ML Analysis — CYPRESS GROVE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CCN 194083 | 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.
40
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health5/25
RCM Upside17/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility7/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
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)
-14.0%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -1.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-42.2%, 14.3%]. P29 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 145539.833 | -0.2001 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 146943.717 | +0.1860 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.611 | -0.1178 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.640 | +0.0304 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 79754.500 | -0.0263 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
Turnaround: 27%Low turnaround probability (27%). Structural disadvantages in Revenue/Bed and Expense/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$924K
RCM Opportunity
B
Opportunity Grade
9.6%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
LA distress rate: 46.3%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.640 | +0.121 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 145539.833 | +0.085 | ▲ risk |
| Occupancy Rate | 0.548 | -0.021 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | 0.045 | -0.043 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 60.000 | -0.012 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $924K
Current margin: -1.0%
Projected margin: 9.6%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.548 | 0.688 | 14.0% | $924K | 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. |