ML Analysis — KENNEDY KRIEGER
CCN 213301 | 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.
45
/ 100 (C)
Financial Health6/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position4/20
Demand Defensibility5/15
Operational Efficiency10/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-37.8%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -50.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-66.0%, -9.4%]. P9 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expense/Bed | 6747018.380 | -0.6270 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Revenue/Bed | 4069754.360 | +0.3476 | Higher Revenue/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.721 | -0.1494 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 2413308.585 | +0.0511 | Higher Bed Utilization Value increases predicted m | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.798 | +0.0481 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 6%Low turnaround probability (6%). Structural disadvantages in Expense/Bed and Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$2.8M
RCM Opportunity
D
Opportunity Grade
-48.6%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
MD distress rate: 60.8%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.593 | -0.063 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.798 | +0.191 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 4069754.360 | -0.147 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 50.000 | -0.013 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | 0.097 | +0.008 | ▲ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $2.8M
Current margin: -50.0%
Projected margin: -48.6%
Grade: D
Comps: 15
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.593 | 0.859 | 26.6% | $1.8M | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.798 | 0.841 | 4.3% | $1.0M | 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. |