e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31,
2010
|
OR
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number
001-34746
Accretive Health,
Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
02-0698101
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
|
incorporation or
organization)
|
|
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
401 North Michigan Avenue
Suite 2700
Chicago, Illinois
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
60611
(Zip Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code
(312) 324-7820
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
Common Stock, $0.01 par value
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such
files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer o
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
Non-accelerated
filer þ
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
Aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common
equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based on the
last sale price for such stock on June 30, 2010:
$375,694,705.
The number of shares outstanding of each of the
registrants classes of common stock, as of
February 28, 2011:
|
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 par value
|
|
95,126,464
|
Portions of the registrants definitive Proxy Statement for
its 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by
reference into Part III of this Annual Report.
ACCRETIVE
HEALTH, INC.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
2
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
contains forward-looking statements, within the meaning of the
federal securities laws, that involve substantial risks and
uncertainties. All statements, other than statements of
historical facts, included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
regarding our strategy, future operations, future financial
position, future revenue, projected costs, prospects, plans,
objectives of management and expected market growth are
forward-looking statements. The words anticipate,
believe, estimate, expect,
intend, may, plan,
predict, project, will,
would and similar expressions are intended to
identify forward-looking statements, although not all
forward-looking statements contain these identifying words.
These forward-looking statements include, among other things,
statements about:
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to attract and retain customers;
|
|
|
|
our financial performance;
|
|
|
|
the advantages of our solutions as compared to those of others;
|
|
|
|
our new quality and total cost of care service initiative;
|
|
|
|
our ability to establish and maintain intellectual property
rights;
|
|
|
|
our ability to retain and hire necessary employees and
appropriately staff our operations;
|
|
|
|
our estimates regarding capital requirements and needs for
additional financing; and
|
|
|
|
our projected contracted annual revenue run rate.
|
We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or
expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and
you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking
statements. Actual results or events could differ materially
from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in the
forward-looking statements we make. We have included important
factors in the cautionary statements included in this Annual
Report, particularly in the Risk Factors section,
that could cause actual results or events to differ materially
from the forward-looking statements that we make. Our
forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact
of any future acquisitions, mergers, dispositions, joint
ventures or investments we may make.
You should read this Annual Report and the documents that we
have filed as exhibits to the Annual Report completely and with
the understanding that our actual future results may be
materially different from what we expect. We do not assume any
obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as
a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except
as required by law.
3
PART I
Unless the context indicates otherwise, references in this
Annual Report to Accretive Health,
Accretive, the Company, we,
our, and us mean Accretive Health, Inc.
and its subsidiaries.
Overview
Accretive Health is a leading provider of services that help
healthcare providers generate sustainable improvements in their
operating margins and healthcare quality while also improving
patient, physician and staff satisfaction. Our core service
offering helps U.S. healthcare providers to more
efficiently manage their revenue cycles, which encompass patient
registration, insurance and benefit verification, medical
treatment documentation and coding, bill preparation and
collections. Our quality and total cost of care service
offering, introduced in 2010, can enable healthcare providers to
effectively manage the health of a defined patient population,
which we believe is a future direction of the manner in which
healthcare services will be delivered in the United States.
At December 31, 2010 we provided our revenue cycle service
offering to 26 customers representing 66 hospitals as well as
physician billing organizations associated with several of these
customers. At December 31, 2010 we provided our quality and
total cost of care solution to one customer representing seven
hospitals and 42 clinics.
Our integrated revenue cycle technology and services offering
spans the entire revenue cycle. We help our revenue cycle
customers increase the portion of the maximum potential patient
revenue they receive while reducing total revenue cycle costs.
Our quality and total cost of care solution can help our
customers identify the individuals who are most likely to
experience an adverse health event and, as a result, incur high
healthcare costs in the coming year. This data allows providers
to focus greater efforts on managing these patients within and
across the delivery system, as well as at home.
Our customers typically are multi-hospital systems, including
faith-based or community healthcare systems, academic medical
centers and independent ambulatory clinics, and their affiliated
physician practice groups. We seek to develop strategic,
long-term relationships with our customers and focus on
providers that we believe understand the value of our operating
model and have demonstrated success in both clinical and
operational outcomes.
Grounded in sophisticated analytics, our revenue cycle solution
spans our customers entire revenue cycle. This helps set
us apart from competing services, which we believe address only
a portion of the revenue cycle. We are not a traditional
outsourcing company focused solely on cost reductions. Through
the implementation of our distinctive operating model that
includes people, processes and technology, customers for our
revenue cycle management services can generate significant and
sustainable revenue cycle improvements. Our service offerings
are adaptable to the evolution of the healthcare regulatory
environment, technology standards and market trends, and require
no up-front cash investment by our customers.
To implement our solutions, we assume full responsibility for
the management and cost of a customers revenue cycle or
quality and total cost of care operations and supplement the
customers existing staff with seasoned Accretive Health
personnel. We collaborate with our customers employees
with the objective of educating and empowering them so that over
time they can deliver improved results using the proprietary
technology included in our applications. Once implemented, our
technology applications, processes and services are deeply
embedded in a hospitals
day-to-day
operations. We and our customers share financial gains resulting
from our solutions, which directly aligns our objectives and
interests with those of our customers. Both we and our customers
benefit on a contractually
agreed-upon
basis from revenue increases and cost savings
realized by the customers as a result of our services. We
believe that, over time, this alignment of interests fosters
greater innovation and incentivizes us to improve our
customers operations.
The revenue cycle operations of a typical hospital, physician or
other healthcare provider often fail to capture and collect the
total amounts contractually owed to it from third-party payors
and patients for medical
4
services rendered, leading to significant bad debt write-offs,
uncompensated care, payment denials by payors and corresponding
administrative write-offs, as well as lost revenue for missed
charges. Fitch Ratings estimates that in 2008 and 2009,
uncompensated care (including bad debt write-offs, charity care
and uninsured discounts) averaged 19% and 20% of net patient
revenue at U.S. hospitals, respectively, and that this
percentage increased to an average of 21.3% in the first three
quarters of 2010. We generally deliver operating margin
improvements to our customers through a combination of
improvements in collections, which we refer to as net revenue
yield; charge capture, which involves ensuring that all charges
for medical treatment are included in the associated bill; and
revenue cycle cost reductions. Our customers have historically
achieved significant net revenue yield improvements within 18 to
24 months of implementing our operating model, with
customers subject to mature managed service contracts typically
realizing 400 to 600 basis points in yield improvements in
the third or fourth contract year. All of a customers
yield improvements during the period we are providing services
are attributed to our solution because we assume full
responsibility for the management of the customers revenue
cycle. Our methodology for measuring yield improvements excludes
the impact of external factors such as changes in reimbursement
rates from payors, the expansion of existing services or
addition of new services, volume increases and acquisitions of
hospitals or physician practices, which may impact net revenue
but are not considered changes to net revenue yield.
Improvements in charge capture and collections are typically
attributable to reduced payment denials by payors,
identification of additional items that can be billed to payors
based on the actual procedures performed, identification of
insurance for a higher percentage of otherwise uninsured
patients, and improved collections of patient balances after
insurance. Revenue cycle cost reductions are typically achieved
through operating efficiencies, including streamlining work
flow, automating processes and centralizing vendor activities.
Specific sources of margin improvement vary among customers.
Our quality and total cost of care solution can help our
customers identify the individuals who are most likely to
experience an adverse health event and, as a result, incur high
healthcare costs in the coming year. This data allows providers
to focus greater efforts on managing these patients within and
across the delivery system, as well as at home. We assist our
customers in capturing a share of the reductions in healthcare
costs by helping them negotiate contracts with third-party
payors that provide an equitable sharing of the savings in total
medical costs among the payor and provider. We will receive a
share of the provider community cost savings for our role in
providing the technology infrastructure and for managing the
care coordination process.
We have developed and refined our solutions based in part on
information, processes and management experience garnered
through working with many of the largest and most prestigious
hospitals and healthcare systems in the United States. We seek
to embed our technology, personnel, know-how and culture within
each customers revenue cycle or population health
management activities with the expectation that we will serve as
the customers
on-site
operational manager beyond the managed service contracts
initial term, which typically ranges from four to five years. To
date, we have experienced a contract renewal rate of 100%
(excluding exploratory new service offerings, a consensual
termination following a change of control and a customer
reorganization). Coupled with the long-term nature of our
managed service contracts and the fixed nature of the base fees
under each contract, our historical renewal experience provides
a core source of recurring revenue.
Our net services revenue consists primarily of base fees and
incentive fees. We receive base fees for managing our
customers revenue cycle or quality and total cost of care
operations, net of any cost savings we share with those
customers. Incentive fees represent our portion of the increase
in our customers revenue resulting from our services. We
generate a portion of our operating margin as a result of the
difference between the fixed base fees and the variable costs of
the operations that we manage. Incentive fees contribute
directly to operating margin, thus significantly impacting our
profitability. We monitor each customers revenue cycle or
quality and total cost of care performance through periodic
operating reviews. A customers revenue improvements and
cost savings generally increase over time as we deploy
additional programs and as the programs we implement become more
effective, which in turn provides visibility into our future
revenue and profitability. In 2010, for example, approximately
87% of our net services revenue, and nearly all of our net
income, was derived from customer contracts that were in place
as of January 1, 2010. In 2010, we had net services revenue
of $606.3 million, representing growth of 19% over 2009 and
a compound annual growth
5
rate of 39% since January 1, 2006. We recognized no revenue
from our quality and total cost of care offering in 2010. In
addition, we were profitable for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, and our
profitability increased in each of those years. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
Seasonality for a discussion of seasonality in our
business.
Market
Opportunity
We believe that current macroeconomic conditions will continue
to impose financial pressure on healthcare providers and will
increase the importance of managing their revenue cycles and
quality and total cost of care activities effectively and
efficiently. We estimate that the domestic market opportunity
for our revenue cycle services exceeds $50 billion,
calculated as 5% (the approximate percentage of a representative
hospital systems total annual revenue paid to us for our
revenue cycle management services at contract maturity, which is
generally reached in three and one-half to four years) of
approximately $1,020 billion in total annual revenue for
services and goods that our revenue cycle solution addresses,
which is estimated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services of the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or CMS,
estimates that in 2009 total revenue for hospitals was
$759 billion, total revenue for home healthcare services
was $68 billion and total revenue from sales of durable and
non-durable medical equipment was $78 billion; and
|
|
|
|
we target the largest physician organizations, which we believe
represent $115 billion, or approximately 20% of CMSs
estimate of total physician and clinical revenue in 2009.
|
According to the CMS, expenditures for hospitals and physician
and clinical services are expected to increase between 2009 and
2018 at annual rates of approximately 6.4% and 5.4%,
respectively. Population growth, longer life expectancy, the
increasing prevalence of chronic illnesses (such as diabetes and
obesity) and the over-utilization of certain healthcare services
is expected to put increasing pressure on hospitals, physicians
and other healthcare providers to operate more efficiently.
American Hospital Association (AHA) surveys indicate that
approximately 43% of hospitals had a negative operating margin
during the first quarter of 2009. Additionally, AHA reports that
approximately 73% of hospitals had reduced capital spending in
the first quarter of 2010, the latest period reported. As the
scope of healthcare services expands and financial pressures
mount, hospitals are demanding both greater effectiveness and
improved efficiency in the management of their revenue cycle
operations. We believe that efficient management of the revenue
cycle and collection of the full amount of payments due for
patient services are among the most critical challenges facing
healthcare providers today.
We believe that the inability of healthcare providers to capture
and collect the total amounts owed to them for patient services
is caused by the following trends:
|
|
|
|
|
Complexity of Revenue Cycle
Management. At most hospitals, there is a
lack of standardization across operating practices, payor and
patient payment methodologies, data management processes and
billing systems. In general, after a patient receives healthcare
services, the hospital must coordinate payment with two or more
parties, including third-party insurance companies, federal and
state government payors, private charities and individual
payors. Hospitals also face a growing population of uninsured
patients, whom healthcare providers have an ethical and legal
obligation to treat.
|
|
|
|
Lack of Integrated Systems and
Processes. Although interrelated, the
individual steps in the revenue cycle are not operationally
integrated across revenue cycle departments at many hospitals.
Multiple tasks and milestones must be completed properly by
personnel in various departments before a hospital or physician
can be reimbursed for patient services. It is often difficult
for a single organization to acquire and coordinate all the
knowledge and experience necessary to identify and eliminate
inefficiencies within the revenue cycle. Even if all steps are
performed flawlessly, the time required to receive full payment
for services creates long billing cycles. With frequent changes
in the reimbursement rules imposed by third-party payors, the
billing and collections cycle often is not timely and
error-free, further lengthening the time before payment is
actually received by the healthcare provider.
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Increasing Patient Financial Responsibility for Healthcare
Services. Hospitals are being forced to adapt
to the need for
direct-to-patient
billing and collections capabilities as patients bear payment
responsibility for an increasing portion of healthcare costs.
Hospitals have traditionally focused on collecting payments from
insurance companies and from state and federal payors, and
typically are less familiar with the processes necessary to
collect payments from patients at the point of service,
including the use of alternative payment options. Patient
billing is often confusing and payment instructions are often
unclear. Moreover, hospitals generally do not utilize consumer
segmentation techniques to formulate effective revenue
collection approaches to patients. As a result, hospitals
generally write-off a high percentage of patient-owed bills,
resulting in increases in bad debt and uncompensated care.
|
|
|
|
Outdated Systems and Insufficient Resources to Upgrade
Them. Many hospitals suffer from operating
inefficiencies caused by outdated technology, increasingly
complex billing requirements, a general lack of standardization
of process and information flow, costly in-house services that
could be more economically outsourced, and an increasingly
stringent regulatory environment. Hospitals often lack the
breadth and depth of data available to payors, and this lack of
information may contribute to the filing of less accurate claims
with third-party insurance payors and unfavorable resolutions of
disputed claims. In addition, the endowments of most hospitals
have significantly declined, motivating them to make their
revenue cycle operations more efficient.
|
In addition to the above trends, we believe that the federal
healthcare reform legislation that was enacted in March
2010 may create new business opportunities for us by
increasing the need for services such as those that we provide.
For example, reduced reimbursement for some healthcare providers
may cause these healthcare providers to turn to outsourcing to
extract more out of their existing revenue cycles, and value and
quality-based reimbursement incentives created by the
legislation could generate more interest in our quality and
total cost of care service offerings.
The
Accretive Health Revenue Cycle Solutions
Our revenue cycle solution is intended to address the full
spectrum of revenue cycle operational issues faced by healthcare
providers, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the increasingly complex and challenging payor environment;
|
|
|
|
a lack of fully integrated
end-to-end
revenue cycle management expertise;
|
|
|
|
the consequences of increasing patient responsibility for their
healthcare costs;
|
|
|
|
the difficulty and associated expense of a single organization
acquiring and coordinating the knowledge and experience
necessary to efficiently manage the revenue cycle;
|
|
|
|
ongoing attrition of revenue cycle staff; and
|
|
|
|
frequent patient confusion and frustration with financial
obligations and billing.
|
The revenue cycle operations of a typical hospital, physician or
other healthcare provider fail to capture and collect the total
amounts owed to them from third-party payors and patients for
medical services rendered, leading to significant bad debt
write-offs, uncompensated care, payment denials by payors and
corresponding administrative write-offs, as well as lost revenue
for missed charges. Fitch Ratings estimates that in 2008 and
2009, uncompensated care (including bad debt write-offs, charity
care and uninsured discounts) averaged 19% and 20% of net
patient revenue at U.S. hospitals, respectively, and that
this percentage increased to an average of 21.3% in the first
three quarters of 2010.
We deliver operating margin improvements to our customers
through a combination of improvements in net revenue yield,
charge capture and revenue cycle cost reductions. Improvements
in charge capture and collections are typically attributable to
reduced payment denials by payors, identification of additional
items that can be billed to payors based on the actual
procedures performed, identification of insurance for a higher
percentage of otherwise uninsured patients, and improved
collections of patient balances after insurance. Revenue cycle
cost reductions are typically achieved through operating
efficiencies, including streamlining
7
work flow, automating processes and centralizing vendor
activities. Specific sources of margin improvement vary among
customers.
Our customers have historically achieved significant net revenue
yield improvements within 18 to 24 months of implementing
our operating model, with customers operating under mature
managed service contracts typically realizing 400 to
600 basis points in yield improvements in the third or
fourth contract year. During the assessment phase of the
customer relationship, we identify specific areas for
improvement in net revenue yield and begin implementation
immediately upon execution of a managed service contract. While
improvements in net revenue yield generally represent the
majority of a customers operating margin improvement, we
generally are able to deliver additional margin improvement
through revenue cycle cost reductions. Because our managed
service contracts align our interests with those of our
customers, we have been able, over time, to improve our margins
along with those of our customers.
We believe that our proprietary and integrated technology,
management experience and well-developed processes are enhanced
by the knowledge and experience we gain working with a wide
range of customers and improve with each payor reimbursement or
patient pay transaction. Our proprietary technology applications
include workflow automation and direct payor connection
capabilities that enable revenue cycle staff to focus on problem
accounts rather than on manual tasks, such as searching payor
websites for insurance and benefits verification for all
patients. We employ technology that identifies and isolates
specific cases requiring review or action, using the same
interface for all users, to automate a host of tasks that
otherwise can consume a significant amount of staff time. We use
real-time feedback from our customers to improve the
functionality and performance of our technology and processes
and incorporate these improvements into our service offerings on
a regular basis. We strive to apply operational excellence
throughout the entire revenue cycle.
We adapt our solution to the hospitals organizational
structure in order to minimize disruption to existing staff and
to make our services transparent to both patients and
physicians. The experience and knowledge of the senior
management personnel we provide to our customers can improve the
performance of their in-house revenue cycle staff. Our objective
is to improve the operating performance of our customers, thus
generating incentive fees for ourselves, by:
|
|
|
|
|
Improving Net Revenue Yield. We help
our customers improve their net revenue yield. Through the use
of our proprietary technologies and methodologies, we precisely
calculate each customers improvement in net revenue yield.
This calculation compares the customers actual cash
collections for a given instance of care to the maximum
potential cash receipts that the customer should have received
from the instance of care, which we refer to as the best
possible net compliant revenue. We aggregate these calculations
for all instances of care and compare the result to the
aggregate calculation for the year before we began to provide
our services to the customer. We receive a share of each
customers improvement in net revenue yield.
|
|
|
|
Increasing Charge Capture. We help our
customers increase their charge capture by implementing
optimization techniques and related processes. We utilize
sophisticated analytics and artificial intelligence software to
help improve the accuracy of claims filings and the resolution
of disputed claims from third-party insurance payors. We also
overlay a range of capabilities designed to reduce missed
charges, improve the clinical/reimbursement interface and
produce bills that comply with third-party payor requirements
and applicable healthcare regulations.
|
|
|
|
Making Revenue Cycle Operations More
Efficient. We help our customers make their
revenue cycle operations more efficient by implementing advanced
technologies, streamlining operations, avoiding unnecessary
re-work and improving quality. We also can reduce the costs of
third-party services, such as Medicaid eligibility review, by
transferring the work to our own internal operations. For some
customers, we are able to reduce operating costs further by
transferring selected internal operations to our centralized
shared services centers located in the United States and India.
|
We employ a variety of techniques intended to achieve this
objective:
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering Complete Patient and Payor
Information. We focus on gathering complete
patient information and validating insurance coverage and
benefits so the services can be recorded and billed
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
to the appropriate parties. For scheduled healthcare services,
we educate the patient as to his or her potential financial
responsibilities before receiving care. Our systems maintain an
automated electronic scorecard, which measures the efficiency of
up-front data capture, billing and collections throughout the
life cycle of any given patient account. These scorecards are
analyzed in the aggregate, and the results are used to help
improve work flow processes and operational decisions for our
customers. Our analyses of data measured by our systems show
that hospitals employing our services have increased the
percentage of non-emergency in-patient admissions with complete
information profiles to more than 90%, enabling fewer billing
delays, increased charge capture and reduced billing cycles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improving Claims Filing and Third-Party Payor
Collections. Based on our customers
experience, and on industry sources, hospitals typically do not
collect 100% of the amounts they are contractually owed by
insurance companies. Through our proprietary technology and
process expertise, we identify, for each patient encounter, the
amount our customer should receive from a payor if the
applicable contract with the payor and patient policies are
followed. Over time, we compare these amounts with the actual
cash collected to help identify which payors, types of medical
treatments and patients represent various levels of payment risk
for a customer. Using proprietary algorithms and analytics, we
consider actual reimbursement patterns to predict the payment
risk associated with a customers claims to its payors, and
we then direct increased attention and time to the riskiest
accounts. Our experience is that this approach significantly
increases the likelihood that a customer will be reimbursed the
amounts it is contractually owed for providing its services.
|
|
|
|
Identifying Alternative Payment
Sources. We use various methods to find
payment sources for uninsured patients and reimbursement for
services not covered by third-party insurance. Our patient
financial screening technology and methodologies often identify
federal, state or private grant sources to help pay for
healthcare services. These techniques are designed to ease the
financial burden on uninsured or underinsured patients and
increase the percentage of patient bills that are actually paid.
