ML Analysis — SSH - DANVILLE
CCN 392047 | 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.
38
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health5/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position6/20
Demand Defensibility7/15
Operational Efficiency0/15
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:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-8.8%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -13.6%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-37.1%, 19.5%]. P40 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 330499.633 | -0.1743 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 375410.133 | +0.1579 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.057 | +0.0417 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.119 | -0.0279 | Lower Net-to-Gross decreases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 3.401 | -0.0226 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 35%Turnaround possible (35%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$4.5M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
31.4%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
PA distress rate: 48.1%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.120 | -0.111 | ▼ risk |
| Occupancy Rate | 0.580 | -0.051 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.526 | +0.034 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 330499.633 | +0.074 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 30.000 | -0.016 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $4.5M
Current margin: -13.6%
Projected margin: 31.4%
Grade: A
Comps: 68
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 | 0.474 | 0.733 | 25.9% | $3.9M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.120 | 0.436 | 31.6% | $367K | 65% | 18mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.580 | 0.611 | 3.0% | $201K | 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. |