πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 390119 | PA | 81 beds | Current EBITDA $-13.9M β†’ Pro Forma $-11.9M (+$2.0M)
$38.5M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-13.9M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$2.0M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-11.9M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$1.5M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

66%
Realization (C)
$2.0M
Modeled Uplift
$1.3M
Risk-Adjusted
-$680K
Execution Discount
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Net-to-Gross RatioHigher Net-to-Gross Ratio increases execution like
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Bed CountBed Count has minimal effect on execution
Occupancy RateOccupancy Rate has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 66% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Net-to-Gross Ratio. Risks: Revenue per Bed, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $1.3M (vs $2.0M 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
$770K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$763K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$469K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$25K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$2.0M

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$770K$770K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$741K$21K$763K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$118K$350K$469K$1.5M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$25K$25K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT38.6% 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$193K$385K$578K$770K$770K$770K$770K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$191K$381K$572K$763K$763K$763K$763K
A/R Days Reduction$0$156K$312K$469K$469K$469K$469K$469K
Clean Claim Rate$0$12K$25K$25K$25K$25K$25K$25K
Cumulative$0$552K$1.1M$1.6M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M$2.0M

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 $2.0M 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$-13.9Mβ€”$-13.9M-36.2%
Year 1$-14.4M+$1.4M$-13.0M-33.8%
Year 2$-14.8M+$2.0M$-12.8M-33.1%
Year 3$-15.2M+$2.0M$-13.2M-34.3%
Year 4$-15.7M+$2.0M$-13.7M-35.5%
Year 5$-16.2M+$2.0M$-14.1M-36.7%
$-139.4M
Entry EV (10x)
$-155.5M
Exit EV (11x)
$-16.1M
Value Created
$-14.1M
Exit EBITDA
$-22.2M
Organic Growth
$20.3M
RCM Value Creation
$-14.1M
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$385K$578K$770K$924K
Denial Rate Reductio$381K$572K$763K$915K
A/R Days Reduction$234K$352K$469K$562K
Clean Claim Rate$12K$18K$25K$30K
Total$1.0M$1.5M$2.0M$2.4M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 103 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-36.2%-19.5%-4.5%8.4%
P11
Net-to-Gross12.7%18.6%29.2%38.6%
P5
Occupancy50.5%36.8%57.2%75.1%
P41
Rev/Bed$476K$412K$613K$1.2M
P29
Exp/Bed$648K$403K$749K$1.3M
P46

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