πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 504013 | WA | 72 beds | Current EBITDA $-2.0M β†’ Pro Forma $-819K (+$1.1M)
$21.7M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$-2.0M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$1.1M
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$-819K
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$831K
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

70%
Realization (C)
$1.1M
Modeled Uplift
$792K
Risk-Adjusted
-$348K
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % reduces execution likeli
Payer DiversityHigher Payer Diversity increases execution likelih
Bed CountBed Count has minimal effect on execution

Expected realization: 69% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Payer Diversity. Risks: Revenue per Bed, Commercial Payer %. Risk-adjusted uplift: $0.8M (vs $1.1M 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
$433K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$429K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$264K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$14K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$1.1M

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$433K$433K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$417K$12K$429K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$66K$197K$264K$831K9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$14K$14K$06mo
Net Collection Rate93.5% DEFAULT36.7% 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$108K$217K$325K$433K$433K$433K$433K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$107K$214K$322K$429K$429K$429K$429K
A/R Days Reduction$0$88K$176K$264K$264K$264K$264K$264K
Clean Claim Rate$0$7K$14K$14K$14K$14K$14K$14K
Cumulative$0$310K$621K$924K$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M$1.1M

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 $1.1M is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
9.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
10.0xLossLossLossLossLoss
11.0x-100% / 0.0xLossLossLossLoss
12.0x-100% / 0.0x-100% / 0.0xLossLossLoss

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$-2.0Mβ€”$-2.0M-9.0%
Year 1$-2.0M+$760K$-1.3M-5.8%
Year 2$-2.1M+$1.1M$-939K-4.3%
Year 3$-2.1M+$1.1M$-1.0M-4.6%
Year 4$-2.2M+$1.1M$-1.1M-4.9%
Year 5$-2.3M+$1.1M$-1.1M-5.2%
$-19.6M
Entry EV (10x)
$-12.4M
Exit EV (11x)
$7.1M
Value Created
$-1.1M
Exit EBITDA
$-3.1M
Organic Growth
$11.4M
RCM Value Creation
$-1.1M
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$217K$325K$433K$520K
Denial Rate Reductio$214K$322K$429K$515K
A/R Days Reduction$132K$198K$264K$316K
Clean Claim Rate$7K$10K$14K$17K
Total$570K$855K$1.1M$1.4M

Peer Context β€” Where This Hospital Sits

Key metrics vs 29 size-matched peers. Low percentile on margin/efficiency metrics = more room for improvement = larger bridge opportunity.

MetricHospitalP25P50P75Percentile
Op Margin-9.0%-18.3%-10.4%-2.2%
P52
Net-to-Gross38.9%23.5%27.1%36.7%
P79
Occupancy69.5%52.8%67.3%81.6%
P55
Rev/Bed$301K$497K$1.4M$2.2M
P10
Exp/Bed$328K$542K$1.5M$2.3M
P14

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