ML Analysis — BRIGHTWELL BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CCN 154066 | 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.
45
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health6/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
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)
0.8%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -7.8%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-27.5%, 29.1%]. P64 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 258451.818 | -0.1844 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 278741.546 | +0.1698 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.076 | +0.0360 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| Log(Beds) | 3.091 | -0.0298 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.011 | +0.0255 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi |
Turnaround: 51%Turnaround possible (51%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$8.9M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
148.3%
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 | 0.798 | -0.253 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.863 | +0.092 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.555 | +0.083 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 258451.818 | +0.078 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 22.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $8.9M
Current margin: -7.8%
Projected margin: 148.3%
Grade: A
Comps: 76
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 | 0.137 | 0.729 | 59.2% | $8.9M | 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. |