ML Analysis — BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTERS
CCN 014018 | Clustering + Distress + RCM Opportunity
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
Investability Score
Speculative — only pursue if turnaround thesis is strong and entry multiple reflects risk.
38
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health5/25
RCM Upside17/25
Market Position6/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Heavy Medicare dependence (>55%)
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-6.7%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -0.3%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-35.0%, 21.6%]. P45 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 210581.550 | -0.1911 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 211240.650 | +0.1781 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.860 | +0.0551 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.996 | -0.0320 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Occupancy × Net-to-Gross | 0.582 | +0.0295 | Higher Occupancy × Net-to-Gross increases predicte |
Turnaround: 38%Turnaround possible (38%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.5M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
82.1%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
AL distress rate: 58.3%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.677 | -0.141 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.668 | +0.059 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.860 | +0.219 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 210581.550 | +0.081 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 20.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.5M
Current margin: -0.3%
Projected margin: 82.1%
Grade: A
Comps: 36
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.332 | 0.563 | 23.1% | $3.5M | 50% | 24mo |
Predicted RCM Performance (Public Data Only)
B
RCM Grade
Average RCM profile — some improvement opportunities. Standard diligence scope recommended.
| Metric | Predicted | 90% CI | Percentile | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denial Rate | 25.0% | [2.0%, 25.0%] | P83 | Below average — denial rate suggests RCM improvement opportu |
| Days in AR | 75.0 | [25.0, 75.0] | P83 | Below average — days in ar suggests RCM improvement opportun |
| Clean Claim Rate | 98.0% | [80.0%, 98.0%] | P0 | Strong — predicted clean claim rate is in the top third. |
| Net Collection Rate | 99.5% | [90.0%, 99.5%] | P8 | Strong — predicted net collection rate is in the top third. |