Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Capital Financing”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources
PubMed1991

Financing maneuvers. Two opportunities to boost a hospital's working capital.

Two receivables financing approaches, factoring and asset-backed securitization, offer an initial cash flow boost and a predictable source for continual cash flow. In a typical receivables factoring program, a healthcare organization receives advance funding from its receivables and reduces collection and follow-up efforts required of its staff. In exchange, the organization: Sells receivables at a discount between 5 percent and 10 percent off face value; and Pays a factoring fee of up to 20 percent of sold receivables. In a typical asset-backed securitization: Proceeds generated from the sale of A1-rated commercial paper are used to purchase receivables from a hospital; Accounts receivable eligible for sale are advance-funded at a level between 80 and 90 percent, with the unfunded portion remaining an asset of the hospital; The hospital is responsible for collection and follow-up activities; and An asset manager maintains cash collections to retire commercial paper notes and pay administrative costs. A healthcare organization interested in receivables financing should review each option's structure and benefits to assess advance funding provided, costs, a seller's level of control, and program eligibility requirements.

Accounts Payable and Receivable↗
PubMed1992

Project risk definition and measurement in a not-for-profit setting.

The health care finance literature on capital investment decisions generally applies conventional market risk concepts without distinguishing between proprietary and not-for-profit forms of organization. Since proprietary firms have shareholder wealth maximization as their primary goal, a project's relevant risk is its contribution to the riskiness of the equity investors' well diversified stock portfolios, or its market risk. However, not-for-profit organizations do not have shareholder wealth maximization as their primary goal, and thus market risk concepts are not applicable. Rather, the relevant risk in a not-for-profit setting is a project's corporate risk; that is, the project's contribution to the riskiness of the organization. The difference in risk definition and measurement between proprietary and not-for-profit firms has two implications for managerial decisions: (1) in making capital investment decisions, a manager must define and measure a project's riskiness on the basis of the firm's organizational form; and (2) although diversification for the sole purpose of risk reduction is not a valid rationale for proprietary firms because stockholders can achieve the same result at less cost, risk-reducing diversification does make sense for not-for-profit firms.

Capital Expenditures↗