ML Analysis — ST JUDE MEDICAL CENTER FULLERTON
CCN 050168 | Clustering + Distress + RCM Opportunity
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
Investability Score
Hold / Selective — investigate specific opportunities but be prepared for execution risk.
48
/ 100 (C)
Financial Health9/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position2/20
Demand Defensibility13/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
- RCM optimization could add 3-5pp margin
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-9.2%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -38.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-37.5%, 19.1%]. P39 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expense/Bed | 2951274.676 | -0.1594 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Revenue/Bed | 2138640.924 | +0.0781 | Higher Revenue/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 5.670 | +0.0301 | Higher Log(Beds) increases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 1572653.695 | +0.0232 | Higher Bed Utilization Value increases predicted m | |
| Bed Count | 290.000 | -0.0220 | Higher Bed Count decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 34%Turnaround possible (34%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Expense/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$6.2M
RCM Opportunity
D
Opportunity Grade
-37.0%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
CA distress rate: 49.7%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.735 | -0.195 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.245 | -0.014 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.204 | -0.073 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 2138640.924 | -0.033 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 290.000 | +0.019 | ▲ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $6.2M
Current margin: -38.0%
Projected margin: -37.0%
Grade: D
Comps: 179
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.204 | 0.288 | 8.4% | $6.1M | 65% | 18mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.735 | 0.755 | 2.0% | $130K | 55% | 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. |