After a typical implementation period, we have been able to help
our customers find a third-party payment source for
approximately 85% of all admitted patients who identified
themselves as uninsured.
|
|
|
|
Employing Proprietary Technology and
Algorithms. Our service offerings employ a
variety of proprietary data analytics and predictive modeling
algorithms. For example, we identify patient accounts with
financial risk by applying data mining techniques to the data we
have collected. Our systems are designed to streamline work
processes through the use of proprietary algorithms that focus
revenue cycle staff effort on those accounts deemed to have the
greatest potential for improving net revenue yield or charge
capture. We frequently adjust our proprietary predictive
algorithms to reflect changes in payor and patient behavior
based upon the knowledge we glean from our entire customer base.
As new customers are added and payor and patient behavior
changes, the information we use to create our algorithms
expands, increasing the accuracy and value of those algorithms.
We rely upon a combination of patent, trademark, copyright and
trade secret law and contractual terms and conditions to protect
our intellectual property rights. We hold one U.S. patent
and have filed six additional U.S. patent applications
covering key innovations utilized in our revenue cycle
management solution.
|
|
|
|
Using Analytical Capabilities and Operational Excellence.
We draw on the experience that we have gained from
working with many of the best healthcare provider systems in the
United States to train hospital staffs about new and innovative
revenue cycle management practices. We employ extensive
analytical analyses to identify specific weaknesses in business
processes. We also strive to achieve operational excellence and
to foster an overall culture of leading by example. As a result,
our on-site
management teams have seen marked shifts in the behaviors of
hospital administrative staff, including enthusiasm for setting
daily and weekly goals, participation in daily
half-hour
gatherings to track results achieved during the day, and
improved adherence to our standard operating procedures.
|
In addition, we help our customers increase their revenue cycle
efficiency by implementing improved practices, advanced data
management technology, streamlining work flow processes and
outsourcing aspects of their revenue cycle operations. For
example, services that can be shared across our customers, such
as patient scheduling and pre-registration, medical
transcription and patient financial services, can be performed
in our
9
shared services centers in the United States and India. By
leveraging the economies of scale and experience of our shared
services centers, we believe that we offer our customers better
quality services at a lower cost. For those customers opting not
to participate in our shared services program, we can help
reduce costs by migrating services such as Medicaid eligibility,
medical transcription and collections from external vendors to
our internal staff.
Our
Strategy
Our goal is to become the preferred
provider-of-choice
for revenue cycle and quality and total cost of care services in
the U.S. healthcare industry. Since our inception, we have
worked with some of the largest and most prestigious healthcare
systems in the United States, such as Ascension Health, the
Henry Ford Health System and the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical
Center. Going forward, our goal is to continue to expand the
scope of our services to hospitals within our existing
customers systems as well as to leverage our strong
relationships with reference customers to continue to attract
business from new customers. Key elements of our strategy
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Delivering Tangible, Long-Term Results by Providing
Services that Span the Entire Revenue
Cycle. Our revenue cycle solution is designed
to help our customers achieve sustainable economic value through
improvements in operating margins. Improvements in our
customers operating margins in turn provide recurring
revenues for us. Our technology and services are deeply
integrated across the customers entire revenue cycle,
whereas most competitive offerings address a narrower portion of
the revenue cycle. Our offering alleviates the need to purchase
services from multiple sources, potentially saving customers
time, money and integration challenges in their efforts to
improve their revenue cycle activities.
|
|
|
|
Continuing to Develop Innovative Approaches to Increase
the Collection Rate on Patient-Owed
Obligations. We have developed and continue
to design creative approaches intended to increase net revenue
yields on patient-owed obligations. These processes include
direct communications with payors to establish patient pay
amounts (after insurance and taking into account deductibles)
and status, contract modeling applications to provide patients
with accurate updates on the portion of an outstanding balance
for which they are personally responsible, and the provision of
prior balance data and payment alternatives to patients at the
point of service. We also use consumer behavior modeling and
conduct trending analyses for collections, and we offer patients
a variety of payment methods.
|
|
|
|
Enhancing and Developing Proprietary Algorithms to
Identify Potential Errors and to Make Process
Corrections. Even as patients begin to assume
responsibility for a greater portion of the cost of medical
services, healthcare providers continue to rely upon third-party
payors for the majority of medical reimbursements. To help
improve revenue collection rates and timing for claims owed by
payors, we have developed proprietary algorithms to assess risk
and the resulting treatment of claims. Our methodology is
designed to enable nearly 100% of outstanding claims to be
reviewed, prioritized and pursued. We believe that our focus on
collecting revenue from a broader range of outstanding claims
and reducing the average time to collection differentiates our
revenue cycle management services. An additional proprietary
algorithm that distinguishes our services from others is
incorporated in our charge capture application that identifies
potential lost charges. In instances where our customers have
been using other third-party applications, we routinely identify
multiple additional lost charges.
|
|
|
|
Expanding Our Revenue Cycle Shared Services
Program. Our revenue cycle shared services
program, which includes patient scheduling and pre-registration,
medical transcription and patient financial services, is
structured to reduce a hospitals overhead costs while
providing services of comparable or higher quality. Expansion of
our shared services program is potentially advantageous for both
our customers and us, as we both benefit from greater savings
attributable to economies of scale and improvements in net
revenue yield. We believe that continuing to transition
customers to our shared services will help us achieve our
targeted improvements in customer operating margins. We
introduced the shared services program in 2008, and we continue
to see interest in this offering from both new and existing
customers. As of February 28, 2011, approximately 39% of
our customers for whom we have
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
provided revenue cycle management services for at least one year
participate in our shared services program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hiring, Training and Retaining Our
Personnel. Our solutions were developed by
what we believe to be the best personnel available in the
market. In order to grow our business and solidify our
competitive position, we need to continue to hire, train and
retain very talented team members who demonstrate a strong focus
on outstanding customer service. Employee recruitment is a
priority for us because we believe that our long-term growth is
limited more by the availability of top talent than by
constraints in market demand for our solutions. We seek an
ongoing influx of new personnel at all levels so that we have
adequate staffing to pursue and accept new customer
opportunities. We also make substantial ongoing investments in
employee training, including our operator academy
and revenue cycle academy which enable us to educate
all new employees regarding our operating models and related
processes and technology.
|
|
|
|
Continuing to Diversify Our Customer
Base. In October 2004, Ascension Health
became our founding customer. While Ascension Health is our
largest customer and we expect to continue to expand our
presence within Ascension Healths network of affiliated
hospitals, we are focusing our marketing efforts primarily on
other healthcare providers and expect to continue to diversify
our customer base. In the year ended December 31, 2010
compared to the year ended December 31, 2009, our net
services revenue from customers not affiliated with Ascension
Health grew by 47.6%, while our net services revenue from
hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health was essentially
unchanged. As a result, the percentage of our total net services
revenue attributable to hospitals affiliated with Ascension
Health declined from 88.7% in the year ended December 31,
2006 to 50.7% in the year ended December 31, 2010. Between
January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2010, approximately
76% of the increase in our PCARRR was attributable to customers
not affiliated with Ascension Health.
|
|
|
|
Developing Enhanced Service Offerings that Offer Long-Term
Opportunities. We intend to continue to
introduce new services that draw upon our core competencies and
that we believe will be attractive to our target customers. In
considering new services, we look for market opportunities that
we believe present low barriers to entry, require limited
incremental cost and present significant growth opportunities.
For example, in 2009 we began providing physician advisory
services to help hospitals classify emergency room patient
admissions to maximize compliant revenue. In 2010, we introduced
our quality and total cost of care offering focused on
increasing the quality of healthcare through incentive payments
to the hospitals and their affiliated physicians. We also plan
to selectively pursue acquisitions that will enable us to
broaden our service offerings.
|
Segments
The information about our business segment set forth below
should be read together with our consolidated financial
statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
All of the Companys significant operations are organized
around the single business of providing
end-to-end
management services of revenue cycle operations for
U.S.-based
hospitals and other medical providers. Accordingly, the Company
has only one operating and reporting segment. All of the
Companys net services revenue and trade accounts
receivable are derived from healthcare providers domiciled in
the United States. See Note 3 to our consolidated financial
statements contained elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form
10-K for net services revenue for each of the last three fiscal
years.
Our
Services
Core
Service Offering Revenue Cycle
Management
Our core revenue cycle services offering consists of
comprehensive, integrated technology and revenue cycle
management services. We assume full responsibility for the
management and cost of the customers complete revenue
cycle operations in exchange for a base fee and the opportunity
to earn incentive fees. To implement our solution, we supplement
the customers existing revenue cycle management and staff
with seasoned Accretive Health revenue cycle leaders, subject
matter experts and staff, and connect our proprietary
11
technology and analytical applications to the hospitals
existing technology systems. Our employees that we add to the
hospitals revenue cycle team typically have significant
experience in healthcare management, revenue cycle operations,
technology, quality control and other management disciplines. In
addition to implementing revenue enhancement procedures, we help
our customers reduce their revenue cycle costs by implementing
improved practices, advanced data management technology and more
efficient processes, as well as outsourcing aspects of their
revenue cycle operations. We seek to adapt our solution to the
hospitals organizational structure in order to minimize
disruption to existing staff and to make our services
transparent to both patients and physicians.
We believe that our revenue cycle management solution offers our
customers a number of strategic, financial and operational
benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Management. We assign
highly-trained management teams to each customer site to
facilitate technology implementation, provide hands-on training
to existing hospital employees and guide staff toward achievable
performance goals.
|
|
|
|
Technology Improvements. We integrate
our proprietary technology with a hospitals transaction
systems to help improve claims collections and realize operating
efficiencies. By using a web interface to layer our applications
on top of a hospitals existing software, we can bring our
capabilities online in a timely manner without requiring any
up-front hardware investment by customers.
|
|
|
|
Standardized Operating Model. We offer
our customers a revenue cycle operating model that has delivered
tangible financial benefits. Our standard implementation
techniques are designed to enable us to install our operating
model in a timely manner and consistently at customer sites. We
utilize a uniform set of key performance indicators to drive and
assess the revenue cycle operations of our customers. Our senior
operational leaders monitor each customers revenue cycle
performance through ten to twelve operating reviews each year.
|
|
|
|
Multi-Industry Revenue Process
Experience. Our personnel have years of prior
work experience advising customers on revenue process management
issues in complex industries. We have combined this experience
with healthcare industry innovative practices and operational
excellence to form the foundation of our service offerings. We
believe that the depth and breadth of our knowledge of
healthcare and non-healthcare revenue cycle management help
differentiate us from our competitors.
|
|
|
|
Shared Services. We offer customers the
opportunity to realize operating efficiencies by outsourcing
certain revenue tasks and responsibilities to shared facilities
that we operate. By allowing multiple, unrelated hospitals to
utilize the same set of resources for key revenue cycle tasks,
our shared services capability provides opportunities to reduce
the operating costs of our customers. We have been able to
achieve meaningful margin improvements for the customers that
utilize our shared services.
|
Our solution spans a hospitals entire revenue cycle. We
deploy our proprietary technology and management experience at
each key point in the revenue cycle. As part of our solution, we
make targeted changes in the hospitals processes designed
to improve its revenue cycle operations. We also implement
cost-reduction programs, including the use of our shared
services centers for customers who choose to participate
12
and, for other customers, by moving services such as Medicaid
eligibility, transcription and collections from external vendors
to our internal staff.
Front Office (Patient Access). A
hospitals front office revenue cycle operations typically
consist of scheduling, pre-registration, registration and
collection of patient co-payments. Complete and accurate
information gathering at this stage is critical to a
hospitals ability to collect revenue from the patient and
third-party payors after healthcare services are provided.
Our AHtoAccess application, an integrated suite of proprietary
patient admission applications, is designed to minimize
downstream collections issues by standardizing up-front patient
information gathering through direct connections between the
customer and each of its third-party payors and automated
workflow navigation of authorization and referral requirements.
Our AHtoAccess application is used by our
on-site
management teams and hospital employees to handle a variety of
front office tasks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
verification of patient contact information, which improves
accuracy of recording patient admissions data in the
hospitals patient accounting system;
|
|
|
|
real-time validation of coverage and benefits for insured
patients, which allows up-front assessment of each
patients ability to pay;
|
|
|
|
screening of self-pay patients for alternative coverage
solutions, which helps identify payment sources including
long-term payment plans and charity or government-sponsored
coverage for uninsured or underinsured patients; and
|
|
|
|
up-front calculation of patient pay residuals, which facilitates
accurate and timely communication and collection of residual
payment obligations and any outstanding patient balances from
previous services.
|
Middle Office (Health Services
Billing). Once treatment has been provided to
a patient, a hospitals middle office revenue cycle
operations typically consist of transcribing physicians
dictated records of patient care and related diagnoses,
assigning treatment codes so that bills may be generated and
consolidating all patient information into a single patient
file. Our solution provides opportunities to improve revenue
yield attributable to the middle office by enabling a customer
to properly bill all appropriate charges, reduce payment denials
by payors based upon inaccurate or incomplete billing or
untimely filing, and improve the accuracy and comprehensiveness
of patient and billing information to enable bills to be issued
in a timely and efficient manner.
13
We deploy several proprietary software applications in the
middle office. Our AHtoCharge automated variance detection
application is used to identify missing charges in patient bills
and to detect coding errors in patient records. In addition to
the use of proprietary technology, we enhance a hospitals
revenue cycle operations in the middle office with our:
|
|
|
|
|
in-house nurse auditors, who review the accuracy of treatments,
diagnoses and charges in patient records and
follow-up
with hospital revenue cycle staff so that the bills may be
updated and sent out within the normal billing cycle; and
|
|
|
|
on-staff physicians, who help hospital case managers properly
code emergency department patients during their transition from
observation to in-patient status, to
improve accurate and appropriate billing to payors.
|
Back Office (Collections). A
hospitals back office revenue cycle operations typically
consist of bill creation and submission,
follow-up to
resolve unpaid or underpaid claims and re-submit incomplete
claims, the collection of amounts due from patients and the
application of cash payments to outstanding balances. At this
stage of the revenue cycle, efficiency and data accuracy are
critical to increasing the hospitals collections from all
responsible parties in a timely manner, and reducing the
hospitals bad debt expense. Our solution is designed to
improve revenue yield attributable to the back office by
enabling a customer to:
|
|
|
|
|
decrease the time required for bill creation and submission;
|
|
|
|
increase the percentage of claims receiving maximum allowable
reimbursement from payors;
|
|
|
|
find alternative payment sources for unpaid and underpaid claims
with both third-party payors and patients; and
|
|
|
|
reduce contractual write-offs to provide an accurate record of
outstanding charges.
|
We deploy a number of proprietary applications in the back
office:
|
|
|
|
|
Yield-Based Follow Up. Our Yield-Based
Follow Up application enables us to pursue reimbursement for
claims based on risk scoring and detection as established by our
proprietary algorithms.
|
|
|
|
Medical Financial Solutions. Our
Medical Financial Solutions application uses proprietary
algorithms to assess a patients propensity to pay and
determines
follow-up
actions structured to allow higher yields with lower collections
effort.
|
|
|
|
Retro Eligibility. Our Retro
Eligibility application continually searches for insurance
coverage for each patient visit, even after treatment has
concluded, to determine whether uninsured patients are eligible
for some form of insurance coverage.
|
|
|
|
AHtoContract. Our AHtoContract
application utilizes proprietary modeling and analytics to
calculate the aggregate reimbursement due to the hospital from
third-party payors and patients for a given patient treatment.
|
|
|
|
Underpayments. Our Underpayments
application employs payor remittance data and contract models to
determine whether a payor has reimbursed less than its
contracted amount for a specific claim and enables the
hospitals back office staff to resolve these situations
directly with payors.
|
|
|
|
AHtoPost. Our AHtoPost application is
used by our shared services centers to centralize the task of
posting cash payments to customers patient accounting
systems.
|
Emerging
Service Offerings
Quality and Total Cost of
Care. Introduced in 2010, our quality and
total cost of care service offering consists of a combination of
people, processes and technology that enable our customers to
effectively manage the health of a defined patient population.
Through this offering, our customers have the ability to improve
the quality of care, enhance the patient and physician
experience and ultimately reduce the total cost of the
populations healthcare.
14
We believe that there is a significant market for this type of
service offering. Many studies have found that
U.S. healthcare costs are the highest in the developed
world without a corresponding increase in overall population
healthcare quality. We believe that the following trends are
among the reasons that healthcare costs continue to rise at
rates that exceed the increase in the consumer price index:
|
|
|
|
|
Improperly Aligned
Incentives. Healthcare providers currently
have little or no financial incentive to make the necessary
people, processes or technology investments to optimize care
delivery that results in a lower total cost of care for their
patients. The prevailing
fee-for-service
payment system reimburses healthcare providers for the amount or
number of services provided, establishing an incentive for more
healthcare services to be provided.
|
|
|
|
Non-Coordination of Care Across Healthcare
Settings. Due to the fragmented nature of the
healthcare provider market, the prevailing
fee-for-service
reimbursement system and a lack of coordination resources,
healthcare providers find it challenging to optimize healthcare
delivery across the full continuum of providers and services.
This challenge is magnified for patients with complex medical
conditions that visit multiple providers. Studies have shown
that a small portion of medically complex patients are
accountable for a disproportionate share of total healthcare
costs.
|
|
|
|
Lack of Integrated Technology Systems and Information
Sharing Processes. Due to the improperly
aligned incentives and fragmented delivery system, providers
generally lack an integrated technology system that projects the
acuity and healthcare needs of patients, communicates and
assigns various tasks to other providers, and measures the
results of each patient encounter to maximize overall patient
quality and cost of care. There are significant costs associated
with developing this type of technology, and providers generally
lack the financial resources to develop this functionality.
|
Furthermore, we believe that management of the health of a
defined patient population is a future direction of the manner
in which healthcare services will be delivered in the United
States. For example, the federal healthcare reform legislation
that was enacted in March 2010 encourages healthcare providers
to experiment with alternative methods to reduce healthcare
spending while improving the quality of care. The legislation
specifically directs the CMS to establish a structure whereby
combinations of hospitals, physicians and other providers can
become accountable care organizations for patients
covered by Medicare and Medicaid. Our quality and total cost of
care service offering positions us to continue providing a
significant service offering to healthcare providers in the
event that healthcare delivery evolves away from the traditional
fee-for-service
payment system and toward accountable care organizations or
other initiatives that reduce demand for our revenue cycle
management services.
We believe that our technology and service infrastructure, which
we provide with no initial investment by the provider, can
facilitate improvements to quality, cost and patient experience
by employing sophisticated proprietary algorithms that identify
the individuals who are most likely to experience an adverse
health event and, as a result, incur high healthcare costs in
the coming year. This data allows providers to focus greater
efforts on managing these patients within and across the
delivery system, as well as at home. The ability of our quality
and total cost of care solution to link episodes of care also
can help facilitate the re-emergence of the primary care
physician as the coordinator of each patients care. We
believe that primary care physicians can drive a significant
number of healthcare decisions (excluding personal lifestyle
decisions) that have a meaningful impact on efforts to improve
clinical outcomes and reduce the cost of healthcare. Primary
care physicians and other providers can use our extensive
database and knowledge of available medical resources to create
individualized care plans for all patients. Providers can also
use the care coordination resources we deploy when implementing
our solution to conduct patient interventions that help ensure
that the identified patients are able to adhere to the care
plans developed by the physician and patient. Finally, our
solution can provide the patients primary care provider
with real-time insight into services being provided across the
healthcare delivery system.
By allowing hospitals and physicians to deliver healthcare
services to specific patient populations, and focusing on
prevention, medical best practices and the use of electronic
health records to achieve better outcomes, we believe that our
quality and total cost of care solution can enable third-party
payors to give providers an incentive to achieve reductions in
the total cost of care for the defined patient population while
15
maintaining or improving overall medical quality. We assist our
customers in capturing a share of the reduction in healthcare
costs by helping them negotiate contracts with third-party
payors that provide an equitable sharing of the savings in total
medical costs among the payor and providers. We receive a share
of the provider community cost savings for our role in providing
the technology infrastructure and for managing the care
coordination process.
We believe that we are well-positioned to deliver this new
service offering. Our core management team leading this
initiative has a demonstrated track record of implementing
processes that are similar in nature to our solution and which
brought improvements to quality and healthcare cost reductions
to the market. As with revenue cycle operations, we believe that
our proprietary and integrated technology, management experience
and well-developed processes are enhanced by the knowledge and
experience we will gain working with a wide range of customers.
Our proprietary technology applications include workflow
automation that enable care management staff to expend extra
effort on high priority patients, while still being able to
monitor all patients. Finally, when a customer adopts both our
revenue cycle and quality and total cost of care management
solutions, we can leverage the information available in our
revenue cycle technology and data platform to enable real-time
care management.
