ML Analysis — STANISLAUS SURGICAL
CCN 050726 | 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.
34
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health5/25
RCM Upside18/25
Market Position6/20
Demand Defensibility3/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Low occupancy (<30%) — demand risk
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-14.7%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -18.8%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-43.0%, 13.6%]. P28 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 1075074.304 | -0.0704 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 1276775.217 | +0.0469 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.087 | +0.0328 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| Log(Beds) | 3.135 | -0.0288 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Occupancy | 0.033 | -0.0279 | Lower Occupancy decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 26%Low turnaround probability (26%). Structural disadvantages in Revenue/Bed and Expense/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$8.4M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
15.4%
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 | 0.033 | +0.457 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.530 | +0.035 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.186 | -0.081 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1075074.304 | +0.030 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 23.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $8.4M
Current margin: -18.8%
Projected margin: 15.4%
Grade: A
Comps: 59
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.033 | 0.686 | 65.3% | $4.3M | 55% | 24mo |
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.470 | 0.661 | 19.1% | $2.9M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.186 | 0.624 | 43.8% | $1.3M | 65% | 18mo |
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. |