ML Analysis — NASHOBA VALLEY HOSPITAL
CCN 220098 | 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.
46
/ 100 (C)
Financial Health6/25
RCM Upside17/25
Market Position9/20
Demand Defensibility9/15
Operational Efficiency6/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Low occupancy (<30%) — demand risk
Catalysts:
- Strong commercial payer base protects revenue
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-14.8%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -2.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-43.1%, 13.5%]. P28 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Peer Margin | -0.122 | -0.0566 | Lower State Peer Margin decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 1265948.544 | +0.0482 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Revenue/Bed | 1240900.456 | -0.0472 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 315816.771 | -0.0185 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma | |
| Occupancy | 0.255 | -0.0154 | Lower Occupancy decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 26%Low turnaround probability (26%). Structural disadvantages in State Peer Margin and Expense/Bed.
Rural/Critical Access
Archetype
55.9%
Distress Risk
$8.6M
RCM Opportunity
B
Opportunity Grade
10.2%
Projected Margin
Cluster: Rural/Critical Access
Percentile within cluster: P51. Rural/small hospitals face structural headwinds. Evaluate CAH conversion, telehealth, and rural health funding.
Nearest Peers
| Hospital | State | Beds |
|---|---|---|
| BRECKINRIDGE HEALTH INC | KY | 25 |
| SHERIDAN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL | MT | 19 |
| DAYTON GENERAL HOSPITAL | WA | 25 |
| BLUE MOUNTAIN HOSPITAL DISTRICT | OR | 16 |
| COMMUNITY HOSPITAL | WY | 25 |
| CARLE EUREKA HOSPITAL | IL | 25 |
Distress Analysis
Risk: High
National distress rate: 49.3%
MA distress rate: 61.8%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.255 | +0.251 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1240900.456 | +0.020 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.426 | +0.017 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | 0.076 | -0.013 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 57.000 | -0.012 | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.370 | +0.001 | ▲ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $8.6M
Current margin: -2.0%
Projected margin: 10.2%
Grade: B
Comps: 33
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.255 | 0.859 | 60.4% | $4.0M | 55% | 24mo |
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.498 | 0.680 | 18.2% | $2.7M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.370 | 0.601 | 23.1% | $1.9M | 65% | 18mo |
Predicted RCM Performance (Public Data Only)
A
RCM Grade
Strong RCM profile — likely low-risk from an operations perspective. Focus diligence on growth thesis.
| Metric | Predicted | 90% CI | Percentile | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denial Rate | 2.0% | [2.0%, 25.0%] | P0 | Strong — predicted denial rate is in the top third nationall |
| Days in AR | 29.4 | [25.0, 75.0] | P54 | Strong — predicted days in ar is in the top third nationally |
| 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. |