The CMS estimates that aggregate healthcare expenditures in the
United States were $2.5 trillion in 2009. Based on the
components of these aggregate healthcare expenditures for which
we believe our quality and total cost of care services are
suitable, we believe that our quality and total cost of care
service offering can potentially address approximately $1.7
trillion of this amount, consisting of the sum of the following
CMS estimates for 2009: $759 billion for hospitals,
$506 billion for physicians and clinics, $250 billion
for prescriptions, $78 billion for durable and non-durable
medical equipment, $68 billion for home healthcare services
and $67 billion for other professional services. However,
as of December 31, 2010 we had only one customer for our
quality and total cost of care service offering, and there is no
assurance that we will be able to achieve a significant portion
of this estimated market opportunity.
To date, all customers for all of our service offerings have
been located in the United States. We believe that increasing
healthcare costs are a concern for other developed nations and
that management of the health of a defined patient population is
a cost-effective means to control overall healthcare
expenditures. We have received inquiries from government related
healthcare providers in other countries about our quality and
total cost of care service offering. As a result, we are
beginning to evaluate the level of potential interest in this
service offering and the methods of delivering this solution to
international customers. This process is in a very early stage
and there is no assurance that a market for our quality and
total cost of care service offering will develop outside of the
United States or that we will be able to serve this market
efficiently.
16
Our quality and total cost of care services offering includes
management of the following processes:
Physician Advisory Services. Introduced
in 2009, our physician advisory services, or Accretive PAS,
offering is focused on assisting hospitals maximize their
compliant revenue associated with emergency room visits and
similar patient classification issues. Through use of our
web-based portal, we provide our customers with concurrent
reviews to support the decision whether to classify an emergency
department visit as an in-patient or observation case for
billing purposes. This proactive case management increases our
customers compliance with CMS policies and reduces their
exposure to the risk of having to return previously recorded
revenue.
Our Accretive PAS offering is gaining acceptance among hospital
management personnel due to increased demands being placed on
healthcare providers for precision in their case classification.
These increasing demands are the result of continually changing
criteria and regulations and the increasingly formalized audit
processes being instituted by government and commercial payors.
These events are leading providers to institute more formalized
processes so that they can better defend themselves when facing
payment recovery audits conducted on behalf of third-party
payors. Our Accretive PAS offering is billed on a case by case
basis or a monthly retainer based on the anticipated volume of
cases at each customer hospital.
According to CMS policies, the decision to classify a patient as
an in-patient or observation case is based on complex medical
judgment that can only be made after the physician has
considered a number of factors including the patients
medical history and current medical needs, the type of
facilities available to outpatients and inpatients, the severity
of signs and symptoms and the medical predictability of adverse
events. Using our secure web portal, hospital customers transmit
pertinent data about the case at hand to our physicians who then
leverage our proprietary diagnosis protocols and the extensive
information within our knowledge database to reach an informed
classification judgment. Each day our physicians communicate
directly with the physicians at our customer hospitals. We also
periodically meet with our customers at their facilities to
discuss potential process and clinical documentation
improvements. We believe that this physician to physician
contact and our adherence to our predetermined service levels
concerning the timeliness of responses help distinguish our
service offering from competitive offerings.
17
Customers
Our
Customers
Customers for our service offerings typically are multi-hospital
systems, including faith-based or community healthcare systems,
academic medical centers and independent clinics, and the
physician practice groups affiliated with those systems. Our
service offerings are best-suited for healthcare organizations
in which substantial improvements can be realized through the
full implementation of our solutions. We seek to develop
strategic, long-term relationships with our customers and focus
on providers that we believe understand the value of our
operating model and have demonstrated success in both the
provision of healthcare services and the ability to achieve
financial and operational results. In October 2004, Ascension
Health became our founding customer. While Ascension Health is
still our largest customer and we expect to continue to expand
our presence beyond the hospitals we currently service within
Ascension Healths network, we are focusing our marketing
efforts primarily on other healthcare providers and expect to
continue to diversify our customer base. As of December 31,
2010, we provided our integrated revenue cycle service offerings
to 26 customers representing 66 hospitals, as well as
physicians billing organizations associated with several
of these customers. As of December 31, 2010 we provided our
quality and total cost of care service offering to one of these
customers representing seven hospitals and 42 clinics.
We target eight market segments in the United States for our
integrated revenue cycle service offering:
|
|
|
|
|
Academic Medical Centers and Ambulatory
Clinics. Academic medical centers and
ambulatory clinics, including related physician practices,
represent approximately $132 billion in annual net patient
revenue. This market segment offers attractive opportunities for
us because of the significant size and patient volume of
academic medical centers and ambulatory clinics (typically more
than $1 billion each in net patient revenue) and the
fragmented revenue cycle management operations of most physician
practices. Our customers in this market segment include the
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and the Henry Ford Health
System.
|
|
|
|
Catholic Community Healthcare
Systems. Catholic community healthcare
systems represented our initial target market segment and remain
a primary focus for us. Catholic community healthcare systems
manage approximately $68 billion in annual net patient
revenue. Ascension Health is the nations largest Catholic
and largest non-profit healthcare system, with a network of 78
hospitals and related healthcare facilities located in
20 states and the District of Columbia. We serve a number
of hospitals and regional healthcare systems affiliated with
Ascension Health.
|
|
|
|
Other Faith-Based Community Healthcare
Systems. Drawing on our experience with the
Catholic community healthcare system market, we also target the
market for other faith-based community healthcare systems.
Healthcare systems affiliated with other religious faiths manage
approximately $46 billion in annual net patient revenue. We
serve several regional healthcare systems in this market segment.
|
|
|
|
Not-for-Profit
Community Hospitals. There are nearly 2,000
not-for-profit
community hospitals, with a variety of affiliations that are not
faith-based.
Not-for-profit
community hospitals, including integrated delivery networks,
manage approximately $265 billion in annual net patient
revenue. Fairview Health Services, which is an integrated
delivery network, is one of our customers in this market
segment, with seven hospitals served, and is our inaugural
quality and total cost of care customer.
|
|
|
|
Physicians Billing
Organizations. Large physicians billing
organizations represent more than $115 billion in annual
net patient revenue. Our customer work in this market includes
the billing activities involving several hundred physicians at
the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and the Henry Ford Health
System.
|
|
|
|
For-Profit Hospital Systems. For-profit
hospital systems manage approximately $101 billion in
annual net patient revenue. This sector, although smaller than
the
not-for-profit
sector, still represents a significant target market segment for
our revenue cycle services. We currently serve one for-profit
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
hospital as the result of the acquisition of a formerly
non-profit hospital by a for-profit company in 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government-Owned Hospitals. Based on
industry sources, each major metropolitan area in the United
States has at least one large municipal or city-owned hospital
system. We believe that this market segment represents
approximately $111 billion in annual net patient revenue.
We do not currently have any customers in this market segment.
|
|
|
|
Home Services and Medical Equipment. In
2010, we began targeting the home healthcare services and
medical equipment providers market, which we believe represents
$80 billion in annual net patient revenue. This market
includes both for-profit and
not-for-profit
companies which work with hospitals and physicians across the
United States. We believe that most companies in this market
fail to capture and collect a significant portion of the total
amounts contractually owed to them due to their highly
decentralized customer service and order entry departments and
the differences in payor requirements that occur when goods and
services are provided in multiple locations.
|
The six hospital market segments noted above are also targets of
our quality and total cost of care offering. We believe that the
diversity of our customer base, ranging from
not-for-profit
community hospitals to large academic medical centers and
healthcare systems, demonstrates our ability to adapt and apply
our operating model to many different situations.
Customer
Agreements
We provide our revenue cycle and quality and total cost of care
service offerings pursuant to managed service contracts with our
customers. In rendering our services, we must comply with
customer policies and procedures regarding charity care,
personnel, compliance and risk management as well as applicable
federal, state and local laws and regulations. Generally, we are
the exclusive provider of revenue cycle or quality and total
cost of care services to our customers.
Our contracts are multi-year agreements and vary in length based
on the customer. After the initial term of the agreement, our
customer contracts automatically renew unless terminated by
either party upon prior written notice.
In general, our managed service contracts provide that:
|
|
|
|
|
we assume responsibility for the management and cost of the
customers revenue cycle or population health management
operations, including the payroll and benefit costs associated
with the customers employees conducting activities within
our contracted services, and the agreements and costs associated
with the related third-party services;
|
|
|
|
we are required to staff a sufficient number of our own
employees on each customers premises and the technology
necessary to implement and manage our services;
|
|
|
|
in general, the customer pays us base fees equal to a specified
amount, subject to annual increases under an
agreed-upon
formula, and incentive fees based on achieving
agreed-upon
financial benchmarks;
|
|
|
|
the parties provide representations and indemnities to each
other; and
|
|
|
|
the contracts are subject to termination by either party in the
event of a material breach which is not cured by the breaching
party.
|
Sales and
Marketing
Our new business opportunities have historically been generated
through high-level industry contacts of members of our senior
management team and board of directors and positive references
from existing customers. As we have grown, we have added senior
sales executives and adopted a more institutional approach to
sales and marketing that relies on systematic relationship
building by a team of 10 senior sales executives. Our sales
process generally begins by engaging senior executives of the
prospective hospital or
19
healthcare system, typically followed by our assessment of the
prospects existing revenue cycle operations and a review
of the findings. We employ a standardized managed service
contract that is designed to streamline the contract process and
support a collaborative discussion of revenue cycle operation
issues and our proposed working relationship. Our sales process
typically requires six to twelve months from the introductory
meeting to contract execution.
Technology
Technology
Development
Our technology development organization operates out of various
facilities in the United States and India. Our technology is
developed in-house by Accretive Health employees, although at
times we may supplement our technology development team with
independent contractors, all of whom have assigned any resulting
intellectual property rights to us. We use a rapid application
development methodology in which new functionality and
enhancements are released on a
30-day
cycle, and minor functionality or patch work is
released on a
seven-day
cycle. Based upon this schedule, we release approximately eleven
technology offerings with new functionalities each year across
each of the four principal portions of our customer-facing
applications. All customer sites run the same base set of code.
We use a beta-testing environment to develop and test new
technology offerings at one or more customers, while keeping the
rest of our customers on production-level code.
Our applications are deployed on a consistent architecture based
upon an industry-standard Microsoft SQL*Server database and a
DotNetNuke open source application architecture.
This architecture provides a common framework for development,
which in turn simplifies the development process and offers a
common interface for end users. We believe the consistent look
and feel of our applications allows our customers and staff to
begin using ongoing enhancements to our software suite quickly
and easily.
We devote substantial resources to our development efforts and
plan at a yearly, half-yearly, quarterly and release level. We
employ a value point scoring system to assess the
impact an enhancement will have on net revenue, costs,
efficiency and customer satisfaction. The results of this value
point system analysis are evaluated in conjunction with our
overall corporate goals when making development decisions. In
addition to our technology development team, our operations
personnel play an integral role in setting technology priorities
in support of their objective of keeping our software operating
24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Technology
Operations
Our applications are hosted in data centers located in
Alpharetta, Georgia and Salt Lake City, Utah, and our internal
financial application suite is hosted in a data center in
Minneapolis, Minnesota. These data centers are operated for us
by third parties and are SAS-70 compliant. Our development,
testing and quality assurance environment is operated from our
Alpharetta, Georgia data center, with a separate server room in
Chicago, Illinois. We have agreements with our hardware and
system software suppliers for support 24 hours a day,
7 days a week. Our operations personnel also use our
resources located in our other U.S. facilities and in our
India facilities.
Customers use high-speed Internet connections or private network
connections to access our business applications. We utilize
commercially available hardware and a combination of
custom-developed and commercially available software. We
designed our primary application in this manner to permit
scalable growth. For example, database servers can be added
without adding web servers, and vice versa. We believe that this
architecture enables us to scale our operations effectively and
efficiently.
Our databases and servers are
backed-up in
full on a weekly basis and undergo incremental
back-ups
nightly. Databases are also
backed-up
frequently by automatically shipping log files with accumulated
changes to separate sets of
back-up
servers. In addition to serving as a
back-up,
these log files update the data in our online analytical
processing engine, enabling the data to be more current than if
only refreshed overnight. Data and information regarding our
customers patients is encrypted when transmitted over the
internet or traveling off-site on portable media such as laptops
or backup tapes.
20
Customer system access requests are load-balanced across
multiple application servers, allowing us to handle additional
users on a per-customer basis without application changes.
System utilization is monitored for capacity planning purposes.
Our software interacts with our customers software through
a series of real-time and batch interfaces. We do not require
changes to the customers core patient care delivery or
financial systems. Instead of installing hardware or software in
customer locations or data centers, we specify the information
that a customer needs to extract from its existing systems in
order to interface with our systems. This methodology enables
our systems to operate with many combinations of customer
systems, including custom and industry-standard implementations.
We have successfully integrated our systems with 15 to
20 year old systems, with package and custom systems, and
with major industry-standard products.
When these interfaces are in place, we provide an application
suite across the hospital revenue cycle. For our purposes, the
revenue cycle starts when a patient registers for future service
or arrives at a hospital or clinic for unscheduled service and
ends when the hospital has collected all the appropriate revenue
from all possible sources. Thus, we provide eligibility, address
validation, skip tracing, charge capture, patient and payor
follow-up,
analytics and tracking, charge master management, contract
modeling, contract what if analysis, collections and
other functions throughout the front office, middle office and
back office operations of a customers revenue cycle.
Because our databases run on industry-standard hardware and
software, we are able to use all standard applications to
develop, maintain and monitor our solutions. Databases for one
or more customers can run on a single database server with disk
storage being provided from a shared storage area network (SAN)
with physical separation maintained between clients. In the
event of a server failure, we have maintenance contracts in
place that require the service provider to have the server back
on-line in four hours or less, or we move the customer
processing to another server. The SAN is configured as a
redundant array of inexpensive disks (RAID) and this RAID
configuration protects against disk failures having an impact on
our operations.
In the event that a combination of events causes a system
failure, we typically can isolate the failure to one or a small
number of customers. We believe that no combination of failures
by our systems can impact a customers ability to deliver
patient care, nor can any such failures prevent accurate
accounting of customer finances because accounting functions are
maintained on customer systems. In the past twelve months, our
up-time has exceeded 99.95% of planned up-time.
Our data centers were designed to withstand many catastrophic
events, such as blizzards and hurricanes. To protect against a
catastrophic event in which our primary data center is
completely destroyed and service cannot be restored within a few
days, we store backups of our systems and databases off-site. In
the event that we had to move operations to a different data
center, we would re-establish operations by provisioning new
servers, restoring data from the off-site backups and
re-establishing connectivity with our customers host
systems. Because our systems are web-based, no changes would
need to be made on customer workstations, and customers would be
able to reconnect as our systems became available again.
We monitor the response time of our application in a number of
ways. We monitor the response time of individual transactions by
customer and place monitors inside our operations and at key
customer sites to run synthetic transactions that demonstrate
our systems
end-to-end
responsiveness. Our hosting provider reports on responsiveness
server-by-server
and identifies potential future capacity issues. In addition, we
survey key customers regarding system response time to make sure
customer-specific conditions are not impacting performance of
our applications.
Proprietary
Software Suite
Revenue Cycle Management. Our proprietary
AHtoAccess software suite is composed of a broad range of
integrated functional areas or domains. The patient
access, improving best possible,
follow-up
and measurement domains utilize interdependent
design and development paths and are an integral driver of value
throughout our customers entire revenue cycle. These
domains correspond to the front office, middle office and back
office revenue cycle business processes described above.
21
|
|
|
|
|
The patient access domain is used during hospital
employees first interactions with patients, either at the
point of service in a hospital or in advance of a hospital visit
during our pre-registration process. The domain uses a
straightforward, consistent architecture.
|
|
|
|
The improving best possible domain is designed to
facilitate top-line revenue improvements and bottom-line
efficiency gains. The domains AHtoCharge application is a
rules-based engine that, with the oversight of a centralized
team of nurse-auditors, automatically analyzes medical billing
and coding data to identify inconsistencies that may delay or
hinder collections.
|
|
|
|
The
follow-up
domain tracks unpaid claims and contacts with insurance
companies, government organizations and other payors responsible
for outstanding debts for past patient services. The domain also
organizes previously unpaid claims using a proprietary
risk-based algorithm.
|
|
|
|
The measurement domain integrates our functional
domains by providing real-time metrics and insight into the
operation of revenue cycle businesses. This application can be
used to generate standard operational reports and allows the end
user to review and analyze all of the micro-level data that
supports the results found in these reports.
|
In addition to applications designed for use by our customers,
we have developed proprietary software for use in our
collections operations and measurement activity. To manage
patient
follow-up
activities and the collection of patient debt, we use a
combination of
off-the-shelf
telephony and campaign management software which analyzes
critical data points to determine the optimum approach for
collecting outstanding debts. Our measurement system enables a
user to generate models for outstanding medical claims related
to specific third-party payors and determine the maximum allowed
reimbursement, based upon the hospitals contract with each
payor.
Quality and Total Cost of Care. Our
proprietary AccretiveQ software suite provides the technology
infrastructure to enable our customers to have visibility into,
and better control of, the full spectrum of services and
associated costs for all patients. Our AccretiveQ software
consists of two broad domains, analytics and
workflow. The analytics domain provides physicians
with on-line analytical processing capabilities so that they can
more easily and accurately monitor patient results by grouping
patients with similar healthcare attributes, risk scores,
demographics and other factors. We also use the analytics domain
to monitor the results of individual physicians, physician
practices or clinics in their efforts to institute the use of
processes that will result in enhanced clinical outcomes with
lower total cost of care for the defined patient populations.
The workflow domain uses a combination of proprietary algorithms
and industry standard applications to prioritize the patients
that are most at risk of an adverse health event. The domain
then
22
automatically assigns the patient to an appropriate care
coordinator, assists in developing the patients care plan,
and serves as a tool for scheduling the appropriate care
interventions. The workflow solution also monitors variation in
care plan activities and the success rate of applying the care
plans parameters.
Competition
While we do not believe any single competitor offers a fully
integrated,
end-to-end
revenue cycle management solution, we face competition from
various sources.
The internal revenue cycle management staff of hospitals, who
historically have performed the functions addressed by our
services, in effect compete with us. Hospitals that previously
have made investments in internally developed solutions
sometimes choose to continue to rely on their own internal
revenue cycle management staff.
We also currently compete with three categories of external
participants in the revenue cycle market, most of which focus on
small components of the hospital revenue cycle:
|
|
|
|
|
software vendors and other technology-supported revenue cycle
management business process outsourcing companies, such as
athenahealth and MedAssets;
|
|
|
|
traditional consultants, either specialized healthcare
consulting firms or healthcare divisions of large accounting
firms, such as Deloitte Consulting and Huron Consulting; and
|
|
|
|
IT outsourcers, which typically are large, non-healthcare
focused business process outsourcing and information technology
outsourcing firms, such as Perot Systems and Computer Science
Corporation/First Consulting.
|
These types of external participants also compete with us in the
field of quality and total cost of care. In addition, the
commercial payor community has historically attempted to provide
information or services that are intended to assist providers in
reducing the total cost of medical care. They could attempt to
develop similar programs again.
We believe that competition for the services we provide is based
primarily on the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
knowledge and understanding of the complex healthcare payment
and reimbursement system in the United States;
|
|
|
|
a track record of delivering revenue improvements and efficiency
gains for hospitals and healthcare systems;
|
|
|
|
the ability to deliver a solution that is fully-integrated along
each step of a hospitals revenue cycle operations;
|
|
|
|
cost-effectiveness, including the breakdown between up-front
costs and
pay-for-performance
incentive compensation;
|
|
|
|
reliability, simplicity and flexibility of the technology
platform;
|
|
|
|
understanding of the healthcare industrys regulatory
environment; and
|
|
|
|
sufficient infrastructure and financial stability.
|
We believe that we compete effectively based upon all of these
criteria. We also believe that several aspects of our business
model differentiate us from our competitors:
|
|
|
|
|
our solutions do not require any up-front cash investment from
customers and we do not charge hourly or licensing fees for our
services;
|
|
|
|
we serve only healthcare providers and do not provide services
to third-party payors; and
|
|
|
|
we focus on delivering significant and sustainable improvements
rather than one-time cost reductions only.
|
23
Nonetheless, we operate in a growing and attractive market with
a steady stream of new entrants. Although we believe that there
are barriers to replicating our
end-to-end
revenue cycle solution, we expect competition to intensify in
the future. Other companies may develop superior or more
economical service offerings that hospitals could find more
attractive than our offerings. Moreover, the regulatory
landscape may shift in a direction that is more strategically
advantageous to existing and future companies.
Government
Regulation
The customers we serve are subject to a complex array of federal
and state laws and regulations. These laws and regulations may
change rapidly, and it is frequently unclear how they apply to
our business. We devote significant efforts, through training of
personnel and monitoring, to establish and maintain compliance
with all regulatory requirements that we believe are applicable
to our business and the services we offer.
