ML Analysis — MERCYONE CEDAR FALLS MEDICAL CENTER
CCN 160040 | 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 Health12/25
RCM Upside10/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
Operational Efficiency5/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Low occupancy (<30%) — demand risk
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-12.2%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: 6.8%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-40.5%, 16.1%]. P33 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expense/Bed | 952769.457 | +0.0868 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Revenue/Bed | 1022594.486 | -0.0777 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.108 | +0.0269 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.082 | -0.0269 | Lower State Peer Margin decreases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 130235.713 | -0.0246 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.1M
RCM Opportunity
C
Opportunity Grade
15.4%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
IA distress rate: 67.2%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.127 | +0.369 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.490 | +0.028 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.211 | -0.070 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1022594.486 | +0.033 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 35.000 | -0.015 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.1M
Current margin: 6.8%
Projected margin: 15.4%
Grade: C
Comps: 83
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.211 | 0.589 | 37.7% | $1.6M | 65% | 18mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.127 | 0.354 | 22.7% | $1.5M | 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. |