ML Analysis — SIERRA VIEW MEDICAL CENTER
CCN 050261 | 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.
45
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health8/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position6/20
Demand Defensibility10/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
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
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-7.7%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -18.1%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-36.0%, 20.6%]. P43 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 1141232.922 | -0.0611 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 1347703.305 | +0.0381 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.219 | -0.0168 | Lower Net-to-Gross decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.158 | +0.0125 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| Log(Beds) | 4.852 | +0.0111 | Higher Log(Beds) increases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 37%Turnaround possible (37%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.1M
RCM Opportunity
D
Opportunity Grade
-16.0%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
CA distress rate: 49.7%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.219 | -0.067 | ▼ risk |
| Occupancy Rate | 0.504 | +0.020 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.278 | -0.008 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1141232.922 | +0.026 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 128.000 | -0.003 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.1M
Current margin: -18.1%
Projected margin: -16.0%
Grade: D
Comps: 192
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.504 | 0.724 | 22.0% | $1.4M | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.219 | 0.299 | 8.0% | $1.4M | 65% | 18mo |
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.722 | 0.740 | 1.8% | $263K | 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. |