ML Analysis — BRIGHTWELL BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
CCN 234044 | 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 Health3/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility10/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
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)
-8.1%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -9.1%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-36.4%, 20.2%]. P42 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 281357.000 | -0.1812 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 306879.739 | +0.1663 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 3.135 | -0.0288 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 204105.316 | -0.0222 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.273 | -0.0206 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m |
Turnaround: 36%Turnaround possible (36%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$2.5M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
29.1%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
MI distress rate: 50.9%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.725 | -0.186 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.474 | +0.025 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 281357.000 | +0.077 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.519 | +0.067 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 23.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $2.5M
Current margin: -9.1%
Projected margin: 29.1%
Grade: A
Comps: 63
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 | 0.526 | 0.691 | 16.4% | $2.5M | 50% | 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. |