ML Analysis — SSH -NASHVILLE
CCN 442011 | 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 Health7/25
RCM Upside20/25
Market Position4/20
Demand Defensibility12/15
Operational Efficiency0/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-2.2%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -7.4%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-30.5%, 26.1%]. P56 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 510669.620 | -0.1492 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 548408.680 | +0.1366 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.096 | +0.0303 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.006 | +0.0291 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.142 | -0.0255 | Lower Net-to-Gross decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 46%Turnaround possible (46%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$3.1M
RCM Opportunity
C
Opportunity Grade
-1.3%
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 | 0.742 | -0.201 | ▼ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.321 | -0.001 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.142 | -0.101 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 510669.620 | +0.063 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 100.000 | -0.007 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $3.1M
Current margin: -7.4%
Projected margin: -1.3%
Grade: C
Comps: 51
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.142 | 0.391 | 24.9% | $1.5M | 65% | 18mo |
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.679 | 0.756 | 7.7% | $1.1M | 50% | 24mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.742 | 0.813 | 7.1% | $466K | 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. |