K$135K$203K$203K$203K$203K$203K
Clean Claim Rate$0$5K$11K$11K$11K$11K$11K$11K
Cumulative$0$239K$477K$710K$876K$876K$876K$876K

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 $876K is added at exit.

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

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$-1.5M$-1.5M-8.9%
Year 1$-1.5M+$584K$-943K-5.7%
Year 2$-1.6M+$876K$-697K-4.2%
Year 3$-1.6M+$876K$-744K-4.5%
Year 4$-1.7M+$876K$-792K-4.8%
Year 5$-1.7M+$876K$-842K-5.1%
$-14.8M
Entry EV (10x)
$-9.3M
Exit EV (11x)
$5.6M
Value Created
$-842K
Exit EBITDA
$-2.4M
Organic Growth
$8.8M
RCM Value Creation
$-842K
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$167K$250K$333K$400K
Denial Rate Reductio$165K$247K$330K$396K
A/R Days Reduction$101K$152K$203K$243K
Clean Claim Rate$5K$8K$11K$13K
Total$438K$657K$876K$1.1M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 61 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-8.9%-17.7%-3.8%6.4%
P40
Net-to-Gross27.7%18.9%26.7%35.3%
P55
Occupancy72.1%25.2%45.8%67.6%
P79
Rev/Bed$231K$443K$940K$1.4M
P11
Exp/Bed$252K$444K$1.1M$1.6M
P7

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