ML Analysis — MADISON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
CCN 101311 | 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.
41
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health5/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position10/20
Demand Defensibility4/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Heavy Medicare dependence (>55%)
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-3.6%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -21.1%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-31.9%, 24.7%]. P53 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 460284.840 | -0.1562 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 557412.960 | +0.1355 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | 0.032 | +0.0578 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Log(Beds) | 3.219 | -0.0268 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 170091.012 | -0.0233 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
Turnaround: 44%Turnaround possible (44%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$7.4M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
43.4%
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 | 0.370 | +0.144 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.669 | +0.059 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 460284.840 | +0.066 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.493 | +0.055 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 25.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $7.4M
Current margin: -21.1%
Projected margin: 43.4%
Grade: A
Comps: 41
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 | 0.331 | 0.652 | 32.1% | $4.8M | 50% | 24mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.370 | 0.744 | 37.4% | $2.5M | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.493 | 0.592 | 9.9% | $133K | 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. |