πŸ›‘οΈ Public data only β€” no PHI permitted on this instance.
SC
SeekingChartis
CCN 673045 | TX | 30 beds | Current EBITDA $2.0M β†’ Pro Forma $2.8M (+$793K)
$15.1M
Net Revenue HCRIS
$2.0M
Current EBITDA COMPUTED
+$793K
RCM EBITDA Uplift
$2.8M
Pro Forma EBITDA
+526bps
Margin Improvement
$579K
WC Released (1x)

Bridge Realization Estimate

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

73%
Realization (B)
$793K
Modeled Uplift
$581K
Risk-Adjusted
-$212K
Execution Discount
Occupancy RateHigher Occupancy Rate increases execution likeliho
Revenue per BedLower Revenue per Bed reduces execution likelihood
Net-to-Gross RatioHigher Net-to-Gross Ratio reduces execution likeli
Bed CountHigher Bed Count increases execution likelihood
Commercial Payer %Higher Commercial Payer % increases execution like

Expected realization: 73% of modeled bridge. Strengths: Occupancy Rate, Bed Count. Risks: Revenue per Bed, Net-to-Gross Ratio. Risk-adjusted uplift: $0.6M (vs $0.8M 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
$302K
+200bp
Denial Rate Reduction
Revenue | 12mo ramp
$299K
+198bp
A/R Days Reduction
Cash Accel | 9mo ramp
$184K
+122bp
Clean Claim Rate
Cost Savings | 6mo ramp
$10K
+6bp
Total EBITDA Impact$793K

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$302K$302K$012mo
Denial Rate Reduction12.0% DEFAULT6.5% BENCHMARK$290K$8K$299K$012mo
A/R Days Reduction52.00 DEFAULT38.00 BENCHMARK$46K$137K$184K$579K9mo
Clean Claim Rate88.0% DEFAULT96.0% BENCHMARK$0$10K$10K$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$75K$151K$226K$302K$302K$302K$302K
Denial Rate Reduction$0$75K$149K$224K$299K$299K$299K$299K
A/R Days Reduction$0$61K$122K$184K$184K$184K$184K$184K
Clean Claim Rate$0$5K$10K$10K$10K$10K$10K$10K
Cumulative$0$216K$432K$643K$793K$793K$793K$793K

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 $793K is added at exit.

Entry \ Exit9.0x10.0x11.0x11.5x12.0x
8.0x52% / 8.1x56% / 9.4x60% / 10.6x62% / 11.3x64% / 11.9x
9.0x47% / 6.8x51% / 8.0x55% / 9.1x57% / 9.7x59% / 10.2x
10.0x42% / 5.8x47% / 6.8x51% / 7.8x53% / 8.4x55% / 8.9x
11.0x38% / 5.0x43% / 5.9x47% / 6.8x49% / 7.3x51% / 7.8x
12.0x34% / 4.3x39% / 5.2x43% / 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)
7%
EBITDA Cushion

Pro forma EBITDA can decline 7% before the 6.5x covenant trips. RCM uplift reduces leverage from 8.5x to 6.1x, adding 2.4 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€”$2.0M13.4%
Year 1$2.1M+$529K$2.6M17.3%
Year 2$2.1M+$793K$2.9M19.4%
Year 3$2.2M+$793K$3.0M19.9%
Year 4$2.3M+$793K$3.1M20.3%
Year 5$2.3M+$793K$3.1M20.8%
$20.2M
Entry EV (10x)
$34.4M
Exit EV (11x)
$14.3M
Value Created
$3.1M
Exit EBITDA
$3.2M
Organic Growth
$7.9M
RCM Value Creation
$3.1M
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$151K$226K$302K$362K
Denial Rate Reductio$149K$224K$299K$358K
A/R Days Reduction$92K$138K$184K$220K
Clean Claim Rate$5K$7K$10K$12K
Total$397K$595K$793K$952K

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 Margin13.4%-30.6%-4.0%10.0%
P80
Net-to-Gross74.8%24.4%35.3%51.9%
P94
Occupancy83.2%15.4%33.8%60.4%
P91
Rev/Bed$503K$421K$624K$1.2M
P37
Exp/Bed$436K$437K$790K$1.4M
P25

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