ML Analysis — SAINT THOMAS HIGHLAND HOSPITAL
CCN 440192 | 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 Health6/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility7/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
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)
-8.5%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -11.9%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-36.8%, 19.8%]. P41 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Log(Beds) | 2.485 | -0.0439 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 2004538.500 | -0.0428 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Revenue/Bed | 1790910.500 | +0.0295 | Higher Revenue/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.006 | +0.0291 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.104 | +0.0280 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m |
Turnaround: 36%Turnaround possible (36%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Log(Beds).
nan%
Distress Risk
$5.2M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
12.4%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
TN distress rate: 43.2%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.294 | +0.215 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.315 | -0.002 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.152 | -0.096 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 12.000 | -0.018 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1790910.500 | -0.012 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $5.2M
Current margin: -11.9%
Projected margin: 12.4%
Grade: A
Comps: 12
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.294 | 0.614 | 32.0% | $2.1M | 55% | 24mo |
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.685 | 0.791 | 10.7% | $1.6M | 50% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.152 | 0.757 | 60.4% | $1.5M | 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. |