ML Analysis — VIBRA HOSPITAL OF NORTHWEST INDIANA
CCN 152028 | 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.
36
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health6/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position2/20
Demand Defensibility10/15
Operational Efficiency0/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-4.3%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -4.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-32.6%, 24.0%]. P51 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 413455.475 | -0.1627 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 429889.375 | +0.1512 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.102 | +0.0286 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.011 | +0.0255 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.189 | -0.0202 | Lower Net-to-Gross decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 42%Turnaround possible (42%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$2.6M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
11.7%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
IN distress rate: 42.0%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.685 | -0.149 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.459 | +0.023 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.189 | -0.080 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 413455.475 | +0.069 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 40.000 | -0.015 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $2.6M
Current margin: -4.0%
Projected margin: 11.7%
Grade: A
Comps: 90
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 | 0.541 | 0.686 | 14.5% | $2.2M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.189 | 0.401 | 21.2% | $411K | 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. |