πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 450447 | TX | 49 beds | Current EBITDA $12.2M β†’ Pro Forma $16.9M (+$4.7M)
$89.4M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$12.2M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$4.7M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$16.9M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$3.4M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

67%
Realization (C)
$4.7M
Modeled Uplift
$3.1M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.6M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateLower Occupancy Rate reduces execution likelihood
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Revenue per BedRevenue per Bed has minimal effect on execution
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 67% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate. Risk-adjusted uplift: $3.1M (vs $4.7M 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
$1.8M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$1.8M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$1.1M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$57K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$4.7M

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$1.8M$1.8M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.7M$49K$1.8M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$274K$813K$1.1M$3.4M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$57K$57K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT51.1% 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$447K$894K$1.3M$1.8M$1.8M$1.8M$1.8M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$442K$885K$1.3M$1.8M$1.8M$1.8M$1.8M
A/R Days Reduction$0$362K$725K$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M
Clean Claim Rate$0$29K$57K$57K$57K$57K$57K$57K
Cumulative$0$1.3M$2.6M$3.8M$4.7M$4.7M$4.7M$4.7M

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 $4.7M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x52% / 8.0x56% / 9.3x60% / 10.6x62% / 11.2x64% / 11.8x
9.0x47% / 6.8x51% / 7.9x55% / 9.0x57% / 9.6x59% / 10.1x
10.0x42% / 5.8x47% / 6.8x51% / 7.8x53% / 8.3x54% / 8.8x
11.0x38% / 5.0x43% / 5.9x47% / 6.8x49% / 7.2x50% / 7.7x
12.0x34% / 4.3x39% / 5.1x43% / 6.0x45% / 6.4x47% / 6.8x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
6.1x
Pro Forma Leverage
0.4x
Headroom (turns)
6%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 6% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 6.1x, adding 2.4 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$12.2Mβ€”$12.2M13.7%
Year 1$12.6M+$3.1M$15.7M17.6%
Year 2$13.0M+$4.7M$17.7M19.8%
Year 3$13.3M+$4.7M$18.0M20.2%
Year 4$13.7M+$4.7M$18.4M20.6%
Year 5$14.2M+$4.7M$18.9M21.1%
$122.1M
Entry EV (10x)
$207.4M
Exit EV (11x)
$85.3M
Value Created
$18.9M
Exit EBITDA
$19.4M
Organic Growth
$47.0M
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$894K$1.3M$1.8M$2.1M
Denial Rate Reductio$885K$1.3M$1.8M$2.1M
A/R Days Reduction$544K$816K$1.1M$1.3M
Clean Claim Rate$29K$43K$57K$69K
Total$2.4M$3.5M$4.7M$5.6M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 272 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin13.7%-21.0%-3.2%10.6%
P80
Net-to-Gross19.7%23.2%32.9%51.1%
P20
Occupancy42.7%23.4%50.7%71.5%
P42
Rev/Bed$1.8M$335K$561K$1.1M
P92
Exp/Bed$1.6M$371K$533K$1.2M
P85

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