ML Analysis — FLORIDA STATE HOSPITAL
CCN 100298 | 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 Health0/25
RCM Upside18/25
Market Position10/20
Demand Defensibility2/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
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:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-92.4%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -50.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-120.7%, -64.1%]. P0 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expense/Bed | 5916831.542 | -0.5247 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 1.000 | -0.2297 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Revenue/Bed | 80984.708 | -0.2091 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 1.000 | +0.0708 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | 0.032 | +0.0578 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi |
Turnaround: 0%Low turnaround probability (0%). Structural disadvantages in Expense/Bed and Reimbursement Quality.
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.7M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
138.3%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
FL distress rate: 30.3%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.187 | +0.314 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 1.000 | +0.281 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 80984.708 | +0.088 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 24.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.7M
Current margin: -50.0%
Projected margin: 138.3%
Grade: A
Comps: 34
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.187 | 0.742 | 55.4% | $3.7M | 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. |