Healthcare infrastructure
Live
Recommended to proceed
Key conclusions
The judgement
Tap any figure to see how it was calculated, its source and its confidence.
Need
The evidence of need
Consequences of inaction
Financial model
Annual payment profile. No payment during construction; rent starts on completion and is capped between 1% and 5% a year.
Shaded band: the contractual 1–5% cap and collar — every possible rent path stays inside it. Hatched years: construction, £0 payable. A payment holiday on commencement can be agreed.
Capital amount
£m
Region
Lease term
Construction period · delay stress
Pricing (gilt + margin)
% gilt
% margin
Sensitivity — total rent under each inflation path
Terms
Public value
Alongside the 25-year total
Annual and programme-level effects, kept separate from the total above and never added to it.
Place
What changes because of this location
Place indicators
Challenge the case
How we test our own case before anyone else does. The recommendation below is computed from need, value, affordability, evidence and fairness; Impact Sync's return is not an input to it.
The hard questions
Fairness
Whether reward is proportionate to risk carried, and whether the structure is fair to the public, the place and the investor. Profit is legitimate; extraction is not the objective.
What would make us walk away
Standing conditions under which Impact Sync would not proceed, whatever the strengths elsewhere.
What is left behind
A traditional investor asks what the exit is. Impact Sync asks what remains after the capital has been repaid.
Evidence register
Two structural rules apply throughout. A derived output can never carry greater confidence than its weakest input. Correct arithmetic never upgrades evidence quality; only source documents do. Evidence recorded in session updates the register live; export the register to retain it.