ML Analysis — KENSINGTON HOSPITAL
CCN 390025 | Clustering + Distress + RCM Opportunity
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
Investability Score
Pass — risk/return profile does not justify PE capital deployment at market multiples.
29
/ 100 (F)
Financial Health3/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position2/20
Demand Defensibility3/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-17.3%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -50.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-45.6%, 11.0%]. P24 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 321534.500 | -0.1756 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 531921.571 | +0.1386 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.639 | -0.0403 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.328 | -0.0364 | Higher Reimbursement Quality decreases predicted m | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 100613.242 | -0.0256 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
Turnaround: 23%Low turnaround probability (23%). Structural disadvantages in Revenue/Bed and Expense/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$605K
RCM Opportunity
B
Opportunity Grade
-36.6%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
PA distress rate: 48.1%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.313 | +0.197 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 321534.500 | +0.074 | ▲ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.328 | -0.018 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 14.000 | -0.018 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $605K
Current margin: -50.0%
Projected margin: -36.6%
Grade: B
Comps: 29
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.313 | 0.398 | 8.5% | $559K | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.328 | 0.415 | 8.7% | $46K | 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. |