ML Analysis — OCHSNER REHABILITATION HOSPITAL
CCN 193099 | Clustering + Distress + RCM Opportunity
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
Investability Score
Hold / Selective — investigate specific opportunities but be prepared for execution risk.
47
/ 100 (C)
Financial Health6/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility12/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-5.4%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -4.9%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-33.7%, 22.9%]. P48 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 415683.411 | -0.1624 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 436230.732 | +0.1504 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 314386.000 | -0.0185 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma | |
| Bed Count | 56.000 | +0.0145 | Higher Bed Count increases predicted margin | |
| Occupancy | 0.756 | +0.0131 | Higher Occupancy increases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 40%Turnaround possible (40%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$2.6M
RCM Opportunity
B
Opportunity Grade
6.1%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
LA distress rate: 46.3%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.756 | -0.215 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.340 | +0.002 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 415683.411 | +0.069 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.302 | -0.030 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 56.000 | -0.012 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $2.6M
Current margin: -4.9%
Projected margin: 6.1%
Grade: B
Comps: 84
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 | 0.660 | 0.804 | 14.3% | $2.2M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.302 | 0.459 | 15.7% | $428K | 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. |