Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — MCLEOD MED CTR - DARLINGTON 2026-04-26 14:09 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — MCLEOD MED CTR - DARLINGTON
CCN 420057 | SC | 36 beds | Current EBITDA $-1.1M → Pro Forma $-930K (+$128K)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$2.1M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-1.1M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$128K
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-930K
Pro Forma EBITDA
+598bps
Margin Improvement
$82K
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

56%
Realization (C)
$128K
Modeled Uplift
$72K
Risk-Adjusted
-$56K
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateLower Occupancy Rate reduces execution likelihood
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 56% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate, Revenue per Bed. Risk-adjusted uplift: $0.1M (vs $0.1M 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).

Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$49K
+231bp
Cost to Collect
Cost Savings | 12mo ramp
$43K
+200bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$26K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$10K
+45bp
Total EBITDA Impact$128K

Lever Detail

Each value shows its data source. SELLER = seller data room, DEFAULT = model default, BENCHMARK = P75 peer benchmark.

LeverCurrentTargetRevenueCostEBITDAWCRamp
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$41K$8K$49K$012mo
Cost to Collect4.5% DEFAULT2.5% BENCHMARK$0$43K$43K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$7K$19K$26K$82K9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$10K$10K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT60.0% 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
Denial Rate Reduction$0$12K$25K$37K$49K$49K$49K$49K
Cost to Collect$0$11K$21K$32K$43K$43K$43K$43K
A/R Days Reduction$0$9K$17K$26K$26K$26K$26K$26K
Clean Claim Rate$0$5K$10K$10K$10K$10K$10K$10K
Cumulative$0$36K$73K$105K$128K$128K$128K$128K

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 $128K 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$-1.1M$-1.1M-49.5%
Year 1$-1.1M+$85K$-1.0M-47.0%
Year 2$-1.1M+$128K$-995K-46.6%
Year 3$-1.2M+$128K$-1.0M-48.1%
Year 4$-1.2M+$128K$-1.1M-49.8%
Year 5$-1.2M+$128K$-1.1M-51.4%
$-10.6M
Entry EV (10x)
$-12.1M
Exit EV (11x)
$-1.5M
Value Created
$-1.1M
Exit EBITDA
$-1.7M
Organic Growth
$1.3M
RCM Value Creation
$-1.1M
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%
Denial Rate Reductio$25K$37K$49K$59K
Cost to Collect$21K$32K$43K$51K
A/R Days Reduction$13K$19K$26K$31K
Clean Claim Rate$5K$7K$10K$12K
Total$64K$96K$128K$153K

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 39 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-49.5%-13.0%1.6%15.7%
P3
Net-to-Gross28.5%22.4%31.5%60.0%
P46
Occupancy3.8%40.3%64.3%75.9%
P0
Rev/Bed$59K$451K$619K$1.8M
P0
Exp/Bed$89K$412K$657K$1.6M
P0

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