Ready to Sell?
Homecare Group is ready to buy your established private duty home care agency.
X
Homecare Agency Valuation Calculator and Instant Offer Generator: Technical Specification and Risk Adjustment Modeling
Try the homecare valuation calculator here.
1. Foundational Valuation Methodology and Benchmark Setting
The accurate valuation of homecare agencies necessitates a market-based approach, leveraging adjusted earnings multiples derived from comparable mergers and acquisitions (M&A) transactions within the healthcare services sector. The selection of the appropriate earnings metric and its associated multiplier is the single most significant factor in establishing Enterprise Value (EV). This analysis mandates the use of a hybrid model, distinguishing between Seller’s Discretionary Earnings (SDE) for smaller, owner-reliant entities and Adjusted Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization (AEBITDA) for professionally scaled platforms.
1.1 The Central Equation: Enterprise Value as a Function of Risk and Cash Flow
The universally accepted valuation equation in the homecare M&A landscape relates Enterprise Value (EV) to the agency’s cash flow proxy and a valuation multiple:
Enterprise Value (EV) = Adjusted Earnings x Valuation Multiple
The valuation multiple is not a static figure; rather, it is the inverse measure of the perceived go-forward risk inherent in the cash flow continuing after the transaction is complete. High risk equates to a lower multiple (and thus a higher required rate of return for the buyer), while low risk justifies a higher multiple.
1.1.1 The Multiples Approach: EV/AEBITDA vs. SDE Multiples
A. Seller’s Discretionary Earnings (SDE): SDE is the mandated metric for small, owner-operated businesses, particularly those generating less than $1,000,000 in AEBITDA. SDE normalizes profitability by adding back owner compensation and other personal, non-essential expenditures to pre-tax income. This metric captures the total financial benefit flowing to the current owner-operator. The reliance on SDE signifies a higher level of owner-dependency risk.
B. Adjusted EBITDA (AEBITDA): AEBITDA is the preferred metric for larger, professionally managed agencies, typically utilized when normalized earnings surpass $1,000,000 or annual revenue exceeds approximately $5,000,000. AEBITDA provides a cleaner proxy for normalized cash flow, reflecting the true profitability available to service debt and fund future growth, regardless of the capital structure.
A critical aspect of transitioning between these metrics involves the necessary normalization of expenses. For smaller agencies valued using SDE, any buyer intending to integrate the operation into a larger platform must deduct a reasonable replacement salary for the owner's operational role. This crucial adjustment, known as the Pro Forma Management Replacement Cost, ensures the estimated cash flow aligns with the post-acquisition operating budget, often resulting in a significantly lower derived AEBITDA than the raw SDE. The valuation model must execute this deduction implicitly or explicitly to arrive at an accurate, transferable value, particularly in cases of high owner reliance (discussed further in Section IV).
1.1.2 Core Earnings Metric Formulas
Metric | Applicable Scale | Derivation Formula |
Seller’s Discretionary Earnings (SDE) | Small/Owner-Operated (<$1M AEBITDA) | SDE = Net Income + Owner's Compensation + Interest + Taxes + D&A + Discretionary Expenses |
Adjusted EBITDA (AEBITDA) | Regional/Scaled (>=$1M AEBITDA) | AEBITDA = SDE - (Pro Forma Management Replacement Cost) |
1.2 Defining the Agency Archetypes: Scale and Service Line Segmentation
The initial base multiple is primarily determined by the agency’s service specialization and its operational scale, which are strong predictors of market leverage and M&A desirability. Skilled Medical Home Health agencies generally attract higher valuations than their Non-Medical counterparts due to the incorporation of skilled professionals (RNs, LPNs) and access to higher-reimbursing programs like Medicare.
1.2.1 The Critical Revenue Breakpoints
M&A activity demonstrates clear segmentation based on size, as larger firms typically exhibit better back-office infrastructure, diversified referrals, and stronger compliance programs.
