ML Analysis — HALE HOOLA HAMAKUA
CCN 121307 | 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.
44
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health5/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position4/20
Demand Defensibility9/15
Operational Efficiency6/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-17.1%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -20.3%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-45.4%, 11.2%]. P24 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Peer Margin | -0.147 | -0.0753 | Lower State Peer Margin decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.456 | -0.0732 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Expense/Bed | 2213631.454 | -0.0685 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.817 | +0.0503 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.398 | -0.0459 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 23%Low turnaround probability (23%). Structural disadvantages in State Peer Margin and Reimbursement Quality.
nan%
Distress Risk
$661K
RCM Opportunity
D
Opportunity Grade
-17.0%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
HI distress rate: 68.0%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.602 | -0.072 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.442 | +0.020 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.817 | +0.200 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 11.000 | -0.018 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1840197.000 | -0.015 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $661K
Current margin: -20.3%
Projected margin: -17.0%
Grade: D
Comps: 715
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 | 0.558 | 0.602 | 4.4% | $661K | 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. |