Unit economics
Which sites create contribution, and can this platform reproduce them?
Structure
Fixed scope per build
Delivery
Embedded
Output
Traceable, defensible unit cost
Any one of the four can be the whole build, once the diagnostic has sized it.
What's actually going on
Margin varies by site, by service line and by patient cohort, and every bit of that variance is invisible at the consolidated level.
So staffing decisions get made from an aggregate view. Capacity gets added where demand is not. And when EBITDA misses, nobody can separate a pricing problem from a utilization problem from a cost-to-serve problem, which means the remedy is chosen by whoever argues hardest.
This is infrastructure, not cost takeout. The output is a decision system that directs capacity and investment toward contribution, not a list of things to cut.
What gets found, built and proven
01
Find it
What the assessment finds
Cost-to-Serve Analysis
Cost by site, by service line, and by patient cohort, built on drivers rather than allocations.
Site and Service-Line Contribution
Contribution by unit, with shared cost identified separately from direct cost.
Capacity and Utilization Analysis
The capacity that actually produces the unit, however this platform measures it, set against actual demand.
Authorized-to-Delivered Analysis
What was approved against what was actually delivered, by site and by cohort, and where the gap is scheduling rather than demand.
Contribution Ranking
Which sites, service lines, and cohorts create margin and which consume it.
Board-ready margin readout
Where margin is made and lost, and what the platform can act on this year.
02
Build it
What gets installed
Driver-based cost model
A standing model the finance team maintains, with defined drivers and a documented calculation.
Demand-to-capacity model
Provider capacity against demand by site and service line, updated on a cycle.
Staffing and scheduling standards
Written thresholds that determine when capacity is added, moved, or reduced.
Site and service-line review cadence
The recurring session where contribution is read and decisions are made.
03
Prove it
What the ledger shows
The benefit ledger
Cost per unit at baseline against cost per unit at close, and the contribution that movement produced, co-signed with the CFO.
The exit record
Unit economics a buyer can rebuild from the platform's own records.
When this tends to be the right call
At close
The model assumed operating leverage the platform has never demonstrated.
Cost is allocated by a percentage nobody can defend, and no site P&L survives a challenge.
Early hold
There is no written threshold for when a site adds a provider, and capacity gets added where the loudest manager is.
Nobody can say which sites have capacity and which are turning demand away.
Mid-hold
Contribution gets reviewed when a site misses, and no standing session decides anything from it.
A site is being considered for closure on a number nobody trusts.
Which sites create contribution, and which consume it?
Start with a short diagnostic on this area. It sizes the gap before anything gets built.
Start a Conversation
© 2026 Martel Health