For small deals (Enterprise Value under $10 million), the median multiple observed across home health and hospice transactions is 4.7x EBITDA, with a range between 4.1x and 6.5x. This median should serve as a practical check; if the model output for a sub-$10M entity exceeds 6.0x, the calculated adjustment factors must rigorously justify the deviation by demonstrating substantial risk mitigation (e.g., zero owner dependency, superior payer mix).
The following table establishes the base multiples for the initial calculation, prior to specific risk adjustments:
Table I.2.3: Homecare Agency Baseline Multiples by Scale and Service Type
Agency Type | Scale / TTM Revenue Range (Approx.) | Recommended Earnings Metric | Base Multiple Range (x) | Median Multiple (x) |
Non-Medical Personal Care | Small / Single-Market (<$5M) | SDE / Low AEBITDA | 3.0x – 5.0x | 4.0x |
Non-Medical Personal Care | Regional Operator ($5M – $15M) | AEBITDA | 5.0x – 8.0x | 6.5x |
Medical Home Health (Skilled) | Single-Branch / Small (<$5M) | AEBITDA | 3.0x – 6.0x | 4.5x |
Medical Home Health (Skilled) | Regional Multi-Branch ($5M – $25M) | AEBITDA | 6.0x – 9.0x | 7.5x |
Scaled Platforms (Multi-State/Hybrid) | $25M+ Revenue / $5M+ AEBITDA | AEBITDA | 9.0x – 12.0x+ | 10.5x |
II. Specification of Required Data Inputs and Categorization
To execute the valuation accurately, the calculator requires specific financial, operational, and geographic data points that serve as empirical evidence for applying adjustments to the base multiple.
2.1 Standardization of Financial Inputs
The requirement for multi-year data is non-negotiable, as valuation multiples are paid for stability and growth projection. Trailing Twelve Months (TTM) figures provide the most current financial snapshot. Data from the two prior full years (PY-1 and PY-2) are essential for assessing consistency.
Input Field | Data Type | Valuation Requirement |
TTM Revenue (Trailing Twelve Months) | Dollar Amount | Used for scale assessment and cross-checking against the revenue multiple rule of thumb (median 0.6x for small deals). |
TTM Adjusted EBITDA/SDE | Dollar Amount | Core cash flow metric for valuation. |
Prior Year (PY-1) Revenue / Earnings | Dollar Amount | Essential for calculating Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR). |
PY-2 Revenue / Earnings | Dollar Amount | Required to establish a stable three-year financial trend. |
The consistent trending of earnings and revenue over a multi-year period is a primary determinant of risk. Buyers seek cash flow stability. Volatile earnings or declining revenue trends necessitate the use of an averaged or normalized AEBITDA, which inherently lowers the multiple due to increased risk. Conversely, agencies demonstrating consistent year-over-year revenue growth exceeding 10% justify a premium adjustment to the base multiple, reflecting expansion and market penetration capability.
2.2 Regulatory Licensing and Hybrid Models
The licensing status defines the permissible scope of services and access to lucrative government reimbursement programs.
Input Option | Valuation Impact | Rationale |
(1) Non-Medical Homecare (Private Pay/Private Insurance Only) | Base Multiple: Non-Medical (3x-8x) | Valuation dictated by consumer market factors and caregiver retention. |
(2) Skilled Nursing Care (State Licensed Only, No Medicare) | Base Multiple: Skilled (3x-9x) | Access to some non-Medicare government/MCO contracts, limited by federal program exclusion. |
(3) Medicare Certified (Skilled Home Health Agency - HHA) | Base Multiple: Skilled (3x-12x+) | Highest regulatory requirement, necessary for top-tier reimbursement and VBP participation. |
(4) Hybrid Model (Skilled HHA + Non-Medical Line) | Premium: +5% on Base Multiple | Diversification of revenue streams and the ability to serve clients across the continuum of care (one-stop-shop), creating valuable synergy for buyers. |
The ability to operate across multiple business lines—specifically adding non-skilled care to skilled offerings—mitigates referral risk and keeps clients within the agency's ecosystem, providing diversified revenue opportunities and market advantage. This synergistic capability commands a demonstrable premium in the M&A market.
