Corpus Intelligence EBITDA Bridge — SA WARM SPRINGS REHAB HOSP 2026-04-26 06:49 UTC
EBITDA Bridge — SA WARM SPRINGS REHAB HOSP
CCN 453035 | TX | 134 beds | Current EBITDA $10.7M → Pro Forma $14.8M (+$4.1M)
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
$78.4M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$10.7M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$4.1M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$14.8M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$3.0M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

75%
Realization (B)
$4.1M
Modeled Uplift
$3.1M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.0M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % increases execution like
Net-to-Gross RatioNet-to-Gross Ratio has minimal effect on execution
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 75% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Commercial Payer %. Risks: Revenue per Bed. Risk-adjusted uplift: $3.1M (vs $4.1M 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
$1.6M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$1.6M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$954K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$50K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$4.1M

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$1.6M$1.6M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.5M$43K$1.6M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$240K$713K$954K$3.0M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$50K$50K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT34.2% 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$392K$784K$1.2M$1.6M$1.6M$1.6M$1.6M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$388K$776K$1.2M$1.6M$1.6M$1.6M$1.6M
A/R Days Reduction$0$318K$636K$954K$954K$954K$954K$954K
Clean Claim Rate$0$25K$50K$50K$50K$50K$50K$50K
Cumulative$0$1.1M$2.2M$3.3M$4.1M$4.1M$4.1M$4.1M

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 $4.1M 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% / 5.0x42% / 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 2.3 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$10.7M$10.7M13.7%
Year 1$11.0M+$2.7M$13.8M17.6%
Year 2$11.4M+$4.1M$15.5M19.8%
Year 3$11.7M+$4.1M$15.8M20.2%
Year 4$12.1M+$4.1M$16.2M20.7%
Year 5$12.4M+$4.1M$16.6M21.1%
$107.3M
Entry EV (10x)
$182.1M
Exit EV (11x)
$74.9M
Value Created
$16.6M
Exit EBITDA
$17.1M
Organic Growth
$41.2M
RCM Value Creation
$16.6M
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$784K$1.2M$1.6M$1.9M
Denial Rate Reductio$776K$1.2M$1.6M$1.9M
A/R Days Reduction$477K$715K$954K$1.1M
Clean Claim Rate$25K$38K$50K$60K
Total$2.1M$3.1M$4.1M$4.9M

Peer Context — Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 173 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin13.7%-9.5%2.3%13.0%
P77
Net-to-Gross34.3%15.2%23.8%34.2%
P75
Occupancy86.2%47.1%62.6%75.2%
P91
Rev/Bed$585K$312K$879K$1.4M
P42
Exp/Bed$505K$332K$783K$1.3M
P36

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