πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 390322 | PA | 24 beds | Current EBITDA $13.3M β†’ Pro Forma $16.7M (+$3.4M)
$64.8M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$13.3M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$3.4M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$16.7M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$2.5M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

63%
Realization (C)
$3.4M
Modeled Uplift
$2.1M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.3M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateLower Occupancy Rate reduces execution likelihood
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 63% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Revenue per Bed, Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate. Risk-adjusted uplift: $2.1M (vs $3.4M 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
$1.3M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$1.3M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$788K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$41K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$3.4M

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$1.3M$1.3M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.2M$36K$1.3M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$199K$589K$788K$2.5M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$41K$41K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT36.4% 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$324K$648K$972K$1.3M$1.3M$1.3M$1.3M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$321K$641K$962K$1.3M$1.3M$1.3M$1.3M
A/R Days Reduction$0$263K$525K$788K$788K$788K$788K$788K
Clean Claim Rate$0$21K$41K$41K$41K$41K$41K$41K
Cumulative$0$928K$1.9M$2.8M$3.4M$3.4M$3.4M$3.4M

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 $3.4M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x48% / 7.1x52% / 8.2x57% / 9.4x58% / 10.0x60% / 10.6x
9.0x43% / 6.0x47% / 7.0x52% / 8.0x53% / 8.5x55% / 9.0x
10.0x38% / 5.0x43% / 6.0x47% / 6.9x49% / 7.3x51% / 7.8x
11.0x34% / 4.3x39% / 5.1x43% / 6.0x45% / 6.4x47% / 6.8x
12.0x30% / 3.6x35% / 4.4x39% / 5.2x41% / 5.6x43% / 6.0x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
6.7x
Pro Forma Leverage
-0.2x
Headroom (turns)
-4%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline -4% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 6.7x, adding 1.7 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$13.3Mβ€”$13.3M20.6%
Year 1$13.7M+$2.3M$16.0M24.7%
Year 2$14.1M+$3.4M$17.6M27.1%
Year 3$14.6M+$3.4M$18.0M27.8%
Year 4$15.0M+$3.4M$18.4M28.4%
Year 5$15.5M+$3.4M$18.9M29.1%
$133.3M
Entry EV (10x)
$207.5M
Exit EV (11x)
$74.2M
Value Created
$18.9M
Exit EBITDA
$21.2M
Organic Growth
$34.1M
RCM Value Creation
$18.9M
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$648K$972K$1.3M$1.6M
Denial Rate Reductio$641K$962K$1.3M$1.5M
A/R Days Reduction$394K$591K$788K$946K
Clean Claim Rate$21K$31K$41K$50K
Total$1.7M$2.6M$3.4M$4.1M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 53 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin20.6%-13.6%-0.5%6.5%
P94
Net-to-Gross24.3%24.9%30.4%36.4%
P23
Occupancy15.4%18.4%33.7%53.7%
P17
Rev/Bed$2.7M$437K$1.2M$2.1M
P81
Exp/Bed$2.1M$617K$1.3M$2.1M
P74

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