ML Analysis — ST LUKES HEALTH MEMORIAL SAN AUGUST
CCN 451360 | 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.
39
/ 100 (D)
Financial Health4/25
RCM Upside18/25
Market Position8/20
Demand Defensibility5/15
Operational Efficiency4/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
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)
-16.6%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -49.4%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-44.9%, 11.7%]. P25 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 732661.600 | -0.1182 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 1094208.200 | +0.0694 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.303 | -0.0481 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.006 | +0.0290 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Bed Utilization Value | 45118.709 | -0.0275 | Lower Bed Utilization Value decreases predicted ma |
Turnaround: 24%Low turnaround probability (24%). Structural disadvantages in Revenue/Bed and Expense/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$4.2M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
7.9%
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 | 0.062 | +0.430 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.436 | +0.019 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 732661.600 | +0.050 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 10.000 | -0.019 | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.380 | +0.005 | ▲ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $4.2M
Current margin: -49.4%
Projected margin: 7.9%
Grade: A
Comps: 64
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 | 0.564 | 0.723 | 15.9% | $2.4M | 50% | 24mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.062 | 0.300 | 23.9% | $1.6M | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.380 | 0.653 | 27.3% | $234K | 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. |