ML Analysis — SOLUTIONS MEDICAL CONSULTING LLC
CCN 194074 | 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.
39
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health4/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-8.4%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -5.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-36.7%, 19.9%]. P41 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 228655.778 | -0.1885 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 240146.000 | +0.1746 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.890 | -0.0345 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 191868.996 | -0.0226 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma | |
| Bed Count | 18.000 | +0.0204 | Higher Bed Count increases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 36%Turnaround possible (36%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$160K
RCM Opportunity
D
Opportunity Grade
-1.1%
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 | 0.839 | -0.291 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.087 | -0.041 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 228655.778 | +0.080 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.286 | -0.037 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 18.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $160K
Current margin: -5.0%
Projected margin: -1.1%
Grade: D
Comps: 106
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 | 0.286 | 0.617 | 33.1% | $160K | 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. |