ML Analysis — COOK COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT
CCN 241317 | 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.
41
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health3/25
RCM Upside18/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
Operational Efficiency6/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Low occupancy (<30%) — demand risk
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-15.9%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -11.5%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-44.2%, 12.4%]. P26 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.530 | -0.0946 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.873 | +0.0566 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin | |
| Revenue/Bed | 1219849.688 | -0.0502 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.773 | -0.0372 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 1360142.875 | +0.0366 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 24%Low turnaround probability (24%). Structural disadvantages in Reimbursement Quality and Net-to-Gross.
nan%
Distress Risk
$1.8M
RCM Opportunity
C
Opportunity Grade
-2.4%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
MN distress rate: 45.4%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.146 | +0.352 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.393 | +0.011 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.873 | +0.225 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1219849.688 | +0.021 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 16.000 | -0.018 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $1.8M
Current margin: -11.5%
Projected margin: -2.4%
Grade: C
Comps: 87
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.146 | 0.416 | 27.1% | $1.8M | 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. |