Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — GOOD SHEPHERD MEDICAL CENTER 2026-04-26 03:59 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — GOOD SHEPHERD MEDICAL CENTER
CCN 450032 | TX | 314 beds | Current EBITDA $4.1M → Pro Forma $33.4M (+$29.3M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$557.4M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$4.1M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$29.3M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$33.4M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$21.4M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

69%
Realization (C)
$29.3M
Modeled Uplift
$20.4M
Risk-Adjusted
-$9.0M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Net-to-Gross RatioHigher Net-to-Gross Ratio increases execution like
Revenue per BedRevenue per Bed has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 69% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Net-to-Gross Ratio. Risks: Bed Count, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $20.4M (vs $29.3M 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
$11.1M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$11.0M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$6.8M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$357K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$29.3M

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$11.1M$11.1M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$10.7M$307K$11.0M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$1.7M$5.1M$6.8M$21.4M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$357K$357K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT25.0% 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
Cost to Collect$0$2.8M$5.6M$8.4M$11.1M$11.1M$11.1M$11.1M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$2.8M$5.5M$8.3M$11.0M$11.0M$11.0M$11.0M
A/R Days Reduction$0$2.3M$4.5M$6.8M$6.8M$6.8M$6.8M$6.8M
Clean Claim Rate$0$178K$357K$357K$357K$357K$357K$357K
Cumulative$0$8.0M$16.0M$23.8M$29.3M$29.3M$29.3M$29.3M

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 $29.3M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x125% / 57.2x130% / 64.0x134% / 70.7x137% / 74.0x139% / 77.4x
9.0x119% / 50.5x124% / 56.5x129% / 62.5x131% / 65.5x133% / 68.4x
10.0x114% / 45.1x119% / 50.5x124% / 55.9x126% / 58.6x128% / 61.3x
11.0x110% / 40.7x115% / 45.6x119% / 50.5x121% / 53.0x123% / 55.4x
12.0x106% / 37.1x111% / 41.6x115% / 46.0x117% / 48.3x119% / 50.5x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
1.0x
Pro Forma Leverage
5.5x
Headroom (turns)
84%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 84% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 1.0x, adding 7.4 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$4.1M$4.1M0.7%
Year 1$4.2M+$19.5M$23.8M4.3%
Year 2$4.4M+$29.3M$33.7M6.0%
Year 3$4.5M+$29.3M$33.8M6.1%
Year 4$4.6M+$29.3M$34.0M6.1%
Year 5$4.8M+$29.3M$34.1M6.1%
$41.2M
Entry EV (10x)
$375.1M
Exit EV (11x)
$333.9M
Value Created
$34.1M
Exit EBITDA
$6.6M
Organic Growth
$293.2M
RCM Value Creation
$34.1M
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$5.6M$8.4M$11.1M$13.4M
Denial Rate Reductio$5.5M$8.3M$11.0M$13.2M
A/R Days Reduction$3.4M$5.1M$6.8M$8.1M
Clean Claim Rate$178K$268K$357K$428K
Total$14.7M$22.0M$29.3M$35.2M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 125 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin0.7%-7.9%4.8%14.7%
P39
Net-to-Gross16.2%12.6%18.1%25.0%
P38
Occupancy65.6%56.5%68.3%77.6%
P40
Rev/Bed$1.8M$922K$1.3M$1.6M
P82
Exp/Bed$1.8M$786K$1.1M$1.6M
P82

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