Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — UT MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER 2026-04-26 04:01 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — UT MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER
CCN 450076 | TX | 721 beds | Current EBITDA $-39.2M → Pro Forma $218.6M (+$257.8M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$4.90B
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-39.2M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$257.8M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$218.6M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$188.0M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

76%
Realization (B)
$257.8M
Modeled Uplift
$196.9M
Risk-Adjusted
-$60.9M
Execution Discount
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Bed CountHigher Bed Count reduces execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 76% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Revenue per Bed, Occupancy Rate. Risks: Bed Count. Risk-adjusted uplift: $196.9M (vs $257.8M 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
$98.0M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$97.0M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$59.6M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$3.1M
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$257.8M

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$98.0M$98.0M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$94.3M$2.7M$97.0M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$15.0M$44.6M$59.6M$188.0M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$3.1M$3.1M$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT27.4% 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$24.5M$49.0M$73.5M$98.0M$98.0M$98.0M$98.0M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$24.3M$48.5M$72.8M$97.0M$97.0M$97.0M$97.0M
A/R Days Reduction$0$19.9M$39.8M$59.6M$59.6M$59.6M$59.6M$59.6M
Clean Claim Rate$0$1.6M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M$3.1M
Cumulative$0$70.2M$140.4M$209.0M$257.8M$257.8M$257.8M$257.8M

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 $257.8M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
9.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
10.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
11.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x
12.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0x

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

99.0x
Entry Leverage
-1.5x
Pro Forma Leverage
8.0x
Headroom (turns)
123%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 123% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 99.0x to -1.5x, adding 100.5 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$-39.2M$-39.2M-0.8%
Year 1$-40.4M+$171.9M$131.5M2.7%
Year 2$-41.6M+$257.8M$216.2M4.4%
Year 3$-42.9M+$257.8M$214.9M4.4%
Year 4$-44.1M+$257.8M$213.7M4.4%
Year 5$-45.5M+$257.8M$212.3M4.3%
$-392.2M
Entry EV (10x)
$2.34B
Exit EV (11x)
$2.73B
Value Created
$212.3M
Exit EBITDA
$-62.5M
Organic Growth
$2.58B
RCM Value Creation
$212.3M
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$49.0M$73.5M$98.0M$117.6M
Denial Rate Reductio$48.5M$72.8M$97.0M$116.4M
A/R Days Reduction$29.8M$44.7M$59.6M$71.6M
Clean Claim Rate$1.6M$2.4M$3.1M$3.8M
Total$128.9M$193.4M$257.8M$309.4M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 43 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-0.8%-13.7%2.2%12.6%
P42
Net-to-Gross44.8%13.7%21.8%27.4%
P91
Occupancy87.1%67.3%74.1%81.1%
P91
Rev/Bed$6.8M$1.2M$1.5M$1.8M
P98
Exp/Bed$6.9M$1.1M$1.5M$2.3M
P98

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