ML Analysis — SE TEXAS ER & HOSPITAL
CCN 670310 | Clustering + Distress + RCM Opportunity
🛡️ Public data only — no PHI permitted on this instance.
Investability Score
Pass — risk/return profile does not justify PE capital deployment at market multiples.
26
/ 100 (F)
Financial Health3/25
RCM Upside18/25
Market Position2/20
Demand Defensibility3/15
Operational Efficiency0/15
Entry Multiple: 6.0x – 8.5x
Est. MOIC: 1.5x
Risk Factors:
- Negative operating margin
- Low occupancy (<30%) — demand risk
- Expenses exceed revenue
Catalysts:
Margin Prediction (Trained Ridge Model)
-11.0%
R²=0.34 | n=4,907 | Grade B | Actual: -50.0%
Ridge regression trained on 4,907 HCRIS hospitals. 90% CI: [-39.3%, 17.3%]. P35 nationally.
| Driver | Value | Effect | Explanation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue/Bed | 96384.759 | -0.2070 | Lower Revenue/Bed decreases predicted margin | |
| Expense/Bed | 288071.926 | +0.1687 | Higher Expense/Bed increases predicted margin | |
| Net-to-Gross | 0.103 | -0.0298 | Lower Net-to-Gross decreases predicted margin | |
| Reimbursement Quality | 0.101 | +0.0290 | Higher Reimbursement Quality increases predicted m | |
| State Peer Margin | -0.006 | +0.0290 | Higher State Peer Margin increases predicted margi |
Turnaround: 32%Turnaround possible (32%) but uncertain. Margin improvement depends on improving Revenue/Bed.
nan%
Distress Risk
$5.0M
RCM Opportunity
A
Opportunity Grade
46.4%
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 | 0.017 | +0.472 | ▲ risk |
| Medicare Day Pct | 0.024 | -0.052 | ▼ risk |
| Medicaid Day Pct | nan | +nan | ▼ risk |
| Net To Gross Ratio | 0.103 | -0.118 | ▼ risk |
| Revenue Per Bed | 96384.759 | +0.088 | ▲ risk |
| Beds | 54.000 | -0.013 | ▼ risk |
RCM Improvement Opportunity
Total (risk-adjusted): $5.0M
Current margin: -50.0%
Projected margin: 46.4%
Grade: A
Comps: 229
Gap analysis vs P75 peers with 60% closure assumption. Confidence-weighted by lever implementation difficulty.
| Lever | Current | Benchmark | Gap | Impact | Confidence | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Improvement | 0.017 | 0.739 | 72.2% | $4.8M | 55% | 24mo |
| Net-to-Gross Ratio Improvement | 0.103 | 0.511 | 40.8% | $248K | 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. |