ML Analysis — VAL VERDE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER
CCN 450154 | 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.
41
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health6/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility6/15
Operational Efficiency2/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Small facility (<50 beds) — limited scale
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
- Limited competition supports pricing power
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-6.1%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -13.6%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-34.4%, 22.2%]. P46 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Peer Margin | -0.006 | +0.0290 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Expense/Bed | 1820785.447 | -0.0202 | Higher Expense/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Bed Count | 47.000 | +0.0159 | Higher Bed Count increases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.247 | -0.0136 | Lower Net-to-Gross decreases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 3.850 | -0.0122 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 39%Turnaround possible (39%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on State Peer Margin.
nan%
Distress Risk
$4.7M
RCM Opportunity
C
Opportunity Grade
-7.4%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
TX distress rate: 42.8%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.376 | +0.138 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.261 | -0.011 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.247 | -0.054 | ▼ risk |
| Beds | 47.000 | -0.014 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1602416.362 | -0.001 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $4.7M
Current margin: -13.6%
Projected margin: -7.4%
Grade: C
Comps: 278
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 | 0.247 | 0.512 | 26.5% | $2.3M | 65% | 18mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.376 | 0.721 | 34.4% | $2.3M | 55% | 24mo |
| Payer Mix Optimization | 0.739 | 0.744 | 0.5% | $72K | 50% | 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. |