Government
Regulation of Health Information
Privacy and Security Regulations. The
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as
amended, and the regulations that have been issued under it,
which we collectively refer to as HIPAA, contain substantial
restrictions and requirements with respect to the use and
disclosure of individuals protected health information.
HIPAA prohibits a covered entity from using or disclosing an
individuals protected health information unless the use or
disclosure is authorized by the individual or is specifically
required or permitted under HIPAA. Under HIPAA, covered entities
must establish administrative, physical and technical safeguards
to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of
electronic protected health information maintained or
transmitted by them or by others on their behalf.
HIPAA applies to covered entities, such as healthcare providers
that engage in HIPAA-defined standard electronic transactions,
health plans and healthcare clearinghouses. In February 2009,
HIPAA was amended by the Health Information Technology for
Economic and Clinical Health, or HITECH, Act to impose certain
of the HIPAA privacy and security requirements directly upon
business associates that perform functions on behalf
of, or provide services to, certain covered entities. Most of
our customers are covered entities and we are a business
associate to many of those customers under HIPAA as a result of
our contractual obligations to perform certain functions on
behalf of and provide certain services to those customers. In
order to provide customers with services that involve the use or
disclosure of protected health information, HIPAA requires our
customers to enter into business associate agreements with us so
that certain HIPAA requirements would be applied to us as
contractual commitments. Such agreements must, among other
things, provide adequate written assurances:
|
|
|
|
|
as to how we will use and disclose the protected health
information;
|
|
|
|
that we will implement reasonable administrative, physical and
technical safeguards to protect such information from misuse;
|
|
|
|
that we will enter into similar agreements with our agents and
subcontractors that have access to the information;
|
|
|
|
that we will report security incidents and other inappropriate
uses or disclosures of the information; and
|
|
|
|
that we will assist the customer with certain of its duties
under HIPAA.
|
Transaction Requirements. In addition
to privacy and security requirements, HIPAA also requires that
certain electronic transactions related to healthcare billing be
conducted using prescribed electronic formats. For example,
claims for reimbursement that are transmitted electronically to
payors must comply with specific formatting standards, and these
standards apply whether the payor is a government or a private
entity. We are contractually required to structure and provide
our services in a way that supports our customers HIPAA
compliance obligations.
Data Security and Breaches. In recent
years, there have been well-publicized data breach incidents
involving the improper dissemination of personal health and
other information of individuals, both within and outside of the
healthcare industry. Many states have responded to these
incidents by enacting laws requiring
24
holders of personal information to maintain safeguards and to
take certain actions in response to data breach incidents, such
as providing prompt notification of the breach to affected
individuals and government authorities. In many cases, these
laws are limited to electronic data, but states are increasingly
enacting or considering stricter and broader requirements. Under
the HITECH Act and its implementing regulations, business
associates are also required to notify covered entities, which
in turn are required to notify affected individuals and
government authorities of data security breaches involving
unsecured protected health information. In addition, the
U.S. Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, has prosecuted some
data breach cases as unfair and deceptive acts or practices
under the Federal Trade Commission Act. We have implemented and
maintain physical, technical and administrative safeguards
intended to protect all personal data and have processes in
place to assist us in complying with applicable laws and
regulations regarding the protection of this data and properly
responding to any security incidents.
State Laws. In addition to HIPAA, most
states have enacted patient confidentiality laws that protect
against the unauthorized disclosure of confidential medical
information, and many states have adopted or are considering
further legislation in this area, including privacy safeguards,
security standards and data security breach notification
requirements. Such state laws, if more stringent than HIPAA
requirements, are not preempted by the federal requirements, and
we must comply with them even though they may be subject to
different interpretations by various courts and other
governmental authorities.
Other Requirements. In addition to
HIPAA, numerous other state and federal laws govern the
collection, dissemination, use, access to and confidentiality of
individually identifiable health and other information and
healthcare provider information. The FTC has issued and several
states have issued or are considering new regulations to require
holders of certain types of personally identifiable information
to implement formal policies and programs to prevent, detect and
mitigate the risk of identity theft and other unauthorized
access to or use of such information. Further, the
U.S. Congress and a number of states have considered or are
considering prohibitions or limitations on the disclosure of
medical or other information to individuals or entities located
outside of the United States.
Government
Regulation of Reimbursement
Our customers are subject to regulation by a number of
governmental agencies, including those that administer the
Medicare and Medicaid programs. Accordingly, our customers are
sensitive to legislative and regulatory changes in, and
limitations on, the government healthcare programs and changes
in reimbursement policies, processes and payment rates. During
recent years, there have been numerous federal legislative and
administrative actions that have affected government programs,
including adjustments that have reduced or increased payments to
physicians and other healthcare providers and adjustments that
have affected the complexity of our work. For example, the
federal healthcare reform legislation that was enacted in
March 2010 may reduce reimbursement for some
healthcare providers, increase reimbursement for others
(including primary care physicians) and create various value and
quality-based reimbursement incentives. It is possible that the
federal or state governments will implement additional
reductions, increases or changes in reimbursement in the future
under government programs that adversely affect our customer
base or our cost of providing our services. Any such changes
could adversely affect our own financial condition by reducing
the reimbursement rates of our customers.
Fraud
and Abuse Laws
A number of federal and state laws, generally referred to as
fraud and abuse laws, apply to healthcare providers, physicians
and others that make, offer, seek or receive referrals or
payments for products or services that may be paid for through
any federal or state healthcare program and in some instances
any private program. Given the breadth of these laws and
regulations, they may affect our business, either directly or
because they apply to our customers. These laws and regulations
include:
Anti-Kickback Laws. There are numerous
federal and state laws that govern patient referrals, physician
financial relationships, and inducements to healthcare providers
and patients. The federal healthcare anti-kickback law prohibits
any person or entity from offering, paying, soliciting or
receiving
25
anything of value, directly or indirectly, for the referral of
patients covered by Medicare, Medicaid and certain other federal
healthcare programs or the leasing, purchasing, ordering or
arranging for or recommending the lease, purchase or order of
any item, good, facility or service covered by these programs.
Courts have construed this anti-kickback law to mean that a
financial arrangement may violate this law if any one of the
purposes of an arrangement is to induce referrals of federal
healthcare programs, patients or business, regardless of whether
there are other legitimate purposes for the arrangement. There
are several limited exclusions known as safe harbors that may
protect certain arrangements from enforcement penalties although
these safe harbors tend to be quite narrow. Penalties for
federal anti-kickback violations can be severe, and include
imprisonment, criminal fines, civil money penalties with triple
damages and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare
programs. Anti-kickback law violations also may give rise to a
civil False Claims Act action, as described below. Many states
have adopted similar prohibitions against kickbacks and other
practices that are intended to induce referrals, and some of
these state laws are applicable to all patients regardless of
whether the patient is covered under a governmental health
program or private health plan.
False or Fraudulent Claim Laws. There
are numerous federal and state laws that forbid submission of
false information or the failure to disclose information in
connection with the submission and payment of provider claims
for reimbursement. In some cases, these laws also forbid abuse
of existing systems for such submission and payment, for
example, by systematic over treatment or duplicate billing of
the same services to collect increased or duplicate payments.
In particular, the federal False Claims Act, or FCA, prohibits a
person from knowingly presenting or causing to be presented a
civil false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval by an
officer, employee or agent of the United States. The FCA also
prohibits a person from knowingly making, using, or causing to
be made or used a false record or statement material to such a
claim. The FCA was amended on May 20, 2009 by the Fraud
Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, or FERA. Following the
FERA amendments, the FCAs reverse false claim
provision also creates liability for persons who knowingly
conceal an overpayment of government money or knowingly and
improperly retain an overpayment of government funds. In
addition, the federal healthcare reform legislation that was
enacted in March 2010 requires providers to report and return
overpayments and to explain the reason for the overpayment in
writing within 60 days of the date on which the overpayment
is identified, and the failure to do so is punishable under the
FCA. Violations of the FCA may result in treble damages,
significant monetary penalties, and other collateral
consequences including, potentially, exclusion from
participation in federally funded healthcare programs. The scope
and implications of the recent FCA amendments have yet to be
fully determined or adjudicated and as a result it is difficult
to predict how future enforcement initiatives may impact our
business.
In addition, under the Civil Monetary Penalty Act of 1981, the
Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector
General has the authority to impose administrative penalties and
assessments against any person, including an organization or
other entity, who knowingly presents, or causes to be presented,
to a state or federal government employee or agent certain false
or otherwise improper claims.
Stark Law and Similar State Laws. The
Ethics in Patient Referrals Act, known as the Stark Law,
prohibits certain types of referral arrangements between
physicians and healthcare entities and thus potentially applies
to our customers. Specifically, under the Stark Law, absent an
applicable exception, a physician may not make a referral to an
entity for the furnishing of designated health service (or DHS)
for which payment may be made by the Medicare program if the
physician (or any immediate family member) has a financial
relationship with that entity. Further, an entity that furnishes
DHS pursuant to a prohibited referral may not present or cause
to be presented a claim or bill for such services to the
Medicare program or to any other individual or entity.
Violations of the statute can result in civil monetary penalties
and/or
exclusion from federal healthcare programs. Stark law violations
also may give rise to a civil FCA action. Any such violations
by, and penalties and exclusions imposed upon, our customers
could adversely affect their financial condition and, in turn,
could adversely affect our own financial condition.
Laws in many states similarly forbid billing based on referrals
between individuals
and/or
entities that have various financial, ownership or other
business relationships. These laws vary widely from state to
state.
26
Laws
Limiting Assignment of Reimbursement Claims
Various federal and state laws, including Medicare and Medicaid,
forbid or limit assignments of claims for reimbursement from
government funded programs. Some of these laws limit the manner
in which business service companies may handle payments for such
claims and prevent such companies from charging their provider
customers on the basis of a percentage of collections or
charges. We do not believe that the services we provide our
customers result in an assignment of claims for the Medicare or
Medicaid reimbursements for purposes of federal healthcare
programs. Any determination to the contrary, however, could
adversely affect our ability to be paid for the services we
provide to our customers, require us to restructure the manner
in which we are paid, or have further regulatory consequences.
Emergency
Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
The federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or
EMTALA, was adopted by the U.S. Congress in response to
reports of a widespread hospital emergency room practice of
patient dumping. At the time of EMTALAs
enactment, patient dumping was considered to have occurred when
a hospital capable of providing the needed care sent a patient
to another facility or simply turned the patient away based on
such patients inability to pay for his or her care. EMTALA
imposes requirements as to the care that must be provided to
anyone who seeks care at facilities providing emergency medical
services. In addition, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services has issued final regulations clarifying those areas
within a hospital system that must provide emergency treatment,
procedures to meet on-call requirements, as well as other
requirements under EMTALA. Sanctions for failing to fulfill
these requirements include exclusion from participation in the
Medicare and Medicaid programs and civil monetary penalties. In
addition, the law creates private civil remedies that enable an
individual who suffers personal harm as a direct result of a
violation of the law to sue the offending hospital for damages
and equitable relief. A hospital that suffers a financial loss
as a direct result of another participating hospitals
violation of the law also has a similar right.
EMTALA generally applies to our customers, and we assist our
customers with the intake of their patients. Although we believe
that our customers medical screening, stabilization and
transfer practices are in compliance with the law and applicable
regulations, we cannot be certain that governmental officials
responsible for enforcing the law or others will not assert that
we or our customers are in violation of these laws nor what
obligations may be imposed by regulations to be issued in the
future.
Regulation
of Debt Collection Activities
The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, or FDCPA,
regulates persons who regularly collect or attempt to collect,
directly or indirectly, consumer debts owed or asserted to be
owed to another person. Certain of our accounts receivable
activities may be subject to the FDCPA. The FDCPA establishes
specific guidelines and procedures that debt collectors must
follow in communicating with consumer debtors, including the
time, place and manner of such communications. Further, it
prohibits harassment or abuse by debt collectors, including the
threat of violence or criminal prosecution, obscene language or
repeated telephone calls made with the intent to abuse or
harass. The FDCPA also places restrictions on communications
with individuals other than consumer debtors in connection with
the collection of any consumer debt and sets forth specific
procedures to be followed when communicating with such third
parties for purposes of obtaining location information about the
consumer. In addition, the FDCPA contains various notice and
disclosure requirements and prohibits unfair or misleading
representations by debt collectors. Finally, the FDCPA imposes
certain limitations on lawsuits to collect debts against
consumers.
Debt collection activities are also regulated at state level.
Most states have laws regulating debt collection activities in
ways that are similar to, and in some cases more stringent than,
the FDCPA. In addition, some states require debt collection
companies to be licensed. In all states where we operate, we
believe that we currently hold all required state licenses or
are pursuing a license, or are exempt from licensing.
We are also subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, or FCRA,
which regulates consumer credit reporting and which may impose
liability on us to the extent that the adverse credit
information reported on a consumer
27
to a credit bureau is false or inaccurate. State law, to the
extent it is not preempted by the FCRA, may also impose
restrictions or liability on us with respect to reporting
adverse credit information.
The FTC has the authority to investigate consumer complaints
relating to the FDCPA and the FCRA, and to initiate or recommend
enforcement actions, including actions to seek monetary
penalties. State officials typically have authority to enforce
corresponding state laws. In addition, affected consumers may
bring suits, including class action suits, to seek monetary
remedies (including statutory damages) for violations of the
federal and state provisions discussed above.
Regulation
of Credit Card Activities
We accept payments by credit cards from patients of our
customers. Various federal and state laws impose privacy and
information security laws and regulations with respect to the
use of credit cards. If we fail to comply with these laws and
regulations or experience a credit card security breach, our
reputation could be damaged, possibly resulting in lost future
business, and we could be subjected to additional legal or
financial risk as a result of non-compliance.
Foreign
Regulations
Our operations in India are subject to additional regulations by
the government of India. These include Indian federal and local
corporation requirements, restrictions on exchange of funds,
employment-related laws and qualification for tax status.
Intellectual
Property
We rely upon a combination of patent, trademark, copyright and
trade secret laws and contractual terms and conditions to
protect our intellectual property rights, and have sought patent
protection for aspects of our key innovations.
We have been issued one U.S. patent, which expires in 2028,
and filed six additional U.S. patent applications aimed at
protecting the four domains of our AHtoAccess software suite:
patient access, improving best possible,
follow-up
and measurement. See Business
Technology Proprietary Software Suite for more
information. Legal standards relating to the validity,
enforceability and scope of protection of patents can be
uncertain. We do not know whether any of our pending patent
applications will result in the issuance of patents or whether
the examination process will require us to narrow our claims.
Our patent applications may not result in the grant of patents
with the scope of the claims that we seek, if at all, or the
scope of the granted claims may not be sufficiently broad to
protect our products and technology. Our one issued patent or
any patents that may be granted in the future from pending or
future applications may be opposed, contested, circumvented,
designed around by a third party or found to be invalid or
unenforceable. Third parties may develop technologies that are
similar or superior to our proprietary technologies, duplicate
or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technologies or
design around patents owned or licensed by us. If our technology
is found to infringe any patent or other intellectual property
right held by a third party, we could be prevented from
providing our service offerings and subject us to significant
damage awards.
We also rely in some circumstances on trade secrets to protect
our technology. We control access to and the use of our
application capabilities through a combination of internal and
external controls, including contractual protections with
employees, customers, contractors and business partners. We
license some of our software through agreements that impose
specific restrictions on customers ability to use the
software, such as prohibiting reverse engineering and limiting
the use of copies. We also require employees and contractors to
sign non-disclosure agreements and invention assignment
agreements to give us ownership of intellectual property
developed in the course of working for us.
On occasion, we incorporate third-party commercial or open
source software products into our technology platform. Although
we prefer to develop our own technology, we periodically employ
third-party software in order to simplify our development and
maintenance efforts, provide a commodity capability,
support our own technology infrastructure or test a new
capability.
28
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had 1,991 full-time
employees, including 255 engaged in technology development and
deployment, as well as 231 part-time employees. None of our
employees is represented by a labor union and we consider our
current employee relations to be good.
Our operations employees are required to participate in our
operator academy and revenue cycle
academy, consisting of multiple training sessions each
year. Our ongoing training and executive learning programs are
modeled after the practices of companies that we believe have
reputations for service excellence. In addition, all of our
employees undergo mandatory HIPAA training.
As of December 31, 2010, pursuant to managed service
contracts, we also managed approximately 8,200 revenue cycle
staff persons who are employed by our customers. We have the
right to control and direct the work activities of these staff
persons and are responsible for paying their compensation out of
the base fees paid to us by our customers, but these staff
persons are considered employees of our customers for all
purposes.
Corporate
Information
We were incorporated in Delaware under the name Healthcare
Services, Inc. in July 2003 and changed our name to Accretive
Health, Inc. in August 2009. Our principal executive offices are
located at 401 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 2700, Chicago,
Illinois 60611, and our telephone number is
(312) 324-7820.
Information
availability
Our annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and all amendments to those reports are available free of charge
on our website at www.accretivehealth.com under the
Investor Relations caption as soon as reasonably
practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or
furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
content on any website referred to in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
is not incorporated by reference into this report, unless
expressly noted otherwise.
Risks
Related to Our Business and Industry
We may
not be able to maintain or increase our profitability, and our
recent growth rates may not be indicative of our future growth
rates.
We have been profitable on an annual basis only since the year
ended December 31, 2007, and we incurred net losses in the
quarters ended March 31, 2007, December 31, 2007,
March 31, 2008, December 31, 2008 and March 31,
2009. We may not succeed in maintaining our profitability on an
annual basis and could incur quarterly or annual losses in
future periods. We expect to incur additional operating expenses
associated with being a public company and we intend to continue
to increase our operating expenses as we grow our business. We
also expect to continue to make investments in our proprietary
technology applications, sales and marketing, infrastructure,
facilities and other resources as we expand our operations, thus
incurring additional costs. If our revenue does not increase to
offset these increases in costs, our operating results would be
negatively affected. You should not consider our historic
revenue and net income growth rates as indicative of future
growth rates. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will be
able to maintain or increase our profitability in the future.
Each of the risks described in this Risk Factors
section, as well as other factors, may affect our future
operating results and profitability.
29
Hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health currently account for a
majority of our net services revenue, and we have several
customers that have each accounted for 10% or more of our net
services revenue in past fiscal periods. The termination of our
master services agreement with Ascension Health, or any
significant loss of business from our large customers, would
have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition.
We are party to a master services agreement with Ascension
Health pursuant to which we provide services to its affiliated
hospitals that execute separate managed service contracts with
us. Hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health have accounted
for a majority of our net services revenue each year since our
formation. In the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and
2010, aggregate revenue from hospitals affiliated with Ascension
Health represented 70.7%, 60.3% and 50.7% of our net services
revenue in such periods. In some fiscal periods, individual
hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health have each accounted
for 10% or more of our total net services revenue. For example,
in the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2010, revenue from
St. John Health (an affiliate of Ascension Health) was
$66.5 million and $67.5 million, respectively, equal
to 13.0% and 11.1%, respectively, of our total net services
revenue. In addition, another customer, which is not affiliated
with Ascension Health, accounted for 10.6% of our total net
services revenue in the year ended December 31, 2008 but
less than 10% of our total net services revenue in the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2010. Additionally, Henry Ford
Health System, which is not affiliated with Ascension Health and
with which we entered into a managed service contract in 2009,
accounted for 11.3% of our total net services revenue in the
year ended December 31, 2010. Furthermore, Fairview Health
Services, which is not affiliated with Ascension Health and with
which we entered into a managed service contract in 2010,
accounted for 10.7% of our total net services revenue in the
year ended December 31, 2010.
All of our managed service contracts with hospitals affiliated
with Ascension Health will expire on December 31, 2012
unless renewed. Pursuant to our master services agreement with
Ascension Health and our managed service contracts with
hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health, our fees are subject
to adjustment in the event quarterly cash collections at these
hospitals deteriorate materially after we take over revenue
cycle management operations. While these adjustments have never
been triggered, if they were, our future fees from hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health would be reduced. In addition,
any of our other customers, including hospitals affiliated with
Ascension Health, can elect not to renew their managed service
contracts with us upon expiration. We intend to seek renewal of
all managed service contracts with our customers, but cannot
assure you that all of them will be renewed or that the terms
upon which they may be renewed will be as favorable to us as the
terms of the initial managed service contracts.
Our inability to renew the managed service contracts with
hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health, the termination of
our master services agreement with Ascension Health, the loss of
any of our other large customers or their failure to renew their
managed service contracts with us upon expiration, or a
reduction in the fees for our services for these customers would
have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition.
Our
master services agreement with Ascension Health requires us to
offer to Ascension Healths affiliated hospitals service
fees that are at least as low as the fees we charge any other
similarly situated customer receiving comparable services at
comparable volumes.