2.3 Geographic and Infrastructure Analysis
The geographic operating environment introduces varying levels of risk related to regulatory complexity, competition, and labor supply.
Input Field | Data Type | Valuation Implication |
Number of Physical Locations (Branches) | Integer | Assesses Single-Branch vs. Multi-Branch scale. |
Primary Operating Zip Code(s) | Zip Code List | Determines Urban/Rural status and market dynamics. |
State of Operation (CON Status) | Enumerated List (CON / Non-CON) | Assesses regulatory barriers to entry. |
2.3.1 The CON State Factor
Certificate of Need (CON) laws restrict competition and market entry, artificially limiting the supply of home health agencies in certain states. This scarcity drives heightened demand among buyers, leading to "valuation multiples that dwarf the regular norms of the industry". While the exact premium is volatile and highly specific to the local market and the buyer, a presence in a CON state is a strong positive valuation factor. For the purposes of the calculator, an initial premium of +10% to +20% should be assigned, provided the agency has a clean compliance history and strong clinical programs.
2.3.2 Density Over Footprint
Contemporary M&A strategy favors operational density over a geographically sprawling footprint. Buyers prioritize the ability to co-locate new hospice, personal care, or home health operations within a tight geographic area, facilitating resource sharing and cross-referrals. Spreading branches sparsely across a wide region increases administrative complexity without providing scale efficiencies.
Location also impacts risk: rural beneficiaries often experience lower home healthcare utilization and quality of service compared to urban counterparts, sometimes requiring federal add-on payments to stabilize supply. Therefore, the calculator applies a premium for a high number of branches demonstrating operational density (e.g., concentrated within a single Metropolitan Statistical Area), while a small discount may be necessary for remote rural operations due to inherent logistical and staffing challenges.
III. Quantitative Multiple Adjustment Matrix: Payer Mix and Liquidity Risk
The stability, predictability, and margin profile of the agency’s revenue stream, determined by the payer mix, are chief factors in calculating the risk-adjusted multiple.
3.1 Detailed Payer Mix Input Structure and Risk Weighting
The user input must provide a proportional breakdown of TTM revenue by payer source. Each source carries a distinct risk and profitability profile: Private Pay offers the highest margin and least political risk; Medicare offers high reimbursement but high regulatory compliance risk (PDGM, VBP); Medicaid offers the lowest payment-to-cost ratio, often failing to cover fully allocated costs; and Managed Care Organizations (MCOs)/Medicare Advantage (MA) offer negotiated rates that are often lower than traditional Medicare.
3.2 Payer Mix Multiple Adjustment Formula (Δ Payer)
The adjustment factor Δ Payer is determined by assessing the dominance of favorable (high margin, predictable) versus unfavorable (low margin, politically sensitive) revenue sources. Private Pay, Long-Term Care (LTC) Insurance, and traditional Fee-For-Service Medicare generally constitute the favorable mix.
Private Pay in particular can command substantial premium (10% to 30%) while heavy reliance on Medicaid is a known discount trigger, lowering the multiple by 5% to 15%.
Table III.2.1: Payer Mix Multiple Adjustment Grid
Payer Mix Scenario | Criteria | Adjustment Factor (ΔPayer) | Rationale |
High Premium Mix | >60% from Private Pay / Medicare / LTC Insurance | +15% to +30% | Higher margins, reduced policy risk, predictable cash flow. 5 |
Moderate Premium Mix | 40% - 60% Favorable Mix, with disciplined MCO contracts | +5% to +15% | Healthy diversification mitigates concentration risk. |
Neutral Mix | Well-diversified, or roughly balanced split | ±0% | Standard risk profile. |
Heavy Medicaid Discount | >50% of Revenue from Medicaid/State Programs | -5% to -15% | Tight reimbursement-to-cost ratios, high vulnerability to state budget instability. 7 |
3.3 Valuation Impact of Quality Metrics and Regulatory Preparedness
The increasing prevalence of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollment and the implementation of Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) models fundamentally change the valuation landscape for Medicare-certified agencies. Payment adjustments of up to 7% (upward or downward) are directly tied to quality performance under VBP.
