πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 450565 | TX | 48 beds | Current EBITDA $-27.0M β†’ Pro Forma $-25.1M (+$1.9M)
$35.8M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-27.0M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$1.9M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-25.1M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$1.4M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

66%
Realization (C)
$1.9M
Modeled Uplift
$1.2M
Risk-Adjusted
-$650K
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
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 65% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate, Revenue per Bed. Risk-adjusted uplift: $1.2M (vs $1.9M 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
$716K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$709K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$436K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$23K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$1.9M

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$716K$716K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$689K$20K$709K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$110K$326K$436K$1.4M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$23K$23K$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$179K$358K$537K$716K$716K$716K$716K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$177K$354K$532K$709K$709K$709K$709K
A/R Days Reduction$0$145K$290K$436K$436K$436K$436K$436K
Clean Claim Rate$0$11K$23K$23K$23K$23K$23K$23K
Cumulative$0$513K$1.0M$1.5M$1.9M$1.9M$1.9M$1.9M

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 $1.9M 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$-27.0Mβ€”$-27.0M-75.4%
Year 1$-27.8M+$1.3M$-26.5M-74.1%
Year 2$-28.6M+$1.9M$-26.7M-74.7%
Year 3$-29.5M+$1.9M$-27.6M-77.1%
Year 4$-30.4M+$1.9M$-28.5M-79.6%
Year 5$-31.3M+$1.9M$-29.4M-82.1%
$-269.8M
Entry EV (10x)
$-323.3M
Exit EV (11x)
$-53.5M
Value Created
$-29.4M
Exit EBITDA
$-43.0M
Organic Growth
$18.8M
RCM Value Creation
$-29.4M
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$358K$537K$716K$859K
Denial Rate Reductio$354K$532K$709K$850K
A/R Days Reduction$218K$327K$436K$523K
Clean Claim Rate$11K$17K$23K$27K
Total$942K$1.4M$1.9M$2.3M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 281 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-50.0%-20.9%-2.9%10.8%
P0
Net-to-Gross24.1%24.1%34.1%51.1%
P25
Occupancy43.8%23.1%50.1%72.2%
P44
Rev/Bed$746K$335K$561K$1.1M
P62
Exp/Bed$1.3M$367K$537K$1.2M
P78

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