ML Analysis — BATH COUNTY COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
CCN 491300 | 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 Health4/25
RCM Upside19/25
Market Position10/20
Demand Defensibility3/15
Operational Efficiency6/15
Entry Multiple: 8.0x – 10.0x
Est. MOIC: 1.9x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Heavy Medicare dependence (>55%)
- 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)
-5.9%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -42.4%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-34.2%, 22.4%]. P47 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State Peer Margin | 0.044 | +0.0666 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi | |
| Revenue/Bed | 1242433.643 | -0.0470 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Log(Beds) | 2.639 | -0.0403 | Lower Log(Beds) decreases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.621 | +0.0283 | Higher Net-to-Gross increases predicted margin | |
| Bed Count | 14.000 | +0.0210 | Higher Bed Count increases predicted margin |
Turnaround: 40%Turnaround possible (40%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on State Peer Margin.
nan%
Distress Risk
$8.2M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
5.0%
Projected Margin
Distress Analysis
Risk: Unknown
National distress rate: 49.3%
VA distress rate: 29.6%
Model AUC: 0.629
| Factor | Value | Contribution | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Rate | 0.287 | +0.221 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.779 | +0.078 | ▲ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.621 | +0.113 | ▲ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 1242433.643 | +0.020 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 14.000 | -0.018 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $8.2M
Current margin: -42.4%
Projected margin: 5.0%
Grade: A
Comps: 11
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 | 0.221 | 0.590 | 36.9% | $5.5M | 50% | 24mo |
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.287 | 0.697 | 40.9% | $2.7M | 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. |