An agency heavily reliant on Medicare/MA revenue must demonstrate superior clinical quality, typically evidenced by high HHA CAHPS (Home Health Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers & Systems) patient survey star ratings or low re-hospitalization rates. Agencies with poor Star Ratings risk significant future revenue deceleration due to negative VBP adjustments and reduced attractiveness to MCO partners. This necessitates treating Star Rating performance as a direct proxy for regulatory and reimbursement risk, applying a discount if quality metrics are poor, even if the gross revenue concentration from Medicare is high.
Furthermore, MCO contracts, while scalable, often pay significantly less per-visit than traditional Medicare. The quality of these contracts is critical; agencies that have been "disciplined in their negotiations" and avoided low-margin agreements are valued higher. A major analytical point in due diligence is that if MCO rates are set too low, they compress the AEBITDA margin, effectively dampening the multiple, regardless of payer mix diversification.
IV. Operational Risk Adjustment: Stability and Scalability Metrics
The sustainability of the projected Adjusted Earnings is intrinsically linked to the operational stability of the agency—specifically, its ability to retain clients and qualified staff. Labor pressure is now central to deal structuring and determines ultimate ROI.
4.1 Client Stability Metrics and Multiple Impact
High client retention translates directly to lower customer acquisition costs (CAC) and higher customer lifetime value (CLV), both highly valued attributes. The industry average for healthcare companies is approximately a 77% retention rate.
Client Retention Rate (CRR) | Adjustment Factor (ΔClient) | Rationale |
Exceptional (CRR > 85%) | +5% to +10% | Significantly superior patient satisfaction and operational stability. |
Above Average (70% < CRR < 85%) | +0% to +5% | Meets or slightly exceeds industry benchmark. |
Below Average (CRR < 70%) | -5% to -10% | Signals satisfaction issues and increased future CAC. |
4.2 Workforce Stability: Caregiver Retention as the Dominant Operational Risk
Caregiver retention is a crucial component of valuation, particularly for non-medical and skilled platforms. High staff turnover increases costs (training, recruitment, typically thousands per hire) and degrades care quality. Industry-wide caregiver turnover rates have hovered around 65.2% (meaning a retention rate of approximately 35%). Agencies that demonstrate strong retention effectively reduce the "go-forward risk" of cash flow deterioration, thereby increasing the multiple.
Table IV.2.1: Caregiver Retention Rate (CRR) Adjustment Grid (Staff)
Caregiver Retention Rate (CRR) | Adjustment Factor (ΔStaff) | Rationale |
Exceptional (CRR > 65%) | +10% to +15% | Substantially superior to average; major risk mitigation. 19 |
Above Average (45% < CRR < 65%) | +5% to +10% | Demonstrates effective HR policies and competitive advantage in a tight labor market. |
Industry Average (35% < CRR < 45%) | ±0% | Standard industry challenge. |
Critical (CRR < 35%) | -10% to -20% | Major workforce instability, high risk to quality and volume capability. 19 |
The stability of the labor pool directly impacts the confidence in future cash flow. If both client retention and caregiver retention are below industry standards, the financial risks compound exponentially. For Medicare-certified agencies, low Caregiver CRR generates a leveraged penalty: the operational failure (high turnover) compromises the clinical metrics necessary for VBP and MCO contracts (Section III), effectively threatening the core revenue stream. This interdependent relationship necessitates an amplified discount on the multiple to reflect the required capital investment post-acquisition for labor stabilization.
4.3 Management Depth and Owner Dependency (The SDE Valuation Trigger)
High owner dependency introduces significant key person risk; if the agency cannot function without the owner’s daily input, the business goodwill is deemed non-transferable, severely reducing value. The multiple reflects the cost and difficulty of replacing the owner.