Our master services agreement with Ascension Health requires us
to offer to Ascension Healths affiliated hospitals fees
for our services that are at least as low as the fees we charge
any other similarly-situated customer receiving comparable
services at comparable volumes. If we were to offer another
similarly-situated customer receiving a comparable volume of
comparable services fees that are lower than the fees paid by
hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health, we would be
obligated to offer such lower fees to hospitals affiliated with
Ascension Health, which could have a material adverse effect on
our results of operations and financial condition.
30
Our
agreements with hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health and
with some other customers include provisions that could impede
or delay our ability to enter into managed service contracts
with new customers.
Under the terms of our master services agreement with Ascension
Health, we are required to consult with Ascension Healths
affiliated hospitals before undertaking services for competitors
specified by them in the managed service contracts they execute
with us. As a result, before we can begin to provide services to
a specified competitor, we are required to inform and discuss
the situation with the Ascension Health affiliated hospital that
specified the competitor but are not required to obtain the
consent of such hospital. In addition, we are required to obtain
the consent of one customer not affiliated with Ascension Health
before providing services to competitors specified by such
customer. In another instance, our managed service contract with
one other customer not affiliated with Ascension Health requires
us to consult with such customer before providing services to
competitors specified by such customer. The obligations
described above could impede or delay our ability to enter into
managed service contracts with new customers.
The
markets for our revenue cycle management and quality and total
cost of care services may develop more slowly than we expect,
which could adversely affect our revenue and our ability to
maintain or increase our profitability.
Our success depends, in part, on the willingness of hospitals,
physicians and other healthcare providers to implement
integrated solutions that span the entire revenue cycle, which
encompasses patient registration, insurance and benefit
verification, medical treatment documentation and coding, bill
preparation and collections. Our success also depends on
healthcare providers willingness to move away from
traditional
fee-for-service
payment systems and toward accountable care organizations and
similar initiatives. Some hospitals may be reluctant or
unwilling to implement our solutions for a number of reasons,
including failure to perceive the need for improved revenue
cycle operations and quality and total cost of care services,
and lack of knowledge about the potential benefits our solutions
provide.
Even if potential customers recognize the need to improve
revenue cycle operations and to more effectively manage the
health of defined patient populations, they may not select
solutions such as ours because they previously have made
investments in internally developed solutions and choose to
continue to rely on their own internal resources. As a result,
the markets for integrated,
end-to-end
revenue cycle and quality and total cost of care solutions may
develop more slowly than we expect, which could adversely affect
our revenue and our ability to maintain or increase our
profitability.
We
operate in a highly competitive industry, and our current or
future competitors may be able to compete more effectively than
we do, which could have a material adverse effect on our
business, revenue, growth rates and market share.
The market for revenue cycle management solutions is highly
competitive and we expect competition to intensify in the
future. We face competition from a steady stream of new
entrants, including the internal revenue cycle management staff
of hospitals, as described above, and external participants.
External participants that are our competitors in the revenue
cycle market include software vendors and other
technology-supported revenue cycle management business process
outsourcing companies; traditional consultants; and information
technology outsourcers. These types of external participants
also compete with us in the field of quality and total cost of
care. In addition, the commercial payor community has
historically attempted to provide information or services that
are intended to assist providers in reducing the total cost of
medical care. They could attempt to develop similar programs
again. Our competitors may be able to respond more quickly and
effectively than we can to new or changing opportunities,
technologies, standards, regulations or customer requirements.
We may not be able to compete successfully with these companies,
and these or other competitors may introduce technologies or
services that render our technologies or services obsolete or
less marketable. Even if our technologies and services are more
effective than the offerings of our competitors, current or
potential customers might prefer competitive technologies or
services to our technologies and services. Increased competition
is likely to result in pricing pressures, which could negatively
impact our margins, growth rate or market share.
31
If we
are unable to retain our existing customers, our financial
condition will suffer.
Our success depends in part upon the retention of our customers,
particularly Ascension Health and its affiliated hospitals. We
derive our net services revenue primarily from managed service
contracts pursuant to which we receive base fees and incentive
payments. Customers can elect not to renew their managed service
contracts with us upon expiration. If a managed service contract
is not renewed or is terminated for any reason, including for
example, if we are found to be in violation of any federal or
state fraud and abuse laws or excluded from participating in
federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and
Medicaid, we will not receive the payments we would have
otherwise received over the life of contract. In addition,
financial issues or other changes in customer circumstances,
such as a customer change in control, may cause us or the
customer to seek to modify or terminate a managed service
contract, and either we or the customer may generally terminate
a contract for material uncured breach by the other. If we
breach a managed service contract or fail to perform in
accordance with contractual service levels, we may also be
liable to the customer for damages. Any of these events could
adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating
results and cash flows.
We
face a variable selling cycle to secure new revenue cycle and
quality and total cost of care managed service contracts, making
it difficult to predict the timing of specific new customer
relationships.
We face a variable selling cycle, typically spanning six to
twelve months, to secure a new managed service contract. Even if
we succeed in developing a relationship with a potential new
customer, we may not be successful in entering into a managed
service contract with that customer. In addition, we cannot
accurately predict the timing of entering into managed service
contracts with new customers due to the complex procurement
decision processes of most healthcare providers, which often
involves high-level or committee approvals. Consequently, we
have only a limited ability to predict the timing of specific
new customer relationships.
Delayed
or unsuccessful implementation of our technologies or services
with our customers or implementation costs that exceed our
expectations may harm our financial results.
To implement our solutions, we utilize the customers
existing management and staff and layer our proprietary
technology applications on top of the customers existing
patient accounting and clinical systems. Each customers
situation is different, and unanticipated difficulties and
delays may arise. If the implementation process is not executed
successfully or is delayed, our relationship with the customer
may be adversely affected and our results of operations could
suffer. Implementation of our solutions also requires us to
integrate our own employees into the customers operations.
The customers circumstances may require us to devote a
larger number of our employees than anticipated, which could
increase our costs and harm our financial results.
Our
quarterly results of operations may fluctuate as a result of
factors that may impact our incentive and base fees, some of
which may be outside of our control.
We recognize base fee revenue on a straight-line basis over the
life of the managed service contract. Base fees for contracts
which are received in advance of services delivered are
classified as deferred revenue until services have been
provided. Our managed service contracts generally allow for
adjustments to the base fee. Adjustments typically occur at 90,
180 or 360 days after the contract commences, but can also
occur at subsequent dates as a result of factors including
changes to the scope of operations and internal and external
audits. In addition, our fees from hospitals affiliated with
Ascension Health are subject to adjustment in the event
quarterly cash collections at these hospitals deteriorate
materially after we take over revenue cycle management
operations. While these adjustments have never been triggered,
if they were, our future fees from hospitals affiliated with
Ascension Health would be reduced. Further, estimates of the
incentive payments we have earned from providing services to
customers in prior periods could change because the laws,
regulations, instructions, payor contracts and rule
interpretations governing how our customers receive payments
from payors are complex and change frequently. Any such change
in estimates could be material. The timing of such adjustments
is often dependent on factors outside of our control and may
result in material increases or
32
decreases in our revenue and operating margin. Any such changes
or adjustments may cause our
quarter-to-quarter
results of operations to fluctuate.
In addition, the timing of customer additions is not uniform
throughout the year, which causes fluctuations in our quarterly
results as new customers are added. Operating margins are
typically slightly lower in quarters in which we add new
customers because we incur expenses to implement our operating
model at those customers while our incentive payments from
revenue improvements and operating cost reductions for those
customers are only at a preliminary stage. We also experience
fluctuations in incentive payments as a result of patients
ability to accelerate or defer elective procedures, particularly
around holidays such as Thanksgiving and Christmas. Generally,
incentive payments are lower in the first quarter of each year
and higher in the fourth quarter of each year. Incentive
payments have a significant impact on operating margins and
adjusted EBITDA, and changes in the amount of incentive payments
can cause fluctuations in our
quarter-to-quarter
operating results.
If we
lose key personnel or if we are unable to attract, hire,
integrate and retain key personnel and other necessary
employees, our business would be harmed.
Our future success depends in part on our ability to attract,
hire, integrate and retain key personnel. Our future success
also depends on the continued contributions of our executive
officers and other key personnel, each of whom may be difficult
to replace. In particular, Mary A. Tolan, our president and
chief executive officer, is critical to the management of our
business and operations and the development of our strategic
direction. The loss of services of Ms. Tolan or any of our
other executive officers or key personnel or the inability to
continue to attract qualified personnel could have a material
adverse effect on our business. The replacement of any of these
key personnel would involve significant time and expense and may
significantly delay or prevent the achievement of our business
objectives. Competition for the caliber and number of employees
we require is intense. We may face difficulty identifying and
hiring qualified personnel at compensation levels consistent
with our existing compensation and salary structure. In
addition, we invest significant time and expense in training
each of our employees, which increases their value to
competitors who may seek to recruit them. If we fail to retain
our employees, we could incur significant expenses in hiring,
integrating and training their replacements and the quality of
our services and our ability to serve our customers could
diminish, resulting in a material adverse effect on our business.
The
imposition of legal responsibility for obligations related to
our employees or our customers employees could adversely
affect our business or subject us to liability.
Under our contracts with customers, we directly manage our
customers employees engaged in the activities we have
contracted to manage for our customers. Our managed service
contracts establish the division of responsibilities between us
and our customers for various personnel management matters,
including compliance with and liability under various employment
laws and regulations. We could, nevertheless, be found to have
liability with our customers for actions against or by employees
of our customers, including under various employment laws and
regulations, such as those relating to discrimination,
retaliation, wage and hour matters, occupational safety and
health, family and medical leave, notice of facility closings
and layoffs and labor relations, as well as similar liability
with respect to our own employees, and any such liability could
result in a material adverse effect on our business.
If we
fail to manage future growth effectively, our business would be
harmed.
We have expanded our operations significantly since inception
and anticipate expanding further. For example, our net services
revenue increased from $160.7 million in 2006 to
$606.3 million in 2010, and the number of our employees
increased from 33, all of whom were full-time, as of
January 1, 2005 to 1,991 full-time employees and
231 part-time employees as of December 31, 2010. In
addition, the number of customer employees whom we manage has
increased from approximately 1,600 as of January 1, 2005 to
approximately 8,200 as of December 31, 2010. This growth
has placed significant demands on our management, infrastructure
and other resources. To manage future growth, we will need to
hire, integrate and retain highly skilled and motivated
employees, and will need to effectively manage a growing number
of customer employees
33
engaged in revenue cycle operations. We will also need to
continue to improve our financial and management controls,
reporting systems and procedures. If we do not effectively
manage our growth, we may not be able to execute on our business
plan, respond to competitive pressures, take advantage of market
opportunities, satisfy customer requirements or maintain
high-quality service offerings.
Disruptions
in service or damage to our data centers and shared services
centers could adversely affect our business.
Our data centers and shared services centers are essential to
our business. Our operations depend on our ability to operate
our shared service centers, and to maintain and protect our
applications, which are located in data centers that are
operated for us by third parties. We cannot control or assure
the continued or uninterrupted availability of these third-party
data centers. In addition, our information technologies and
systems, as well as our data centers and shared services
centers, are vulnerable to damage or interruption from various
causes, including (i) acts of God and other natural
disasters, war and acts of terrorism and (ii) power losses,
computer systems failures, Internet and telecommunications or
data network failures, operator error, losses of and corruption
of data and similar events. We conduct business continuity
planning and maintain insurance against fires, floods, other
natural disasters and general business interruptions to mitigate
the adverse effects of a disruption, relocation or change in
operating environment at one of our data centers or shared
services centers, but the situations we plan for and the amount
of insurance coverage we maintain may not be adequate in any
particular case. In addition, the occurrence of any of these
events could result in interruptions, delays or cessations in
service to our customers, or in interruptions, delays or
cessations in the direct connections we establish between our
customers and third-party payors. Any of these events could
impair or prohibit our ability to provide our services, reduce
the attractiveness of our services to current or potential
customers and adversely impact our financial condition and
results of operations.
In addition, despite the implementation of security measures,
our infrastructure, data centers, shared services centers or
systems that we interface with, including the Internet and
related systems, may be vulnerable to physical break-ins,
hackers, improper employee or contractor access, computer
viruses, programming errors,
denial-of-service
attacks or other attacks by third parties seeking to disrupt
operations or misappropriate information or similar physical or
electronic breaches of security. Any of these can cause system
failure, including network, software or hardware failure, which
can result in service disruptions. As a result, we may be
required to expend significant capital and other resources to
protect against security breaches and hackers or to alleviate
problems caused by such breaches.
If our
security measures are breached or fail and unauthorized access
is obtained to a customers data, our service may be
perceived as not being secure, the attractiveness of our
services to current or potential customers may be reduced, and
we may incur significant liabilities.
Our services involve the storage and transmission of
customers proprietary information and protected health,
financial, payment and other personal information of patients.
We rely on proprietary and commercially available systems,
software, tools and monitoring, as well as other processes, to
provide security for processing, transmission and storage of
such information, and because of the sensitivity of this
information, the effectiveness of such security efforts is very
important. The systems currently used for transmission and
approval of credit card transactions, and the technology
utilized in credit cards themselves, all of which can put credit
card data at risk, are determined and controlled by the payment
card industry, not by us. If our security measures are breached
or fail as a result of third-party action, employee error,
malfeasance or otherwise, someone may be able to obtain
unauthorized access to customer or patient data. Improper
activities by third parties, advances in computer and software
capabilities and encryption technology, new tools and
discoveries and other events or developments may facilitate or
result in a compromise or breach of our computer systems.
Techniques used to obtain unauthorized access or to sabotage
systems change frequently and generally are not recognized until
launched against a target, and we may be unable to anticipate
these techniques or to implement adequate preventive measures.
Our security measures may not be effective in preventing these
types of activities, and the security measures of our
third-party data centers and service providers may not be
adequate. If a breach of our security occurs, we could face
damages for contract breach,
34
penalties for violation of applicable laws or regulations,
possible lawsuits by individuals affected by the breach and
significant remediation costs and efforts to prevent future
occurrences. In addition, whether there is an actual or a
perceived breach of our security, the market perception of the
effectiveness of our security measures could be harmed and we
could lose current or potential customers.
We may
be liable to our customers or third parties if we make errors in
providing our services, and our anticipated net services revenue
may be lower if we provide poor service.
The services we offer are complex, and we make errors from time
to time. Errors can result from the interface of our proprietary
technology applications and a customers existing patient
accounting system, or we may make human errors in any aspect of
our service offerings. The costs incurred in correcting any
material errors may be substantial and could adversely affect
our operating results. Our customers, or third parties such as
our customers patients, may assert claims against us
alleging that they suffered damages due to our errors, and such
claims could subject us to significant legal defense costs and
adverse publicity regardless of the merits or eventual outcome
of such claims. In addition, if we provide poor service to a
customer and the customer therefore realizes less improvement in
revenue yield, the incentive fee payments to us from that
customer will be lower than anticipated.
We
offer our services in many jurisdictions and, therefore, may be
subject to state and local taxes that could harm our business or
that we may have inadvertently failed to pay.
We may lose sales or incur significant costs should various tax
jurisdictions be successful in imposing taxes on a broader range
of services. Imposition of such taxes on our services could
result in substantial unplanned costs, would effectively
increase the cost of such services to our customers and may
adversely affect our ability to retain existing customers or to
gain new customers in the areas in which such taxes are imposed.
For example, in 2008 Michigan began to impose a tax based on
gross receipts in addition to tax based on net income.
We may
seek to expand into international markets in the future. We have
no experience in providing services to customers outside of the
United States. Expansion into international markets, if pursued,
could expose us to additional risks that we do not face in the
United States, which could have an adverse effect on our
operating results.
To date, all customers for all of our service offerings have
been located in the United States. We believe that increasing
healthcare costs are a concern for other developed nations and
that management of the health of a defined patient population is
a cost effective means to control overall healthcare
expenditures. We have received inquiries from government-related
healthcare providers in other countries about our quality and
total cost of care service offering. As a result, we are
beginning to evaluate the level of potential interest in this
service offering and the methods of delivering this solution to
international customers. This process is in a very early stage
and there is no assurance that our quality and total cost of
care service offering can be successfully tailored to meet the
specific requirements of healthcare providers outside the United
States, that a market for this service will develop outside of
the United States or that we will be able to serve this market
efficiently.
We have no experience in providing services to customers outside
of the United States. If we seek to expand into international
markets in the future, such operations will be subject to a
variety of legal, financial, operational, regulatory, economic
and political risks that we do not face in the United States. We
may not be successful in developing and implementing policies
and strategies that would be effective in managing these risks
in each country where we may seek do business. Our failure to
manage these risks successfully could harm our operations and
increase our costs, and put pressure on our business, financial
condition and operating results.
Our
growing operations in India expose us to risks that could have
an adverse effect on our costs of operations.
We employ a significant number of persons in India and expect to
continue to add personnel in India. While there are cost
advantages to operating in India, significant growth in the
technology sector in India has
35
increased competition to attract and retain skilled employees
and has led to a commensurate increase in compensation expense.
In the future, we may not be able to hire and retain such
personnel at compensation levels consistent with our existing
compensation and salary structure in India. In addition, our
reliance on a workforce in India exposes us to disruptions in
the business, political and economic environment in that region.
Maintenance of a stable political environment is important to
our operations, and terrorist attacks and acts of violence or
war may directly affect our physical facilities and workforce or
contribute to general instability. Our operations in India
require us to comply with local laws and regulatory
requirements, which are complex and of which we may not always
be aware, and expose us to foreign currency exchange rate risk.
Our Indian operations may also subject us to trade restrictions,
reduced or inadequate protection for intellectual property
rights, security breaches and other factors that may adversely
affect our business. Negative developments in any of these areas
could increase our costs of operations or otherwise harm our
business.
Negative
public perception in the United States regarding offshore
outsourcing and proposed legislation may increase the cost of
delivering our services.
Offshore outsourcing is a politically sensitive topic in the
United States. For example, various organizations and public
figures in the United States have expressed concern about a
perceived association between offshore outsourcing providers and
the loss of jobs in the United States. In addition, there has
been recent publicity about the negative experience of certain
companies that use offshore outsourcing, particularly in India.
Current or prospective customers may elect to perform such
services themselves or may be discouraged from transferring
these services from onshore to offshore providers to avoid
negative perceptions that may be associated with using an
offshore provider. Any slowdown or reversal of existing industry
trends towards offshore outsourcing would increase the cost of
delivering our services if we had to relocate aspects of our
services from India to the United States where operating costs
are higher.
Legislation in the United States may be enacted that is intended
to discourage or restrict offshore outsourcing. In the United
States, federal and state legislation has been proposed, and
enacted in several states, that could restrict or discourage
U.S. companies from outsourcing their services to companies
outside the United States. For example, legislation has been
proposed that would require offshore providers to identify where
they are located. In addition, legislation has been enacted in
at least one state that requires that state contracts for
services be performed within the United States, while several
other states provide a preference to state contracts that are
performed within the state. It is possible that legislation
could be adopted that would restrict U.S. private sector
companies that have federal or state government contracts, or
that receive government funding or reimbursement, such as
Medicare or Medicaid payments, from outsourcing their services
to offshore service providers. Any changes to existing laws or
the enactment of new legislation restricting offshore
outsourcing in the United States may adversely affect our
ability to do business, particularly if these changes are
widespread, and could have a material adverse effect on our
business, results of operations, financial condition and cash
flows.
Regulatory
Risks
The
healthcare industry is heavily regulated. Our failure to comply
with regulatory requirements could create liability for us,
result in adverse publicity and negatively affect our
business.
The healthcare industry is heavily regulated and is subject to
changing political, legislative, regulatory and other
influences. Many healthcare laws are complex, and their
application to specific services and relationships may not be
clear. In particular, many existing healthcare laws and
regulations, when enacted, did not anticipate the services that
we provide. There can be no assurance that our operations will
not be challenged or adversely affected by enforcement
initiatives. Our failure to accurately anticipate the
application of these laws and regulations to our business, or
any other failure to comply with regulatory requirements, could
create liability for us, result in adverse publicity and
negatively affect our business. Federal and state legislatures
and agencies periodically consider proposals to revise aspects
of the healthcare industry or to revise or create additional
statutory and regulatory requirements. Such proposals, if
implemented, could impact our operations, the use of our
services and our ability to market new services, or could create
unexpected liabilities for us. We are unable to predict what
changes to laws or regulations might be made in the future or
how those changes could affect our business or our operating
costs.
36
Developments
in the healthcare industry, including national healthcare
reform, could adversely affect our business.
The healthcare industry has changed significantly in recent
years and we expect that significant changes will continue to
occur. The timing and impact of developments in the healthcare
industry are difficult to predict. We cannot be sure that the
markets for our services will continue to exist at current
levels or that we will have adequate technical, financial and
marketing resources to react to changes in those markets. The
federal healthcare reform legislation (known as the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) that was enacted in
March 2010 could, for example, encourage more companies to enter
our market, provide advantages to our competitors and result in
the development of solutions that compete with ours. Moreover,
healthcare reform remains a major policy issue at the federal
level, and constitutional challenges to or the repeal of the
existing legislation and additional healthcare legislation in
the future could have adverse consequences for us or the
customers we serve.
