ML Analysis — SHODAIR CHILDRENS HOSPITAL
CCN 274004 | 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.
42
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health3/25
RCM Upside21/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
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)
-27.4%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -50.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-55.7%, 0.9%]. P14 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 759529.500 | -0.1144 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Medicaid % | 0.718 | -0.0761 | Higher Medicaid % decreases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.096 | -0.0373 | Lower State Peer Margin decreases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.996 | -0.0320 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.126 | +0.0216 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m |
Turnaround: 13%Low turnaround probability (13%). Structural disadvantages in Revenue/Bed and Medicaid %.
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.3M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
-28.2%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
MT distress rate: 69.8%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.900 | -0.348 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | 0.718 | +0.629 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 759529.500 | +0.048 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.448 | +0.035 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 20.000 | -0.017 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.3M
Current margin: -50.0%
Projected margin: -28.2%
Grade: A
Comps: 49
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 | 0.282 | 0.451 | 16.9% | $2.5M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.448 | 0.883 | 43.5% | $773K | 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. |