Table IV.3.1: Owner Dependency Adjustment Grid (ΔOwner)
Owner Involvement Level | Criteria | Adjustment Factor (ΔOwner) | Required Valuation Method |
High Dependency | Owner handles >50% of operational oversight/referrals. | -15% to -35% | SDE |
Moderate Dependency | Owner handles 20%-50% of operations/referrals. | -5% to -15% | SDE / Low AEBITDA |
Low Dependency | Owner acts primarily as strategic leader (<20% operational). | +5% to +10% | AEBITDA |
Absentee/Professional Management | Fully delegated corporate structure with tenured managers. | +10% to +15% | AEBITDA |
V. Acquisition Channels and Market Diversification
The source of client acquisition validates the scalability of the revenue base. Revenue derived exclusively from the owner’s personal network carries high risk, as it is non-transferable and may vanish post-closing. Revenue from established institutional channels (MCOs, Health Systems) or systematic, low-cost digital marketing is considered highly valuable.
5.1 Input Specification for Client Acquisition Source Proportions
The user must provide a percentage breakdown of new client acquisition sources. This provides crucial insight into the cost structure and transferability of growth.
5.2 Multiple Adjustments for Channel Dependence
Table V.2.1: Acquisition Channel Adjustment Grid
Channel Scenario | Criteria | Adjustment Factor (ΔAcquisition) | Rationale |
Owner-Exclusive Reliance | >80% acquired via Owner's personal network. | -15% to -40% | Revenue is built on personal, non-transferable goodwill. Supports the floor valuation hypothesis (1x SDE). |
Diversified & Scalable | <20% Owner Network; >60% MCO/Health System/Organic Digital | +10% to +20% | Stable referral ecosystems and low-cost digital acquisition support high valuation. 5 |
Paid Referral Dominant | >60% via Paid Referral Networks | -5% to +5% | Scalable, but high Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) pressure on margin. |
The crucial difference between a low multiple (e.g., 1x or 2x SDE) and an average multiple (3x SDE) is the existence of transferable goodwill. If an agency with $30,000 in annual profit and a census of seven relies entirely on the owner's personal network, the business value reflects only liquidation value or minimal residual income, justifying a 1x or lower multiple, as the revenue stream is guaranteed to cease upon the owner’s departure. A strong digital marketing presence (omnichannel strategy) that seamlessly integrates customer interactions across various platforms represents the gold standard for scalable and low-cost acquisition, warranting a premium.
VI. Qualitative Adjustment Factors and Final Formula Synthesis
Qualitative factors capture specific, non-recurring risks and unique strategic assets that influence the final valuation multiple. These factors are assigned discrete percentage adjustments that are aggregated into the Net Adjustment Factor.
6.1 Enumeration of Negative Valuation Affectors (Qualitative Discounts)
These items represent material liabilities or operational flaws that increase buyer risk.
Table VI.1.1: Negative Qualitative Risk Adjustments
Factor | Rationale / Due Diligence Risk |
Pending Litigation / Regulatory Audit | Represents major unfunded liability risk, potentially warranting a Discount for Lack of Marketability (DLOM) due to extraordinary circumstances. |
High Payer Concentration (Single Source) | Over-reliance on a single MCO or large health system referral partner. |
Major Compliance Issues (OIG/State) | Risk of payment recoupment, fines, or suspension of privileges. |
Outdated or Non-Integrated Technology/EMR | High integration cost for the buyer; creates operational friction. |
6.2 Enumeration of Positive Valuation Affectors (Qualitative Premiums)
These factors reflect strategic advantages that enhance the agency's competitive position or efficiency.