If a
breach of our measures protecting personal data covered by the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act or Health
Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act
occurs, we may incur significant liabilities.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996,
as amended, and the regulations that have been issued under it,
which we refer to collectively as HIPAA, contain substantial
restrictions and requirements with respect to the use and
disclosure of individuals protected health information.
Under HIPAA, covered entities must establish administrative,
physical and technical safeguards to protect the
confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic
protected health information maintained or transmitted by them
or by others on their behalf. In February 2009 HIPAA was amended
by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical
Health, or HITECH, Act to impose certain of the HIPAA privacy
and security requirements directly upon business associates of
covered entities. New regulations that took effect in late 2009
also require business associates to notify covered entities, who
in turn must notify affected individuals and government
authorities of data security breaches involving unsecured
protected health information. Most of our customers are covered
entities and we are a business associate to many of those
customers under HIPAA and the HITECH Act as a result of our
contractual obligations to perform certain functions on behalf
of and provide certain services to those customers. We have
implemented and maintain physical, technical and administrative
safeguards intended to protect all personal data and have
processes in place to assist us in complying with applicable
laws and regulations regarding the protection of this data and
properly responding to any security incidents. A knowing breach
of the HITECH Acts requirements could expose us to
criminal liability. A breach of our safeguards and processes
that is not due to reasonable cause or involves willful neglect
could expose us to civil penalties and the possibility of civil
litigation.
If we
fail to comply with federal and state laws governing submission
of false or fraudulent claims to government healthcare programs
and financial relationships among healthcare providers, we may
be subject to civil and criminal penalties or loss of
eligibility to participate in government healthcare
programs.
A number of federal and state laws, including anti-kickback
restrictions and laws prohibiting the submission of false or
fraudulent claims, apply to healthcare providers, physicians and
others that make, offer, seek or receive referrals or payments
for products or services that may be paid for through any
federal or state healthcare program and, in some instances, any
private program. These laws are complex and their application to
our specific services and relationships may not be clear and may
be applied to our business in ways that we do not anticipate.
Federal and state regulatory and law enforcement authorities
have recently increased enforcement activities with respect to
Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse regulations and other
healthcare reimbursement laws and rules. From time to time,
participants in the healthcare industry receive inquiries or
subpoenas to produce documents in connection with government
investigations. We could be required to expend significant time
and resources to comply with these requests, and the attention
of our management team could be diverted by these efforts.
Furthermore, if we are found to be in violation of any federal
or state fraud and abuse laws, we could be subject to civil and
criminal penalties, and we could be excluded from participating
in federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and
Medicaid. The occurrence of any
37
of these events could give our customers the right to terminate
our managed service contracts with them and result in
significant harm to our business and financial condition.
The federal healthcare anti-kickback law prohibits any person or
entity from offering, paying, soliciting or receiving anything
of value, directly or indirectly, for the referral of patients
covered by Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare
programs or the leasing, purchasing, ordering or arranging for
or recommending the lease, purchase or order of any item, good,
facility or service covered by these programs. Many states have
adopted similar prohibitions against kickbacks and other
practices that are intended to induce referrals, and some of
these state laws are applicable to all patients regardless of
whether the patient is covered under a governmental health
program or private health plan. We seek to structure our
business relationships and activities to avoid any activity that
could be construed to implicate the federal healthcare
anti-kickback law and similar laws. We cannot assure you,
however, that our arrangements and activities will be deemed
outside the scope of these laws or that increased enforcement
activities will not directly or indirectly have an adverse
effect on our business, financial condition or results of
operations. Any determination by a federal or state agency or
court that we have violated any of these laws could subject us
to civil or criminal penalties, could require us to change or
terminate some portions of our operations or business, could
disqualify us from providing services to healthcare providers
doing business with government programs, could give our
customers the right to terminate our managed service contracts
with them and, thus, could have a material adverse effect on our
business and results of operations. Moreover, any violations by
and resulting penalties or exclusions imposed upon our customers
could adversely affect their financial condition and, in turn,
have a material adverse effect on our business and results of
operations.
There are also numerous federal and state laws that forbid
submission of false information or the failure to disclose
information in connection with the submission and payment of
healthcare provider claims for reimbursement. In particular, the
federal False Claims Act, or the FCA, prohibits a person from
knowingly presenting or causing to be presented a false or
fraudulent claim for payment or approval by an officer, employee
or agent of the United States. In addition, the FCA prohibits a
person from knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or
used a false record or statement material to such a claim.
Violations of the FCA may result in treble damages, significant
monetary penalties, and other collateral consequences including,
potentially, exclusion from participation in federally funded
healthcare programs. The scope and implications of the recent
amendments to the FCA pursuant to the Fraud Enforcement and
Recovery Act of 2009, or FERA, have yet to be fully determined
or adjudicated and as a result it is difficult to predict how
future enforcement initiatives may impact our business. Pursuant
to the healthcare reform legislation enacted in March 2010, a
claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation
of the federal anti-kickback law constitutes a false or
fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA.
These laws and regulations may change rapidly, and it is
frequently unclear how they apply to our business. Errors
created by our proprietary applications or services that relate
to entry, formatting, preparation or transmission of claim or
cost report information may be determined or alleged to be in
violation of these laws and regulations. Any failure of our
proprietary applications or services to comply with these laws
and regulations could result in substantial civil or criminal
liability and could, among other things, adversely affect demand
for our services, invalidate all or portions of some of our
managed service contracts with our customers, require us to
change or terminate some portions of our business, require us to
refund portions of our base fee revenues and incentive payment
revenues, cause us to be disqualified from serving customers
doing business with government payers, and give our customers
the right to terminate our managed service contracts with them,
any one of which could have an adverse effect on our business.
Our
failure to comply with debt collection and consumer credit
reporting regulations could subject us to fines and other
liabilities, which could harm our reputation and
business.
The U.S. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, or FDCPA,
regulates persons who regularly collect or attempt to collect,
directly or indirectly, consumer debts owed or asserted to be
owed to another person. Certain of our accounts receivable
activities may be subject to the FDCPA. Many states impose
additional requirements on debt collection communications, and
some of those requirements may be more stringent than the
comparable federal requirements. Moreover, regulations governing
debt collection are subject to changing
38
interpretations that may be inconsistent among different
jurisdictions. We are also subject to the Fair Credit Reporting
Act, or FCRA, which regulates consumer credit reporting and
which may impose liability on us to the extent that the adverse
credit information reported on a consumer to a credit bureau is
false or inaccurate. We could incur costs or could be subject to
fines or other penalties under the FCRA if the Federal Trade
Commission determines that we have mishandled protected
information. We or our customers could be required to report
such breaches to affected consumers or regulatory authorities,
leading to disclosures that could damage our reputation or harm
our business, financial position and operating results.
Potential
additional regulation of the disclosure of health information
outside the United States may increase our costs.
Federal or state governmental authorities may impose additional
data security standards or additional privacy or other
restrictions on the collection, use, transmission and other
disclosures of health information. Legislation has been proposed
at various times at both the federal and the state levels that
would limit, forbid or regulate the use or transmission of
medical information pertaining to U.S. patients outside of
the United States. Such legislation, if adopted, may render our
operations in India impracticable or substantially more
expensive. Moving such operations to the United States may
involve substantial delay in implementation and increased costs.
Risks
Related to Intellectual Property
We may
be unable to adequately protect our intellectual
property.
Our success depends, in part, upon our ability to establish,
protect and enforce our intellectual property and other
proprietary rights. If we fail to establish or protect our
intellectual property rights, we may lose an important advantage
in the market in which we compete. We rely upon a combination of
patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret law and
contractual terms and conditions to protect our intellectual
property rights, all of which provide only limited protection.
We cannot assure you that our intellectual property rights are
sufficient to protect our competitive advantages. Although we
have filed six U.S. patent applications, we cannot assure
you that any patents that will be issued from these applications
will provide us with the protection that we seek or that any
future patents issued to us will not be challenged, invalidated
or circumvented. We have also been issued one U.S. patent,
but we cannot assure you that it will provide us with the
protection that we seek or that it will not be challenged,
invalidated or circumvented. Legal standards relating to the
validity, enforceability and scope of protection of patents are
uncertain. Any patents that may be issued in the future from
pending or future patent applications or our one issued patent
may not provide sufficiently broad protection or they may not
prove to be enforceable in actions against alleged infringers.
Also, we cannot assure you that any trademark registrations will
be issued for pending or future applications or that any of our
trademarks will be enforceable or provide adequate protection of
our proprietary rights.
We also rely in some circumstances on trade secrets to protect
our technology. Trade secrets may lose their value if not
properly protected. We endeavor to enter into non-disclosure
agreements with our employees, customers, contractors and
business partners to limit access to and disclosure of our
proprietary information. The steps we have taken, however, may
not prevent unauthorized use of our technology, and adequate
remedies may not be available in the event of unauthorized use
or disclosure of our trade secrets and proprietary technology.
Moreover, others may reverse engineer or independently develop
technologies that are competitive to ours or infringe our
intellectual property.
Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may be unable to prevent
third parties from infringing or misappropriating our
intellectual property and using our technology for their
competitive advantage. Any such infringement or misappropriation
could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition. Monitoring infringement of
our intellectual property rights can be difficult and costly,
and enforcement of our intellectual property rights may require
us to bring legal actions against infringers. Infringement
actions are inherently uncertain and therefore may not be
successful, even when our rights have been infringed, and even
if successful may require a substantial amount of resources and
divert our managements attention.
39
Claims
by others that we infringe their intellectual property could
force us to incur significant costs or revise the way we conduct
our business.
Our competitors protect their intellectual property rights by
means such as patents, trade secrets, copyrights and trademarks.
We have not conducted an independent review of patents issued to
third parties. Additionally, because patent applications in the
United States and many other jurisdictions are kept confidential
for 18 months before they are published, we may be unaware
of pending patent applications that relate to our proprietary
technology. Although we have not been involved in any litigation
related to intellectual property rights of others, from time to
time we receive letters from other parties alleging, or
inquiring about, possible breaches of their intellectual
property rights. Any party asserting that we infringe its
proprietary rights would force us to defend ourselves, and
possibly our customers, against the alleged infringement. These
claims and any resulting lawsuit, if successful, could subject
us to significant liability for damages and invalidation of our
proprietary rights or interruption or cessation of our
operations. The software and technology industries are
characterized by the existence of a large number of patents,
copyrights, trademarks and trade secrets and by frequent
litigation based on allegations of infringement or other
violations of intellectual property rights. Moreover, the risk
of such a lawsuit will likely increase as our size and scope of
our services and technology platforms increase, as our
geographic presence and market share expand and as the number of
competitors in our market increases. Any such claims or
litigation could:
|
|
|
|
|
be time-consuming and expensive to defend, whether meritorious
or not;
|
|
|
|
require us to stop providing the services that use the
technology that infringes the other partys intellectual
property;
|
|
|
|
divert the attention of our technical and managerial resources;
|
|
|
|
require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements with
third parties, which may not be available on terms that we deem
acceptable, if at all;
|
|
|
|
prevent us from operating all or a portion of our business or
force us to redesign our services and technology platforms,
which could be difficult and expensive and may make the
performance or value of our service offerings less attractive;
|
|
|
|
subject us to significant liability for damages or result in
significant settlement payments; or
|
|
|
|
require us to indemnify our customers as we are required by
contract to indemnify some of our customers for certain claims
based upon the infringement or alleged infringement of any third
partys intellectual property rights resulting from our
customers use of our intellectual property.
|
Intellectual property litigation can be costly. Even if we
prevail, the cost of such litigation could deplete our financial
resources. Litigation is also time-consuming and could divert
managements attention and resources away from our
business. Furthermore, during the course of litigation,
confidential information may be disclosed in the form of
documents or testimony in connection with discovery requests,
depositions or trial testimony. Disclosure of our confidential
information and our involvement in intellectual property
litigation could materially adversely affect our business. Some
of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex
intellectual property litigation more effectively than we can
because they have substantially greater resources. In addition,
any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation
of any litigation could significantly limit our ability to
continue our operations and could harm our relationships with
current and prospective customers. Any of the foregoing could
disrupt our business and have a material adverse effect on our
operating results and financial condition.
Risks
Related to the Ownership of Shares of Our Common Stock
Anti-takeover
provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law could
discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company
and may affect the trading price of our common
stock.
We are a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions
of the Delaware General Corporation Law may discourage, delay or
prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a
business
40
combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three
years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even
if a change in control would be beneficial to our existing
stockholders. In addition, our restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may discourage,
delay or prevent a change in our management or control over us
that stockholders may consider favorable. Our restated
certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws:
|
|
|
|
|
authorize the issuance of blank check preferred
stock that could be issued by our board of directors to thwart a
takeover attempt;
|
|
|
|
provide for a classified board of directors, as a result of
which the successors to the directors whose terms have expired
will be elected to serve from the time of election and
qualification until the third annual meeting following their
election;
|
|
|
|
require that directors only be removed from office for cause and
only upon a supermajority stockholder vote;
|
|
|
|
provide that vacancies on the board of directors, including
newly created directorships, may be filled only by a majority
vote of directors then in office;
|
|
|
|
limit who may call special meetings of stockholders;
|
|
|
|
prohibit stockholder action by written consent, requiring all
actions to be taken at a meeting of the stockholders; and
|
|
|
|
require supermajority stockholder voting to effect certain
amendments to our restated certificate of incorporation and
amended and restated bylaws.
|
For additional information regarding these and other
anti-takeover provisions, see Description of Capital
Stock Anti-Takeover Effects of Our Charter and
Bylaws and Delaware Law.
We do
not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our capital stock in
the foreseeable future.
Although we paid cash dividends on our capital stock in July
2008 and September 2009, we do not expect to pay cash dividends
on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future
dividend payments will be within the discretion of our board of
directors and will depend on, among other things, our financial
condition, results of operations, capital requirements, capital
expenditure requirements, contractual restrictions, provisions
of applicable law and other factors that our board of directors
may deem relevant. In addition, our revolving credit facility
does not permit us to pay dividends without the lenders
prior consent. We may not generate sufficient cash from
operations in the future to pay dividends on our common stock.
See Dividend Policy.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
We do not own any real estate property and lease our existing
facilities.
As of December 31, 2010, our corporate headquarters occupy
approximately 50,000 square feet in Chicago, Illinois under
a lease expiring as to certain portions of the space in 2014 and
other portions in 2020. In addition, we have a right of first
offer to lease an additional 11,100 square feet of space on
another floor in the same building.
In August 2010, we also leased approximately 44,500 square
feet of office space in another building in Chicago for a period
of 11 years. The total rental commitment under the lease is
approximately $8.0 million. Our other leased facilities are
in Kalamazoo, Michigan; Detroit, Michigan; Jupiter, Florida;
Cape Girardeau, Missouri; and near New Delhi, India. Pursuant to
our master services agreement with Ascension Health and the
managed service contracts between us and our customers, we
occupy space
on-site at
all hospitals where
41
we provide our revenue cycle management services. We do not pay
customers for our use of space provided by them. In general, we
are not permitted to provide services to one customer from
another customers site.
We believe that our current facilities are sufficient for our
current needs. We intend to add new facilities or expand
existing facilities as we add employees or expand our geographic
markets, and we believe that suitable additional or substitute
space will be available as needed to accommodate any such
expansion of our operations.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
From time to time, we have been and may again become involved in
legal or regulatory proceedings arising in the ordinary course
of our business. We are not presently a party to any material
litigation or regulatory proceeding and we are not aware of any
pending or threatened litigation or regulatory proceeding
against us that could have a material adverse effect on our
business, operating results, financial condition or cash flows.
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuers Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Our common stock has traded on the New York Stock Exchange, or
NYSE, under the symbol AH since May 20, 2010.
Prior to that time, there was no public market for our common
stock. The following table sets forth the high and low intraday
sales prices per share of our common stock, as reported by the
NYSE, for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price Range
|
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended June 30, 2010(1)
|
|
$
|
15.21
|
|
|
$
|
12.53
|
|
Quarter ended September 30, 2010
|
|
$
|
13.34
|
|
|
$
|
9.05
|
|
Quarter ended December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
16.25
|
|
|
$
|
8.30
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our common stock began trading on May 20, 2010. |
The closing sale price per share of our common stock, as
reported by the NYSE, on March 16, 2011 was $24.25. As of
February 28, 2011 there were 79 holders of record for our
common stock.
Dividend
Policy
We declared a cash dividend in the aggregate amount of
$15.0 million, or $0.18 per common-equivalent share, to
holders of record as of July 11, 2008 of our common stock
and preferred stock. We declared an additional cash dividend in
the aggregate amount of $14.9 million, or $0.18 per common
equivalent share, to holders of record as of September 1,
2009 of our common stock and preferred stock. We declared no
cash dividends in 2010.
We currently intend to retain earnings, if any, to finance the
growth and development of our business, and we do not expect to
pay any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable
future. Payment of future dividends, if any, will be at the
discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our
financial condition, results of operations, capital
requirements, restrictions contained in current or future
financing instruments, provisions of applicable law, and other
factors the board deems relevant. Our $15 million revolving
line of credit agreement does not permit us to pay any future
dividends without the lenders prior consent.
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The Company maintains a 2006 Second Amended and Restated Stock
Option Plan (the 2006 Plan). In April 2010, the
Company adopted a new 2010 Stock Incentive Plan (the 2010
Plan), which became effective immediately prior to the
closing of the IPO. The Company will not make any further grants
under the 2006
42
Plan, and the 2010 Plan provides for the grant of incentive
stock options, non-statutory stock options, restricted stock
awards and other stock-based awards. As of December 31,
2010, an aggregate of 15,749,404 shares were subject to
outstanding options under both plans, and 8,054,762 shares
were available for grant. However, to the extent that previously
granted awards under the 2006 Plan or 2010 Plan expire,
terminate or are otherwise surrendered, cancelled, forfeited or
repurchased by the Company, the number of shares available for
future awards will increase, up to a maximum of
24,374,756 shares.
The information regarding securities authorized for issuance
under the Companys stock option plans is set forth below,
as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
Securities to be
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Remaining Available for
|
|
|
|
Issued Upon Exercise
|
|
|
Exercise Price of
|
|
|
Future Issuance Under
|
|
Plan
|
|
of Outstanding Options
|
|
|
Outstanding Options
|
|
|
Equity Compensation Plans
|
|
|
2006 Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan
|
|
|
15,459,090
|
|
|
$
|
9.41
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Stock Incentive Plan
|
|
|
290,314
|
|
|
|
11.57
|
|
|
|
8,054,762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
15,749,404
|
|
|
$
|
9.45
|
|
|
|
8,054,762
|
|
Sales of
Unregistered Securities and Use of Proceeds
Use of
Proceeds from Initial Public Offering
The SEC declared the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-162186)
related to our initial public offering effective on May 19,
2010. In the offering, which commenced on May 20, 2010 and
closed on May 25, 2010, we registered
11,500,000 shares of our common stock at a price to the
public of $12.00 per share. We sold 7,666,667 of the shares of
our common stock in the offering, and the selling stockholders
sold 3,833,333 shares. Goldman, Sachs & Co. and
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC were the joint book-running
managers and representatives of the underwriters. The offering
generated gross proceeds to us of $92.0 million, or
$80.8 million net of underwriting discounts and offering
expenses. The offering generated gross proceeds to the selling
stockholders of $46.0 million, or $43.2 million net of
underwriting discounts. We incurred $7.1 million of
offering-related expenses, of which $2.9 million were
incurred prior to December 31, 2009. Out of
$7.1 million of offering expenses, $1.4 million was
satisfied through the issuance of 115,000 shares of common
stock to Financial Technology Partners LP
and/or FTP
Securities LLC in satisfaction of a fee for advisory services in
respect of the initial public offering. Additionally, in
conjunction with the offering, we issued 1,265,012 shares
and paid $0.9 million in satisfaction of liquidation
preference payments due to preferred shareholders, including
certain directors, officers and their affiliates.
From the effective date of the registration statement through
December 31, 2010, we did not use any of our proceeds from
our initial public offering. There has been no change in the
planned use of proceeds from the initial public offering as
described in our Registration Statement on
Form S-1
declared effective by the SEC on May 19, 2010.
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities
Set forth below is information regarding our issuances of
capital stock and our grants of warrants and options to purchase
shares of capital stock, which were not registered under the
Securities Act, since January 1, 2006. Also included is the
consideration, if any, received by us for such shares, warrants
and options and information relating to the section of the
Securities Act, or rule of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, under which exemption from registration was claimed.
(a) Issuances
of Capital Stock
(1) In May 2006, we issued an aggregate of
391,079 shares of non-voting common stock, valued at $1.34
per share (based on the estimated fair value of the shares on
that date) for an aggregate value of $524,764, to a total of 15
former stockholders of SureDecisions, Inc. in connection with
our acquisition of SureDecisions in May 2006. In June 2007, we
issued an aggregate of 156,432 additional shares of non-voting
common stock,
43
valued at $2.09 per share (based on the estimated fair value of
the shares on that date) for an aggregate value of $327,229, as
earn-out consideration to the former stockholders of
SureDecisions.
