πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 501329 | WA | 25 beds | Current EBITDA $-4.2M β†’ Pro Forma $166K (+$4.4M)
$82.8M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-4.2M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$4.4M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$166K
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$3.2M
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

75%
Realization (B)
$4.4M
Modeled Uplift
$3.3M
Risk-Adjusted
-$1.1M
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
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
Scale (Log Beds)Scale (Log Beds) has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 75% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Revenue per Bed. Risk-adjusted uplift: $3.3M (vs $4.4M 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
$1.7M
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$1.6M
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$1.0M
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$53K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$4.4M

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$1.7M$1.7M$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$1.6M$46K$1.6M$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$254K$753K$1.0M$3.2M9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$53K$53K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT61.1% 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$414K$828K$1.2M$1.7M$1.7M$1.7M$1.7M
Denial Rate Reduction$0$410K$820K$1.2M$1.6M$1.6M$1.6M$1.6M
A/R Days Reduction$0$336K$672K$1.0M$1.0M$1.0M$1.0M$1.0M
Clean Claim Rate$0$26K$53K$53K$53K$53K$53K$53K
Cumulative$0$1.2M$2.4M$3.5M$4.4M$4.4M$4.4M$4.4M

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 $4.4M 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
-214.0x
Pro Forma Leverage
220.5x
Headroom (turns)
3393%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 3393% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 99.0x to -214.0x, adding 313.0 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$-4.2Mβ€”$-4.2M-5.1%
Year 1$-4.3M+$2.9M$-1.4M-1.7%
Year 2$-4.4M+$4.4M$-90K-0.1%
Year 3$-4.6M+$4.4M$-223K-0.3%
Year 4$-4.7M+$4.4M$-360K-0.4%
Year 5$-4.9M+$4.4M$-502K-0.6%
$-41.9M
Entry EV (10x)
$-5.5M
Exit EV (11x)
$36.4M
Value Created
$-502K
Exit EBITDA
$-6.7M
Organic Growth
$43.6M
RCM Value Creation
$-502K
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$828K$1.2M$1.7M$2.0M
Denial Rate Reductio$820K$1.2M$1.6M$2.0M
A/R Days Reduction$504K$756K$1.0M$1.2M
Clean Claim Rate$26K$40K$53K$64K
Total$2.2M$3.3M$4.4M$5.2M

Peer Context β€” 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-5.1%-15.7%-9.4%-4.1%
P69
Net-to-Gross38.8%37.5%50.4%61.1%
P28
Occupancy73.8%28.9%48.0%58.2%
P91
Rev/Bed$3.3M$1.1M$1.8M$3.2M
P74
Exp/Bed$3.5M$1.3M$2.0M$3.1M
P79

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