Table VI.2.1: Positive Qualitative Value Premiums
Factor | Rationale / Competitive Advantage |
Proprietary Technology/Integrated EMR | Technology-enabled scheduling and efficiency is a premium driver for scalable platforms. |
Specialized Clinical Programs | Niche programs (e.g., advanced wound care, ortho recovery) differentiate the agency and allow for higher reimbursement/referral rates. |
CON State Advantage | Scarcity value of the license. |
High HHA CAHPS / Star Rating (4+ Stars) | Demonstrates superior quality, essential for succeeding in VBP models and securing premium MCO contracts. |
6.3 The Integrated Valuation Formula: Synthesis of all Adjustments
The final valuation relies on the cumulative effect of all operational and qualitative factors on the base multiple. All percentage adjustments determined in Sections III, IV, V, and VI are summed to create the Net Adjustment Factor.
Step 1: Determine Base Multiple (Base)
Select the appropriate base multiple (3.0x to 12.0x+) from Table I.2.3 based on scale and service line.
Step 2: Calculate Net Adjustment Factor (Net)
Sum all individual percentage adjustments (positive and negative):
Net = Payer + Client + Staff + Owner + Acquisition + Positive Qual} + Negative Qual
Step 3: Calculate Adjusted Multiple
Apply the net factor to the base multiple:
M_Adj = M_Base x (1 + Net)
Step 4: Calculate Estimated Enterprise Value (EV)
Multiply the Adjusted Earnings (SDE or AEBITDA) by the derived Adjusted Multiple:
EV = Adjusted Earnings x M_Adj
This calculation framework rigorously links every agency characteristic, from staffing retention to acquisition method, to a quantifiable adjustment in the buyer’s perceived risk, thus transparently demonstrating how different operational efficiencies affect the valuation.
VII. Compliance and Final Offer Stipulations
The issuance of an "Instant Offer" must be framed by mandatory disclosures and a clear definition of the due diligence process that follows.
7.1 Mandatory Instant Offer and Due Diligence Disclosures
The estimated Enterprise Value generated by the calculator represents an indicative market valuation. The "Instant Offer" should be set as a discounted percentage of the EV (e.g., 90% of EV) to account for inherent risks discovered during the typical pre-diligence review.
The valuation process emphasizes that the reported AEBITDA may require further normalization during formal due diligence (QOE). For instance, if the agency has a critically low Caregiver CRR (Section 4.2), the buyer anticipates a future increase in labor costs required to normalize staffing levels, meaning the reported AEBITDA is inflated relative to the sustainable, go-forward cash flow. This projected capital outlay for labor stabilization results in a further effective discount on the final valuation.
Required Disclosure Language:
Disclaimer: Estimated Valuation and Non-Binding Instant Offer
This valuation and instant offer are based solely on the unverified data provided by the user. The Enterprise Value (EV) generated is an ESTIMATE derived using market-based multiplier heuristics and standardized industry adjustments.
CRITICAL STIPULATION: Any instant offer issued is non-binding and is STRICTLY SUBJECT TO DUE DILIGENCE (DD). A thorough Quality of Earnings (QOE) audit, operational review, and legal/regulatory compliance assessment will be required. Adjustments during DD are common and expected, particularly concerning the normalization of EBITDA, verification of unfunded liabilities (e.g., litigation, compliance risk), and confirmation of management depth and transferable goodwill. The final purchase price may be significantly higher or lower than this estimate.
Try the homecare valuation calculator here.