(2) In May 2007, we issued 2,623,593 shares of voting
common stock to Ascension Health at a price of $2.09 per share
for a total purchase price of $5,488,128.
(3) In December 2008, we issued an aggregate of
12,975,007 shares of voting common stock in exchange for
12,975,007 shares of non-voting common stock held by a
total of 10 of our directors, officers and their affiliates.
These shares are subject to the terms and conditions set forth
in our restricted stock plan, the restricted stock award
agreements entered into between us and our stockholders in
connection with the original issuance of the shares of
non-voting common stock and our stockholders agreement
pursuant to which these persons have certain registration rights.
No underwriters were involved in the foregoing issuances of
securities. The shares of common stock described in paragraphs
(a)(1) and (a)(2) of Item 15 were issued in reliance upon
the exemption from the registration requirements of the
Securities Act provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities
Act as sales by an issuer not involving any public offering. The
shares of common stock described in paragraph (a)(3) of
Item 15 were issued in exchange for shares of our
non-voting common stock held by our existing stockholders
exclusively, with no other consideration, commission or other
remuneration paid or given directly or indirectly for soliciting
such exchange, in reliance upon the exemption from the
registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by
Section 3(a)(9).
(b) Warrant
Grants and Exercises
Since January 1, 2006, we granted warrants to Ascension
Health to purchase an aggregate of 3,040,018 shares of
voting common stock with exercise prices ranging from $0.003 per
share to $13.02 per share. Of these warrants, 1,749,064 were
issued to Ascension Health based upon the achievement of
specified milestones relating to sales and marketing assistance
that it provided to us. Since January 1, 2006, Ascension
Health purchased an aggregate of 1,290,954 shares of voting
common stock upon warrant exercises for aggregate consideration
of $3,293. In connection with our initial public offering in May
2010, we issued 615,649 shares of common stock to Ascension
Health upon its cashless exercise of outstanding supplemental
warrants.
In December 2010, we issued 3,266,668 shares of the common
stock upon the exercise of a warrant for aggregate consideration
of $933,334.
The warrants and shares of voting common stock issued upon the
exercise of the warrants described in this paragraph (b) of
Item 15 were issued in reliance upon the exemption from the
registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by
Section 4(2) of the Securities Act as sales by an issuer
not involving any public offering.
(c) Option
Grants and Exercises
Since January 1, 2006, we granted options to purchase an
aggregate of 17,279,166 shares of non-voting common stock,
with exercise prices ranging from $0.80 to $14.96 per share, to
employees, directors and consultants pursuant to our stock
option plan. Since January 1, 2006, we issued an aggregate
of 3,394,582 shares of non-voting common stock upon
exercise of unvested options for aggregate consideration of
$2,587,593 and 1,251,283 shares of non-voting common stock
upon exercise of vested options for aggregate consideration of
$701,717. Our prior option plan permits the exercise of unvested
options; until vested, shares issued upon exercise of unvested
options remain subject to our right of repurchase.
The options and shares of non-voting common stock issuable upon
the exercise of the options described in this paragraph
(c) of Item 15 were issued pursuant to written
compensatory plans or arrangements with our employees, directors
and consultants in reliance upon the exemption from the
registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by
Rule 701 promulgated under the Securities Act. All
recipients of options and shares pursuant to this exemption
either received adequate information about us or had access,
through employment or other relationships, to such information.
In some cases, the options and shares of non-voting common stock
44
issuable upon the exercise of the options described in this
paragraph (c) of Item 15 were issued in reliance upon
the exemption from the registration requirements of the
Securities Act provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities
Act as sales by an issuer not involving any public offering.
All of the foregoing securities are deemed restricted securities
for purposes of the Securities Act. All certificates
representing the issued shares of voting common stock and
non-voting common stock described in paragraphs (a),
(b) and (c) of Item 15 included appropriate
legends setting forth that the securities had not been
registered and the applicable restrictions on transfer.
(d) Issuance
of Shares for Financial Advisory Services
Contemporaneously with the closing of our initial public
offering in May 2010, we issued shares of common stock to
Financial Technology Partners LP
and/or FTP
Securities LLC in partial payment of a fee due for financial
advisory services provided in connection with that offering. The
issuance of shares to Financial Technology Partners LP
and/or FTP
Securities LLC was exempt from registration under
Section 4(2) of the Securities Act.
Stock
Price Performance Graph
The following graph compares the change in the cumulative total
return (including the reinvestment of dividends) on our common
stock for the period from May 20, 2010, the date our shares
of common stock began trading on the NYSE, to the change in the
cumulative total return on the stocks included in the NYSE
Composite Index and Morningstar Healthcare Services Index over
the same period. The graph assumes an investment of $100 made in
our common stock at a price of $12.00 per share, the opening
sale price on May 20, 2010, our first day of trading
following our IPO, and an investment in each of the other
indices on May 20, 2010. We did not pay any dividends
during the period reflected in the graph.
COMPARISON
OF CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN
ASSUMES $100 INVESTED ON MAY 20, 2010
ASSUMES DIVIDEND REINVESTED
FISCAL YEAR ENDING DEC. 31, 2010
45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company/Market/Peer Group
|
|
|
5/20/2010
|
|
|
5/31/2010
|
|
|
6/30/2010
|
|
|
7/31/2010
|
|
|
8/31/2010
|
|
|
9/30/2010
|
|
|
10/31/2010
|
|
|
11/30/2010
|
|
|
12/31/2010
|
Accretive Health, Inc.
|
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
112.92
|
|
|
|
$
|
115.18
|
|
|
|
$
|
103.51
|
|
|
|
$
|
81.92
|
|
|
|
$
|
94.29
|
|
|
|
$
|
93.85
|
|
|
|
$
|
119.18
|
|
|
|
$
|
141.47
|
|
NYSE Composite Index
|
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
102.19
|
|
|
|
$
|
97.50
|
|
|
|
$
|
105.63
|
|
|
|
$
|
101.42
|
|
|
|
$
|
110.34
|
|
|
|
$
|
113.99
|
|
|
|
$
|
113.02
|
|
|
|
$
|
121.30
|
|
Morningstar Health Information Services
|
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
102.34
|
|
|
|
$
|
96.64
|
|
|
|
$
|
96.91
|
|
|
|
$
|
92.94
|
|
|
|
$
|
103.60
|
|
|
|
$
|
107.37
|
|
|
|
$
|
106.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
114.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The comparisons shown in the graph above are based on historical
data and we caution that the stock price performance shown in
the graph above is not indicative of, and is not intended to
forecast, the potential future performance of our common stock.
The information in this Performance Graph section
shall not be deemed to be soliciting material or to
be filed with the SEC, nor shall such information be
incorporated by reference into any future filing under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by
reference into such filing.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Consolidated Financial Data
|
The following tables summarize our consolidated financial data
for the periods presented. You should read the following
selected consolidated financial data in conjunction with our
financial statements and the related notes appearing at the end
of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
and the Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
We derived the statement of operations data for the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010 and the balance sheet data
as of December 31, 2009 and 2010 from our audited
consolidated financial statements, which are included in this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
We derived the statement of operations data for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2007 and the balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2006, 2007 and 2008 from our audited
consolidated financial statements, which are not included in
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
46
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net services revenue
|
|
$
|
160,741
|
|
|
$
|
240,725
|
|
|
$
|
398,469
|
|
|
$
|
510,192
|
|
|
$
|
606,294
|
|
Costs of services
|
|
|
141,767
|
|
|
|
197,676
|
|
|
|
335,211
|
|
|
|
410,711
|
|
|
|
478,276
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
18,974
|
|
|
|
43,049
|
|
|
|
63,258
|
|
|
|
99,481
|
|
|
|
128,018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infused management and technology
|
|
|
18,875
|
|
|
|
27,872
|
|
|
|
39,234
|
|
|
|
51,763
|
|
|
|
64,029
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
8,777
|
|
|
|
15,657
|
|
|
|
21,227
|
|
|
|
30,153
|
|
|
|
41,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
27,652
|
|
|
|
43,529
|
|
|
|
60,461
|
|
|
|
81,916
|
|
|
|
105,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(8,678
|
)
|
|
|
(480
|
)
|
|
|
2,797
|
|
|
|
17,565
|
|
|
|
22,318
|
|
Net interest income (expense)(1)
|
|
|
1,359
|
|
|
|
1,710
|
|
|
|
710
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(7,319
|
)
|
|
|
1,230
|
|
|
|
3,507
|
|
|
|
17,556
|
|
|
|
22,347
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
456
|
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
|
|
9,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(7,319
|
)
|
|
$
|
774
|
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic:
|
|
$
|
(0.28
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
$
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
Diluted:
|
|
|
(0.28
|
)
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
0.13
|
|
Weighted-average shares used in computing net income (loss) per
common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic:
|
|
|
25,918,942
|
|
|
|
32,968,085
|
|
|
|
36,122,470
|
|
|
|
36,725,194
|
|
|
|
70,732,791
|
|
Diluted:
|
|
|
25,918,942
|
|
|
|
40,360,362
|
|
|
|
36,122,470
|
|
|
|
43,955,167
|
|
|
|
94,206,677
|
|
Other Operating Data (unaudited):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA(2)
|
|
$
|
(7,125
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,842
|
|
|
$
|
12,220
|
|
|
$
|
32,912
|
|
|
$
|
45,024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Projected contracted annual revenue run rate(3)
|
|
$
|
200 to $204
|
|
|
$
|
309 to $315
|
|
|
$
|
421 to $430
|
|
|
$
|
509 to $519
|
|
|
$
|
698 to $713
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
20,782
|
|
|
$
|
34,745
|
|
|
$
|
51,656
|
|
|
$
|
43,659
|
|
|
$
|
155,573
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
(2,445
|
)
|
|
|
8,010
|
|
|
|
(3,453
|
)
|
|
|
(4,122
|
)
|
|
|
109,757
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
27,333
|
|
|
|
60,858
|
|
|
|
86,904
|
|
|
|
103,472
|
|
|
|
262,619
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
3,166
|
|
|
$
|
15,910
|
|
|
$
|
7,923
|
|
|
$
|
21,279
|
|
|
|
142,719
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Interest income results from earnings associated with our cash
and cash equivalents. Interest income declined subsequent to
2007 due to reductions in market interest rates. No debt or
other interest-bearing obligations were outstanding during any
of the periods presented. Interest expense for 2009 is a result
of a |
47
|
|
|
|
|
$150 origination fee paid in connection with establishing our
new revolving line of credit and has been shown net of interest
income earned during the year. |
|
(2) |
|
We define adjusted EBITDA as net income (loss) before net
interest income (expense), income tax expense (benefit),
depreciation and amortization expense and share-based
compensation expense. Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial
measure and should not be considered as an alternative to net
income, operating income and any other measure of financial
performance calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. |
We believe adjusted EBITDA is useful to investors in evaluating
our operating performance for the following reasons:
|
|
|
|
|
adjusted EBITDA and similar non-GAAP measures are widely used by
investors to measure a companys operating performance
without regard to items that can vary substantially from company
to company depending upon financing and accounting methods, book
values of assets, capital structures and the methods by which
assets were acquired;
|
|
|
|
securities analysts often use adjusted EBITDA and similar
non-GAAP measures as supplemental measures to evaluate the
overall operating performance of companies; and
|
|
|
|
by comparing our adjusted EBITDA in different historical
periods, our investors can evaluate our operating results
without the additional variations of interest income (expense),
income tax expense (benefit), depreciation and amortization
expense and share-based compensation expense.
|
Our management uses adjusted EBITDA:
|
|
|
|
|
as a measure of operating performance, because it does not
include the impact of items that we do not consider indicative
of our core operating performance;
|
|
|
|
for planning purposes, including the preparation of our annual
operating budget;
|
|
|
|
to allocate resources to enhance the financial performance of
our business;
|
|
|
|
to evaluate the effectiveness of our business
strategies; and
|
|
|
|
in communications with our board of directors and investors
concerning our financial performance.
|
We understand that, although measures similar to adjusted EBITDA
are frequently used by investors and securities analysts in
their evaluation of companies, adjusted EBITDA has limitations
as an analytical tool, and you should not consider it in
isolation or as a substitute for analysis of our results of
operations as reported under GAAP. Some of these limitations are:
|
|
|
|
|
adjusted EBITDA does not reflect our cash expenditures or future
requirements for capital expenditures or other contractual
commitments;
|
|
|
|
adjusted EBITDA does not reflect changes in, or cash
requirements for, our working capital needs;
|
|
|
|
adjusted EBITDA does not reflect share-based compensation
expense;
|
|
|
|
adjusted EBITDA does not reflect cash requirements for income
taxes;
|
|
|
|
adjusted EBITDA does not reflect net interest income
(expense); and
|
|
|
|
other companies in our industry may calculate adjusted EBITDA
differently than we do, limiting its usefulness as a comparative
measure.
|
To properly and prudently evaluate our business, we encourage
you to review the GAAP financial statements included elsewhere
in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
and not to rely on any single financial measure to evaluate our
business.
48
The following table presents a reconciliation of adjusted EBITDA
to net income, the most comparable GAAP measure:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(7,319
|
)
|
|
$
|
774
|
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
Net interest (income) expense(a)
|
|
|
(1,359
|
)
|
|
|
(1,710
|
)
|
|
|
(710
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
456
|
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
|
|
9,729
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
626
|
|
|
|
1,307
|
|
|
|
2,540
|
|
|
|
3,921
|
|
|
|
6,157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
$
|
(8,052
|
)
|
|
$
|
827
|
|
|
$
|
5,337
|
|
|
$
|
21,486
|
|
|
$
|
28,475
|
|
Stock compensation expense(b)
|
|
|
844
|
|
|
|
934
|
|
|
|
3,551
|
|
|
|
6,917
|
|
|
|
16,549
|
|
Stock warrant expense(b)
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
5,081
|
|
|
|
3,332
|
|
|
|
4,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
|
$
|
(7,125
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,842
|
|
|
$
|
12,220
|
|
|
$
|
32,912
|
|
|
$
|
45,024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
See footnote 1 above. |
|
(b) |
|
Stock compensation expense and stock warrant expense
collectively represent the share-based compensation expense
reflected in our financial statements. Of the amounts presented
above, $928, $921 and $1,736 was classified as a reduction in
net services revenue for the years ended December 31, 2007,
2008 and 2009, respectively. No such reduction was recorded for
the year ended December 31, 2010 as all warrants had been
earned and therefore there was no stock warrant expense. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
We define our projected contracted annual revenue run rate as
the expected total net services revenue for the subsequent
12 months for all healthcare providers for which we are
providing services under contract. We believe that our projected
contracted annual revenue run rate is a useful method to measure
our overall business volume at a point in time and changes in
the volume of our business over time because it eliminates the
timing impact associated with the signing of new contracts
during a specific quarterly or annual period. Actual revenues
may differ from the projected amounts used for purposes of
calculating projected contracted annual revenue run rate
because, among other factors, the scope of services provided to
existing customers may change and the incentive fees we earn may
be more or less than expected depending on our ability to
achieve projected increases in our customers net revenue
yield and projected reductions in the total medical cost of the
customers patient populations. See Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Overview Our Background
for more information. |
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our
financial condition and results of operations together with our
financial statements and the related notes and other financial
information included elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Some of the information contained in this discussion and
analysis or set forth elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
including information with respect to our plans and strategy for
our business and related financing, includes forward-looking
statements that involve risks and uncertainties. You should
review the Risk Factors section of this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
for a discussion of important factors that could cause actual
results to differ materially from the results described in or
implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the
following discussion and analysis.
Overview
Our
Background
Accretive Health is a leading provider of services that help
healthcare providers generate sustainable improvements in their
operating margins and healthcare quality while also improving
patient, physician and staff satisfaction. Our core service
offering helps U.S. healthcare providers to more
efficiently manage their revenue cycles, which encompass patient
registration, insurance and benefit verification, medical
treatment documentation and coding, bill preparation and
collections. Our quality and total cost of care service
offering,
49
introduced in 2010, can enable healthcare providers to
effectively manage the health of a defined patient population,
which we believe is a future direction of the manner in which
healthcare services will be delivered in the United States.
At December 31, 2010 we provided our integrated revenue
cycle service offering to 26 customers representing 66 hospitals
as well as physician billing organizations associated with
several of these customers, and our quality and total cost of
care service offering to one of these customers, representing
seven hospitals and 42 clinics.
Our integrated revenue cycle technology and services offering
spans the entire revenue cycle. We help our revenue cycle
customers increase the portion of the maximum potential patient
revenue they receive, while reducing total revenue cycle costs.
Our quality and total cost of care solution can help our
customers identify the individuals who are most likely to
experience an adverse health event and, as a result, incur high
healthcare costs in the coming year. This data allows providers
to focus greater efforts on managing these patients within and
across the delivery system, as well as at home.
Our customers typically are multi-hospital systems, including
faith-based or community healthcare systems, academic medical
centers and independent ambulatory clinics, and their affiliated
physician practice groups. To implement our solutions, we assume
full responsibility for the management and cost of the
operations we have contracted to manage and supplement the
customers existing staff involved in such operations with
seasoned Accretive Health personnel. A customers revenue
improvements and cost savings generally increase over time as we
deploy additional programs and as the programs we implement
become more effective, which in turn provides visibility into
our future revenue and profitability. In 2010, for example,
approximately 87% of our net services revenue, and nearly all of
our net income, was derived from customer contracts that were in
place as of January 1, 2010.
Our revenue cycle management services customers have
historically achieved significant net revenue yield improvements
within 18 to 24 months of implementing our solution, with
such customers operating under mature managed service contracts
typically realizing 400 to 600 basis points in yield
improvements in the third or fourth contract year. All of a
customers yield improvements during the period we are
providing services are attributed to our solution because we
assume full responsibility for the management of the
customers revenue cycle. Our methodology for measuring
yield improvements excludes the impact of external factors such
as changes in reimbursement rates from payors, the expansion of
existing services or addition of new services, volume increases
and acquisitions of hospitals or physician practices, which may
impact net revenue but are not considered changes to net revenue
yield.
We and our customers share financial gains resulting from our
solutions, which directly aligns our objectives and interests
with those of our customers. Both we and our customers
benefit on a contractually
agreed-upon
basis from net revenue increases realized by the
customers as a result of our services. To date, we have
experienced a contract renewal rate of 100% (excluding
exploratory new service offerings, a consensual termination
following a change of control and a customer reorganization).
Coupled with the long-term nature of our managed service
contracts and the fixed nature of the base fees under each
contract, our historical renewal experience provides a core
source of recurring revenue.
We believe that current macroeconomic conditions will continue
to impose financial pressure on healthcare providers and will
increase the importance of managing their operations effectively
and efficiently. Additionally, the continued operating pressures
facing U.S. hospitals coupled with some of the underlying
themes of healthcare reform legislation enacted in March 2010
make the efficient management of the revenue cycle, including
collection of the full amount of payments due for patient
services, and quality and total cost of care initiatives, among
the most critical challenges facing healthcare providers today.
Our corporate headquarters are located in Chicago, Illinois, and
we operate shared services centers and offices in Michigan,
Illinois, Missouri, Florida and India. As of December 31,
2010, we had 1,991 full-time employees and
231 part-time employees, and managed approximately 8,200 of
our customers employees who are involved in patient
registration, health management information, procedure coding,
billing and collections.
50
We refer to these functions collectively as the revenue cycle,
and to the personnel involved in a customers revenue cycle
as revenue cycle staff.
In evaluating our business performance, our management monitors
various financial and non-financial metrics. On a monthly basis,
our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and other
senior leaders monitor our projected contracted annual revenue
run rate (as described below), net patient revenue under
management, aggregate net services revenue, revenue cycle
operating costs, corporate-level operating expenses, cash flow
and adjusted EBITDA. When appropriate, decisions are made
regarding action steps to improve these overall operational
measures. Our senior operational leaders also monitor the
performance of each customers revenue cycle or quality and
total cost of care operations through ten to twelve
hospital-specific operating reviews each year. Such reviews
typically focus on planned and actual operating results being
achieved on behalf of our customers, progress against our
operating metrics and planned and actual operating costs for
that site. During these regular reviews, our senior operational
leaders communicate to the operating teams suggestions to
improve contract and operations performance and monitor the
results of previous efforts. In addition, our senior management
also monitors our ability to attract, hire and retain a
sufficient number of talented employees to staff our growing
business, and the development and performance of our proprietary
technology.
We define our projected contracted annual revenue run rate, or
PCARRR, as the total net services revenue we expect to receive
during the subsequent twelve months from all customers under
contract. We report PCARRR as a range as it includes estimates
concerning our relative success in achieving incentive based
payments over the next 12 months. We believe that PCARRR is
a useful method to measure our overall business volume at a
point in time and changes in the volume of our business over
time because it eliminates the timing impact of contract
signings within a specific quarterly or annual period.
