National Field Services Group: A Corporate Development Investment Memo
National Field Services Group is a senior-associate level take-home memo on a proprietary acquisition — a deal sourced directly rather than through a banker-run process. That framing changes everything: there is no CIM polishing the numbers, the quality of earnings is genuinely uncertain, and you are expected to recommend a structure, not just a price.
This page walks through what the case contains, what it is actually testing, how to allocate your time, and the mistakes that most often sink candidates on it. For the broader context on how these exercises work, start with our guide to what a private equity case study looks like.
The Business
National Field Services is a restoration and field services business operating through a network of technicians, with revenue flowing substantially through third-party administrators (TPAs) and insurance carriers. That intermediated demand is the crux of the case.
Because this is a proprietary deal, the financials are messier than a banked process would produce. Add-backs are aggressive, and part of your job is deciding which of them you actually believe.
What This Case Tests
The seller's adjusted EBITDA is a negotiating position, not a fact. Which add-backs are legitimate normalizations and which are the seller's boat? Your entry multiple depends on the answer.
Revenue routed through a small number of intermediaries is a structural risk. What happens if one relationship goes away?
Without a clean QofE, you are valuing a range, not a number. How do you underwrite that?
Earn-out, seller note, holdback, escrow. When the seller's numbers cannot be fully verified, structure is how you bridge the gap. This is the heart of the case.
The memo is addressed to a deal committee, not an academic. Recommendations must be actionable.
How to Approach It
Start from reported, walk through each add-back, and produce your own adjusted number. This single exercise drives your valuation.
Do not just note that TPA concentration exists. Model what a loss of the largest relationship does to EBITDA and to your returns.
Give a valuation range tied to your EBITDA range, then explain where in that range you would transact.
An earn-out bridges disagreement about future performance. A holdback protects against misstatement of the past. Match the instrument to the problem — do not just list all of them.
What are you recommending the committee approve, at what price, with what protections?
Common Mistakes on This Case
On a proprietary deal this is the whole test. Accepting the seller's number means you failed the case.
"We could use an earn-out or a seller note" is not a recommendation.
Say what it costs. Numbers, not adjectives.
The committee knows the business. They want your view.
Get the Case Packet
Get the National Field Services Group case packet
The full National Field Services Group packet — business overview, end markets, historical financials, and the complete set of transaction and operating assumptions — is available inside the PEPath app, along with a framework for what a strong answer looks like, the common mistakes, and discussion questions to self-assess against.
Related Guides
The candidates who clear cases like this one are rarely the smartest people in the room. They are the ones who have built enough models that the mechanics are automatic, which frees their attention for the judgment the interviewer is actually testing.
Practice All 7 PE Case Studies
PEPath includes 7 recruiting case studies with full packets, frameworks, and discussion questions — plus 300+ interview questions, 140+ flashcards, and 10 paper LBO prompts with solutions.
Download PEPath Free