Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — BAYLOR UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CTR 2026-04-26 04:00 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — BAYLOR UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CTR
CCN 450021 | TX | 800 beds | Current EBITDA $5.2M → Pro Forma $71.5M (+$66.2M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$1.26B
Net Revenue HCRIS
$5.2M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$66.2M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$71.5M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$48.3M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

69%
Realization (C)
$66.2M
Modeled Uplift
$45.8M
Risk-Adjusted
-$20.5M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 69% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate. Risks: Bed Count, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $45.8M (vs $66.2M 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
$25.2M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$24.9M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$15.3M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$806K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$66.2M

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$25.2M$25.2M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$24.2M$692K$24.9M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$3.9M$11.5M$15.3M$48.3M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$806K$806K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT27.1% 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$6.3M$12.6M$18.9M$25.2M$25.2M$25.2M$25.2M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$6.2M$12.5M$18.7M$24.9M$24.9M$24.9M$24.9M
A/R Days Reduction$0$5.1M$10.2M$15.3M$15.3M$15.3M$15.3M$15.3M
Clean Claim Rate$0$403K$806K$806K$806K$806K$806K$806K
Cumulative$0$18.0M$36.1M$53.7M$66.2M$66.2M$66.2M$66.2M

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 $66.2M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x150% / 97.7x156% / 109.0x161% / 120.2x163% / 125.8x165% / 131.4x
9.0x144% / 86.5x149% / 96.5x154% / 106.5x157% / 111.5x159% / 116.4x
10.0x139% / 77.5x144% / 86.5x149% / 95.5x151% / 100.0x153% / 104.5x
11.0x134% / 70.2x139% / 78.3x144% / 86.5x146% / 90.6x148% / 94.7x
12.0x130% / 64.1x135% / 71.5x140% / 79.0x142% / 82.8x144% / 86.5x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
0.6x
Pro Forma Leverage
5.9x
Headroom (turns)
90%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 90% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 0.6x, adding 7.8 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$5.2M$5.2M0.4%
Year 1$5.4M+$44.2M$49.5M3.9%
Year 2$5.6M+$66.2M$71.8M5.7%
Year 3$5.7M+$66.2M$72.0M5.7%
Year 4$5.9M+$66.2M$72.1M5.7%
Year 5$6.1M+$66.2M$72.3M5.7%
$52.4M
Entry EV (10x)
$795.3M
Exit EV (11x)
$742.9M
Value Created
$72.3M
Exit EBITDA
$8.3M
Organic Growth
$662.3M
RCM Value Creation
$72.3M
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$12.6M$18.9M$25.2M$30.2M
Denial Rate Reductio$12.5M$18.7M$24.9M$29.9M
A/R Days Reduction$7.7M$11.5M$15.3M$18.4M
Clean Claim Rate$403K$604K$806K$967K
Total$33.1M$49.7M$66.2M$79.5M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 36 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin0.4%-20.2%2.5%12.8%
P44
Net-to-Gross31.7%13.3%21.2%27.1%
P83
Occupancy89.9%67.1%73.0%81.9%
P92
Rev/Bed$1.6M$1.2M$1.5M$1.7M
P61
Exp/Bed$1.6M$1.1M$1.4M$2.4M
P56

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