ML Analysis — KINGS DAUGHTERS MED CENTER OHIO
CCN 360361 | 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.
43
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health16/25
RCM Upside5/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility2/15
Operational Efficiency13/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Low occupancy (<30%) — demand risk
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
7.9%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: 31.9%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-20.4%, 36.2%]. P79 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 3606714.000 | +0.2830 | Higher Revenue/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 2458124.800 | -0.0987 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.303 | -0.0481 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.004 | +0.0313 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Occupancy | 0.116 | -0.0233 | Lower Occupancy decreases predicted margin |
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.7M
RCM Opportunity
B
Opportunity Grade
42.1%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
OH distress rate: 37.3%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.116 | +0.380 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.149 | -0.031 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 3606714.000 | -0.120 | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.278 | -0.040 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 10.000 | -0.019 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.7M
Current margin: 31.9%
Projected margin: 42.1%
Grade: B
Comps: 10
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.116 | 0.588 | 47.2% | $3.1M | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.278 | 0.415 | 13.7% | $577K | 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. |