πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 390112 | PA | 47 beds | Current EBITDA $-6.3M β†’ Pro Forma $-3.5M (+$2.8M)
$53.8M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-6.3M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$2.8M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-3.5M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$2.1M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

60%
Realization (C)
$2.8M
Modeled Uplift
$1.7M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.1M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateLower Occupancy Rate reduces execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Payer DiversityHigher Payer Diversity increases execution likelih
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Revenue per BedRevenue per Bed has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 60% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Payer Diversity, Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $1.7M (vs $2.8M 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
$1.1M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$1.1M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$655K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$34K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$2.8M

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$1.1M$1.1M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.0M$30K$1.1M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$165K$490K$655K$2.1M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$34K$34K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT43.6% 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$269K$538K$808K$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$267K$533K$800K$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M
A/R Days Reduction$0$218K$437K$655K$655K$655K$655K$655K
Clean Claim Rate$0$17K$34K$34K$34K$34K$34K$34K
Cumulative$0$771K$1.5M$2.3M$2.8M$2.8M$2.8M$2.8M

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 $2.8M 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$-6.3Mβ€”$-6.3M-11.7%
Year 1$-6.5M+$1.9M$-4.6M-8.6%
Year 2$-6.7M+$2.8M$-3.9M-7.2%
Year 3$-6.9M+$2.8M$-4.1M-7.5%
Year 4$-7.1M+$2.8M$-4.3M-7.9%
Year 5$-7.3M+$2.8M$-4.5M-8.3%
$-63.1M
Entry EV (10x)
$-49.3M
Exit EV (11x)
$13.8M
Value Created
$-4.5M
Exit EBITDA
$-10.0M
Organic Growth
$28.3M
RCM Value Creation
$-4.5M
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$538K$808K$1.1M$1.3M
Denial Rate Reductio$533K$800K$1.1M$1.3M
A/R Days Reduction$328K$491K$655K$786K
Clean Claim Rate$17K$26K$34K$41K
Total$1.4M$2.1M$2.8M$3.4M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 85 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-11.7%-14.6%1.4%9.1%
P29
Net-to-Gross37.3%19.8%31.1%43.6%
P68
Occupancy16.6%29.7%51.0%72.3%
P11
Rev/Bed$1.1M$407K$755K$1.5M
P65
Exp/Bed$1.3M$390K$871K$1.4M
P72

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