Works cited
Home Health & Hospice: How Valuation Works in M&A - Stoneridge Partners, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.stoneridgepartners.com/2024/11/11/home-health-hospice-how-valuation-works-in-m-and-a/
Home Health and Hospice Value Insights: It's All About the Multiple (…Or Is It?), accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.mertztaggart.com/post/home-health-and-hospice-value-insights-it-s-all-about-the-multiple-or-is-it
EBITDA Multiples by Industry - 45 Day Exit, accessed October 22, 2025, https://45dayexit.com/ebitda-multiples-by-industry/
How Much is a Home Health Agency Worth? [Detailed Analysis] - Exitwise, accessed October 22, 2025, https://exitwise.com/blog/how-much-is-a-home-health-agency-worth
Home Health Valuation Multiples and M&A Trends 2025, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.scoperesearch.co/post/home-health-valuation-multiples-and-m-a-trends-2025
Valuation Multiples from Small Home Health and Hospice M&A Transactions, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.scoperesearch.co/post/valuation-multiples-from-smaller-home-health-and-hospice-m-a-transactions
Home Health Care Business Rules of Thumb & Profit Tips - DealStream, accessed October 22, 2025, https://dealstream.com/industry-guides/home-health-care-businesses/rules-of-thumb
Home Health Value-Based Purchasing Model - CMS, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/innovation-models/home-health-value-based-purchasing-model
Should your home health agency add non-skilled care?, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.alorahealth.com/adding-non-skilled-care/
Addus CEO: Geography a Key Factor in M&A Decisions Amid High Hospice Multiples, accessed October 22, 2025, https://hospicenews.com/2021/03/03/addus-ceo-geography-a-key-factor-in-ma-decisions-amid-high-hospice-multiples/
Certificate-of-Need (CON) Laws and Their Effects on Healthcare Business Valuation, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.stoneridgepartners.com/2024/12/09/certificate-of-need-laws-and-their-effects-on-healthcare-business-valuation/
At-Home Care's New M&A Strategy: From Scale To Density, accessed October 22, 2025, https://homehealthcarenews.com/2025/06/at-home-cares-new-ma-strategy-from-scale-to-density/
Rural and Urban Differences in Care Provided by Home Health Agencies in the United States: A Review of the Literature - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed October 22, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9880873/
The Impact Of Medicare's Rural Add-On Payments On Supply Of Home Health Agencies Serving Rural Counties | Health Affairs, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/abs/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00952
Assessing Medicaid Payment Rates and Costs of Caring for the Medicaid Population Residing in Nursing Homes - https: // aspe . hhs . gov., accessed October 22, 2025, https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/b0758ea351e38746025e99878d229bdc/assessing-medicaid-payment-rates-costs.pdf
Estimates of Medicaid Nursing Facility Payments Relative to Costs | MACPAC, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.macpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Estimates-of-Medicaid-Nursing-Facility-Payments-Relative-to-Costs-1-6-23.pdf
Assessing the Challenging Home Health Valuation Environment - Weaver, accessed October 22, 2025, https://weaver.com/resources/assessing-challenging-home-health-valuation-environment/
Home health services - Measuring agency performance | Provider Data Catalog, accessed October 22, 2025, https://data.cms.gov/provider-data/topics/home-health-services/measuring-agency-performance
In Home-Based Care M&A, Workforce Stability Defines Deal Outcomes, accessed October 22, 2025, https://homehealthcarenews.com/2025/09/in-home-based-care-ma-workforce-stability-defines-deal-outcomes/
How to Calculate (and Improve) Your Customer Retention Rate | UserVoice Blog, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.uservoice.com/blog/improve-customer-retention-rate
Recruiting & Retaining Caregivers in 2025 - HHAeXchange, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.hhaexchange.com/blog/recruiting-and-retaining-caregivers
Caregiver Turnover Rate is 65.2% According to 2021 Home Care Benchmarking Study, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.hcaoa.org/newsletters/caregiver-turnover-rate-is-652-2021-home-care-benchmarking-study
Multichannel Versus Omnichannel Healthcare Marketing Strategies - Levo Health, accessed October 22, 2025, https://levohealth.com/multichannel-versus-omnichannel-healthcare-marketing-strategies/
An Overview of Omnichannel Interaction in Health Care Services - PMC, accessed October 22, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10069288/
Fair Value: Extraordinary Circumstances and the Discount for Lack of Marketability | Insights, accessed October 22, 2025, https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2013/08/fair-value-extraordinary-circumstances-and-the-dis
Homecare Agency Valuation Calculator and Instant Offer Generator: Technical Specification and Risk Adjustment Modeling
Date
Oct 12, 2025
Category
Acquisitions
Reading
Author
Share
Related News
