ML Analysis — PALM POINT BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE
CCN 104082 | 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.
38
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health4/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position6/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-6.9%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -26.8%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-35.2%, 21.4%]. P44 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 137273.446 | -0.2013 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 174054.297 | +0.1827 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | 0.032 | +0.0578 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.374 | -0.0497 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 54396.064 | -0.0272 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
Turnaround: 38%Turnaround possible (38%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$2.5M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
-2.2%
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 | 0.396 | +0.120 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.087 | -0.041 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 137273.446 | +0.085 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.410 | +0.018 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 74.000 | -0.010 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $2.5M
Current margin: -26.8%
Projected margin: -2.2%
Grade: A
Comps: 118
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.396 | 0.774 | 37.8% | $2.5M | 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. |