πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 450880 | TX | 30 beds | Current EBITDA $20.1M β†’ Pro Forma $27.2M (+$7.2M)
$136.0M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$20.1M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$7.2M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$27.2M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$5.2M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

67%
Realization (C)
$7.2M
Modeled Uplift
$4.8M
Risk-Adjusted
-$2.3M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateLower Occupancy Rate reduces execution likelihood
Revenue per BedHigher Revenue per Bed increases execution likelih
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Commercial Payer % has minimal effect on execution
Payer DiversityPayer Diversity has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 67% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Revenue per Bed, Bed Count. Risks: Occupancy Rate. Risk-adjusted uplift: $4.8M (vs $7.2M 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
$2.7M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$2.7M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$1.7M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$87K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$7.2M

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$2.7M$2.7M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$2.6M$75K$2.7M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$417K$1.2M$1.7M$5.2M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$87K$87K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT51.9% 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$680K$1.4M$2.0M$2.7M$2.7M$2.7M$2.7M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$673K$1.3M$2.0M$2.7M$2.7M$2.7M$2.7M
A/R Days Reduction$0$552K$1.1M$1.7M$1.7M$1.7M$1.7M$1.7M
Clean Claim Rate$0$44K$87K$87K$87K$87K$87K$87K
Cumulative$0$1.9M$3.9M$5.8M$7.2M$7.2M$7.2M$7.2M

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 $7.2M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x51% / 7.8x55% / 9.1x59% / 10.3x61% / 10.9x63% / 11.5x
9.0x46% / 6.6x50% / 7.7x54% / 8.8x56% / 9.3x58% / 9.9x
10.0x41% / 5.6x46% / 6.6x50% / 7.6x52% / 8.1x54% / 8.6x
11.0x37% / 4.8x42% / 5.7x46% / 6.6x48% / 7.0x50% / 7.5x
12.0x33% / 4.1x38% / 5.0x42% / 5.8x44% / 6.2x46% / 6.6x

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

8.5x
Entry Leverage
6.2x
Pro Forma Leverage
0.3x
Headroom (turns)
4%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 4% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 6.2x, adding 2.2 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$20.1Mβ€”$20.1M14.8%
Year 1$20.7M+$4.8M$25.4M18.7%
Year 2$21.3M+$7.2M$28.4M20.9%
Year 3$21.9M+$7.2M$29.1M21.4%
Year 4$22.6M+$7.2M$29.7M21.9%
Year 5$23.3M+$7.2M$30.4M22.4%
$200.7M
Entry EV (10x)
$334.7M
Exit EV (11x)
$133.9M
Value Created
$30.4M
Exit EBITDA
$32.0M
Organic Growth
$71.5M
RCM Value Creation
$30.4M
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$1.4M$2.0M$2.7M$3.3M
Denial Rate Reductio$1.3M$2.0M$2.7M$3.2M
A/R Days Reduction$827K$1.2M$1.7M$2.0M
Clean Claim Rate$44K$65K$87K$104K
Total$3.6M$5.4M$7.2M$8.6M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 278 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin14.8%-30.6%-4.0%10.0%
P83
Net-to-Gross36.0%24.4%35.3%51.9%
P51
Occupancy28.1%15.4%33.8%60.4%
P42
Rev/Bed$4.5M$421K$624K$1.2M
P96
Exp/Bed$3.9M$437K$790K$1.4M
P97

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