By way of example, we generally expect that the annual revenues
for our revenue cycle management services at contract maturity
(which is generally reached in three and one-half to four years)
for a representative hospital customer with $1 billion in
net patient revenues will be approximately 5% of the
providers net patient revenue, or approximately
$50 million, consisting of $40 million of base fees,
net of cost savings shared with the customer, and
$10 million of incentive fees. For the same representative
hospital customer for our quality and total cost of care service
offering, which we introduced in 2010, we currently expect that
the annual revenues will be approximately $60 million,
consisting of up to $10 million in base fees and up to
$50 million in incentive fees. We generally expect our
incentive fees to improve over time as we introduce additional
aspects of our operating model and as our predictive analytics
improve with additional customer-specific details. Therefore, we
generally expect our PCARRR for a specific customer engagement
to increase annually until the contract is operating at maturity
levels.
Seasonality
Our quarterly and annual net services revenue generally
increased each period due to ongoing expansion in the number of
hospitals subject to managed service contracts with us and
increases in the amount of incentive payments earned. The timing
of customer additions is not uniform throughout the year. We
also experience fluctuations in incentive payments as a result
of patients ability to accelerate or defer elective
procedures, particularly around holidays such as Thanksgiving
and Christmas. Generally, incentive payments earned are lower in
the first quarter of each year and higher in the fourth quarter
of each year. For example, incentive payments in the quarter
ended March 31, 2010 were $12.3 million, or only 61%
of the $20.2 million earned in the quarter ended
December 31, 2009. As a result of incentive payment
fluctuations, our adjusted EBITDA is typically lower in the
first quarter of each fiscal year. For example, our adjusted
EBITDA of $4.4 million for the quarter ended March 31,
2010 represented less than 10% of our $45.0 million of
adjusted EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2010. We
expect this seasonality to continue in our business and we
believe that first quarter adjusted EBITDA will average
approximately 10% of full fiscal year adjusted EBITDA for the
foreseeable future; provided, however, that due to the factors
described above, as well as other factors, some of which may be
beyond our control, our actual results could differ materially
from these estimates.
51
Net
Services Revenue
We derive our net services revenue primarily from service
contracts under which we manage our customers revenue
cycle or quality and total cost of care operations. Revenues
from managed service contracts consist of base fees and
incentive payments:
|
|
|
|
|
Base fee revenues represent our contractually-agreed annual fees
for managing and overseeing our customers revenue cycle or
quality and total cost of care operations. Following a
comprehensive review of a customers operations, the
customers base fees are tailored to its specific
circumstances and the extent of the customers operations
for which we are assuming operational responsibility; we do not
have standardized fee arrangements.
|
|
|
|
Incentive payment revenues for revenue cycle management services
represent the amounts we receive by increasing our
customers net patient revenue and identifying potential
payment sources for patients who are uninsured and underinsured.
These payments are governed by specific formulas contained in
the managed service contract with each of our customers. In
general, we earn incentive payments by increasing a
customers actual cash yield as a percentage of the
contractual amount owed to such customer for the healthcare
services provided.
|
|
|
|
Incentive payment revenues for quality and total cost of care
services will represent our share of the provider community cost
savings for our role in providing the technology infrastructure
and for managing the care coordination process.
|
In addition, we earn revenue from other services, which
primarily include our share of revenues associated with the
collection of dormant patient accounts (more than 365 days
old) under some of our service contracts. We also receive
revenue from other services provided to customers that are not
part of our integrated service offerings, such as
procedure-by-procedure
fee schedule reviews, physician advisory services or consulting
on the billing for individuals receiving emergency room
treatment.
Some of our service contracts entitle customers to receive a
share of the cost savings we achieve from operating their
revenue cycle. This share is returned to customers as a
reduction in subsequent base fees. Our services revenue is
reported net of cost sharing, and we refer to this as our net
services revenue.
The following table summarizes the composition of our net
services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2010 on a
percentage basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Net base fees for managed service contracts
|
|
|
86
|
%
|
Incentive payments for managed service contracts
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
Other services
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net base fee and incentive payments were exclusively related to
our revenue cycle management services in 2010. We were unable to
record revenues for the benefits that may have been achieved in
our quality and total cost of care services contract as the
amounts were not yet sufficiently fixed and determinable to
qualify for revenue recognition under our accounting policy. See
Results of Operations for more information.
Costs
of Services
Under our managed service contracts, we assume responsibility
for all costs necessary to conduct the customers revenue
cycle or quality and total cost of care operations that we have
contracted to manage. Costs of services consist primarily of the
salaries and benefits of the customers employees engaged
in activities which are included in our contract and who are
managed
on-site by
us, the salaries and benefits of our employees who are engaged
in similar activities, the costs associated with vendors that
provide services
52
integral to the services we are contracted to manage and the
costs associated with operating our shared services centers.
Under our managed service contracts, we assume responsibility
for the costs necessary to conduct the customers revenue
cycle or quality and total cost of care operations that we have
contracted to manage. Costs of services consist primarily of:
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits of the customers employees engaged
in activities which are included in our contract and who are
assigned to work
on-site with
us. Under our contracts with our customers, we are responsible
for the cost of the salaries and benefits for these employees of
our customers. Salaries are paid and benefits are provided to
such individuals directly by the customer, instead of adding
these individuals to our payroll, because these individuals
remain employees of our customers.
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits of our employees in our shared services
centers (these individuals are distinct from
on-site
infused management discussed below) and the
non-payroll costs associated with operating our shared service
centers.
|
|
|
|
Costs associated with vendors that provide services integral to
the customers services we are contracted to manage.
|
Costs of services were exclusively related to our revenue cycle
management services in 2010.
Operating
Margin
Operating margin is equal to net services revenue less costs of
services. Our operating model is designed to improve margin
under each managed service contract as the contract matures, for
several reasons:
|
|
|
|
|
We typically enhance the productivity of a customers
revenue cycle operations over time as we fully implement our
technology and procedures and because any overlap between costs
of our shared services centers and costs of hospital operations
targeted for transition is generally concentrated in the first
year of the contract.
|
|
|
|
Incentive payments under each managed service contract generally
increase over time as we deploy additional programs and the
programs we implement become more effective and produce improved
results for our customers.
|
Infused
Management and Technology Expenses
We refer to our management and staff employees that we devote
on-site to
customer operations as infused management. Infused management
and technology expenses consist primarily of the wages, bonuses,
benefits, share based compensation, travel and other costs
associated with deploying our employees on customer sites to
guide and manage our customers revenue cycle or population
health management operations. The employees we deploy on
customer sites typically have significant experience in revenue
cycle operations, core coordination, technology, quality control
or other management disciplines. The other significant portion
of these expenses is an allocation of the costs associated with
maintaining, improving and deploying our integrated proprietary
technology suite and an allocation of the costs previously
capitalized for developing our integrated proprietary technology
suite.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily
of expenses for executive, sales, corporate information
technology, legal, regulatory compliance, finance and human
resources personnel, including wages, bonuses, benefits and
share-based compensation; fees for professional services;
share-based expense for stock warrants; insurance premiums;
facility charges; and other corporate expenses. Professional
services consist primarily of external legal, tax and audit
services. The costs of developing the processes and technology
for our emerging quality and total cost of care service offering
prior to November 2010 when we signed our inaugural client are
also included in selling, general and administrative expenses.
We expect selling, general and administrative expenses to
increase in absolute dollars as we continue to add information
53
technology, human resources, finance, accounting and other
administrative personnel as we expand our business.
We also expect to incur additional professional fees and other
expenses resulting from future expansion and the compliance
requirements of operating as a public company, including
increased audit and legal expenses, investor relations expenses,
increased insurance expenses, particularly for directors
and officers liability insurance, and the costs of
complying with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. While
these costs may initially increase as a percentage of our net
services revenue, we expect that in the future these expenses
will increase at a slower rate than our overall business volume,
and that they will eventually represent a smaller percentage of
our net services revenue.
Although we cannot predict future changes to the laws and
regulations affecting us or the healthcare industry generally,
we do not expect that any associated changes to our compliance
programs will have a material effect on our selling, general and
administrative expenses.
Interest
Income (Expense)
Interest income is derived from the return achieved from our
cash balances. We invest primarily in highly liquid, short-term
investments, primarily those insured by the
U.S. government. Interest expense for the year ended
December 31, 2009 resulted from origination fees associated
with our revolving line of credit, which we entered into on
September 30, 2009.
Income
Taxes
Income tax expense consists of federal and state income taxes in
the United States and India. Although we had net operating loss
carryforwards in 2008, our effective tax rate in 2008 was
approximately 65%. This was due principally to the fact that a
large portion of our operations is conducted in Michigan, which
in 2008 began to impose a tax based on gross receipts in
addition to tax based on net income. Although we continued to
pay the Michigan gross receipts tax in 2009, our effective tax
rate declined to approximately 17% in 2009, principally due to
the release of $3.5 million of valuation allowances for
deferred tax assets. Our effective tax rate in 2010 was 44% due
principally to the gross receipts taxes paid to the State of
Michigan and, to a lesser extent, other states. In the summer of
2010, a change in legislation substantially reduced the
requirement for us to pay taxes on any future gross receipts in
Michigan. We expect our overall effective tax rate to be
approximately 40% in future years because we have minimal net
operating loss carryforwards and the impact of the various
remaining state gross receipts taxes will become less
significant in relation to other income-based taxes. We also
expect our income tax expense to increase in absolute dollars as
our income increases.
Application
of Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Estimates
Our consolidated financial statements reflect the assets,
liabilities and results of operations of Accretive Health, Inc.
and our wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions
and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. Our
consolidated financial statements have been prepared in
accordance with GAAP.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP
requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the
amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements and
the accompanying notes. We regularly evaluate the accounting
policies and estimates we use. In general, we base estimates on
historical experience and on assumptions that we believe to be
reasonable given our operating environment. Estimates are based
on our best knowledge of current events and the actions we may
undertake in the future. Although we believe all adjustments
considered necessary for fair presentation have been included,
our actual results may differ materially from our estimates.
We believe that the accounting policies described below involve
our more significant judgments, assumptions and estimates and,
therefore, could have the greatest potential impact on our
consolidated financial statements. In addition, we believe that
a discussion of these policies is necessary to understand and
evaluate the consolidated financial statements contained in this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
For further
54
information on our critical and other significant accounting
policies, see note 2 to our consolidated financial
statements contained elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Revenue
Recognition
Our managed service contracts generally have an initial term of
four to five years and various start and end dates. After the
initial terms, these contracts renew annually unless canceled by
either party. Revenue from managed service contracts consists of
base fees and incentive payments.
We record revenue in accordance with the provisions of Staff
Accounting Bulletin 104. As a result, we only record
revenue once there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement,
services have been rendered, the amount of revenue has become
fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured.
We recognize base fee revenues on a straight-line basis over the
life of the managed service contract. Base fees for contracts
which are received in advance of services delivered are
classified as deferred revenue in the consolidated balance
sheets until services have been provided.
Some of our service contracts entitle customers to receive a
share of the cost savings achieved from operating their revenue
cycle. This share is credited to the customers as a reduction in
subsequent base fees. Services revenue is reported net of cost
sharing and is referred to as net services revenue.
Our managed service contracts generally allow for adjustments to
the base fee. Adjustments typically occur at 90, 180 or
360 days after the contract commences, but can also occur
at subsequent dates as a result of factors including changes to
the scope of operations and internal and external audits. All
adjustments, the timing of which is often dependent on factors
outside our control and which can increase or decrease revenue
and operating margin, are recorded in the period the changes are
known and collectibility of any additional fees is reasonably
assured. Any such adjustments may cause our
quarter-to-quarter
results of operations to fluctuate. Adjustments may vary in
direction, frequency and magnitude and generally have not
materially affected our annual revenue trends, margin trends,
and visibility.
We record revenue for incentive payments once the calculation of
the incentive payment earned is finalized and collectibility is
reasonably assured. We use a proprietary technology and
methodology to calculate the amount of benefit each customer
receives as a result of our services. Our calculations are based
in part on the amount of revenue each customer is entitled to
receive from commercial and private insurance carriers,
Medicare, Medicaid and patients. Because the laws, regulations,
instructions, payor contracts and rule interpretations governing
how our customers receive payments from these parties are
complex and change frequently, estimates of a customers
prior period benefits could change. All changes in estimates are
recorded when new information is available and calculations are
completed.
Incentive payments are based on the benefits a customer has
received throughout the life of the managed service contract
with us. Each quarter, we record the increase in the total
benefits received to date. If a quarterly calculation indicates
that the cumulative benefits to date have decreased, we record a
reduction in revenue. If the decrease in revenue exceeds the
amount previously paid by the customer, the excess is recorded
as deferred revenue.
Our services also include collection of dormant patient accounts
receivable that have aged 365 days or more directly from
individual patients. We share all cash generated from these
collections with our customers in accordance with specified
arrangements. We record as revenue our portion of the cash
received from these collections when each customers cash
application is complete.
Accounts
Receivable and Allowance for Uncollectible
Accounts
Base fees and incentive payments are billed to customers
quarterly. Base fees received prior to when services are
delivered are classified as deferred revenue.
We assess our customers creditworthiness as a part of our
customer acceptance process. We maintain an estimated allowance
for doubtful accounts to reduce our gross accounts receivable to
the amount that we
55
believe will be collected. This allowance is based on our
historical experience, our continuing assessment of each
customers ability to pay and the status of any ongoing
operations with each applicable customer.
We perform quarterly reviews and analyses of each
customers outstanding balance and assess, on an
account-by-account
basis, whether the allowance for doubtful accounts needs to be
adjusted based on currently available evidence such as
historical collection experience, current economic trends and
changes in customer payment terms. In accordance with our
policy, if collection efforts have been pursued and all avenues
for collections exhausted, accounts receivable would be written
off as uncollectible.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
We record our financial assets and liabilities at fair value.
The accounting standard for fair value (i) defines fair
value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or
paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date,
(ii) establishes a framework for measuring fair value,
(iii) establishes a hierarchy of fair value measurements
based upon the observability of inputs used to value assets and
liabilities, (iv) requires consideration of nonperformance
risk, and (v) expands disclosures about the methods used to
measure fair value.
The accounting standard establishes a three-level hierarchy of
measurements based upon the reliability of observable and
unobservable inputs used to arrive at fair value. Observable
inputs are independent market data, while unobservable inputs
reflect our assumptions about valuation. The three levels of the
hierarchy are defined as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1: Observable inputs such as quoted
prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities;
|
|
|
|
Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices
but are observable for the asset or liability, either directly
or indirectly. These include quoted prices for similar assets or
liabilities in active markets and quoted prices for identical or
similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active;
and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and
significant value drivers are observable in active
markets; and
|
|
|
|
Level 3: Valuations derived from
valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or
significant value drivers are unobservable.
|
Our financial assets which are required to be measured at fair
value on a recurring basis consist of cash and cash equivalents,
which are invested in highly liquid money market funds and
treasury securities and accordingly classified as level 1
assets in the fair value hierarchy. We do not have any financial
liabilities which are required to be measured at fair value on a
recurring basis.
Software
Development
We apply the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification, or
ASC, 350-40,
Intangibles Goodwill and Other
Internal-Use Software, which requires the capitalization of
costs incurred in connection with developing or obtaining
internal use software. In accordance with
ASC 350-40,
we capitalize the costs of internally-developed, internal use
software when an application is in the development stage. This
generally occurs after the overall design and functionality of
the application has been approved and our management has
committed to the applications development. Capitalized
software development costs consist of payroll and
payroll-related costs for employee time spent developing a
specific internal use software application or related
enhancements, and external costs incurred that are related
directly to the development of a specific software application.
Goodwill
Goodwill represents the excess purchase price over the net
assets acquired for a business that we acquired in May 2006. In
accordance with ASC 350, Intangibles
Goodwill and Other, goodwill is not subject to amortization
but is subject to impairment testing at least annually. Our
annual impairment assessment date is the first day of our fourth
quarter. We conduct our impairment testing on a company-wide
basis because we
56
have only one operating and reporting segment. Our impairment
tests are based on our current business strategy in light of
present industry and economic conditions and future
expectations. As we apply our judgment to estimate future cash
flows and an appropriate discount rate, the analysis reflects
assumptions and uncertainties. Our estimates of future cash
flows could differ from actual results. Our most recent
impairment assessment did not result in goodwill impairment.
Impairments
of Long-Lived Assets
We evaluate all of our long-lived assets, such as furniture,
equipment, software and other intangibles, for impairment in
accordance with ASC 360, Property, Plant and
Equipment, when events or changes in circumstances warrant
such a review. If an evaluation is required, the estimated
future undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset are
compared to the assets carrying amount to determine if an
adjustment to fair value is required.
Income
Taxes
We record deferred tax assets and liabilities for future income
tax consequences that are attributable to differences between
the carrying amount of assets and liabilities for financial
statement purposes and the income tax bases of such assets and
liabilities. We base the measurement of deferred tax assets and
liabilities on enacted tax rates that we expect will apply to
taxable income in the year we expect to settle or recover those
temporary differences. We recognize the effect on deferred
income tax assets and liabilities of any change in income tax
rates in the period that includes the enactment date. We provide
a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets if, based upon the
available evidence, it is more likely than not that some or all
of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.
As of December 31, 2008 and in all prior periods, a
valuation allowance was provided for all of our net deferred tax
assets. As a result of our improved operations, in 2009 we
determined that it was no longer necessary to maintain a
valuation allowance for all of our deferred tax assets.
At December 31, 2009 and 2010, the primary sources of our
deferred taxes were:
|
|
|
|
|
differences in timing of depreciation on fixed assets;
|
|
|
|
the timing of revenue recognition arising from incentive
payments;
|
|
|
|
employee compensation expense arising from stock
options; and
|
|
|
|
costs associated with the issuance of warrants to purchase
shares of our common stock.
|
Beginning January 1, 2008, with the adoption of
ASC 740-10,
Income Taxes Overall, we recognize the
financial statement effects of a tax position only when it is
more likely than not that the position will be sustained upon
examination. Tax positions taken or expected to be taken that
are not recognized under the pronouncement are recorded as
liabilities. Interest and penalties relating to income taxes are
recognized in our income tax provision in the statements of
consolidated operations.
Share-Based
Compensation Expense
Our share-based compensation expense results from issuances of
shares of restricted common stock and grants of stock options
and warrants to employees, directors, outside consultants,
customers, vendors and others. We recognize the costs associated
with option and warrant grants using the fair value recognition
provisions of ASC 718, Compensation Stock
Compensation. Generally, ASC 718 requires the value of
share-based payments to be recognized in the statement of
operations based on their estimated fair value at date of grant
amortized over the grants vesting period.
Restricted Stock Plan. Our restricted
stock plan was adopted by our board of directors in March 2004,
amended in June 2004, August 2004 and February 2005. As of
February 28, 2011, all shares of common stock
57
outstanding under our restricted stock plan were vested. We made
the following grants to employees, directors and consultants
under the restricted stock plan:
|
|
|
|
|
In June 2004, we issued shares of common stock to certain
employees and directors. In January 2005, we issued additional
shares of common stock to a member of our board of directors.
These shares vested on various schedules ranging from immediate
vesting to vesting over a period of 48 months. As a result,
we recorded share-based compensation expense of $2,328 in 2008.
We did not record any share-based compensation expense in 2009
or 2010 relating to these issuances.
|
Ascension Health Stock and Warrants. In
October 2004, Ascension Health became our founding customer.
Since then, in exchange for its initial
start-up
assistance and subsequent sales and marketing assistance, we
have issued common stock and granted warrants to Ascension
Health, as described below:
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Stock Issuance and Protection Warrant
Agreement. In October and November 2004, we
issued 3,537,306 shares of common stock to Ascension
Health, then representing a 5% ownership interest in our company
on a fully-diluted basis, and entered into a protection warrant
agreement under which Ascension Health was granted the right to
purchase additional shares of common stock from time to time for
$0.003 per share when Ascension Healths ownership interest
in our company declined below 5% due to our issuance of
additional stock or rights to purchase stock. The protection
warrant agreement expired on the closing of our initial public
offering in May 2010. We made the initial stock grant and
entered into the protection warrant agreement because Ascension
Health agreed to provide us with an operational laboratory and
related
start-up
consulting services in connection with our development of our
initial revenue cycle management service offering.
|
In 2008 and 2009, we granted Ascension Health the right to
purchase 91,183 and 136,372 shares of common stock for
$0.003 per share, respectively, pursuant to the protection
warrant agreement. We accounted for the costs associated with
these purchase rights as a reduction in base fee revenues due to
us from Ascension Health because we could not reasonably
estimate the fair value of the services provided by Ascension
Health. Accordingly, we reduced the amount of our base fee
revenues from Ascension Health by $0.9 million and
$1.7 million in 2008 and 2009, respectively. There were no
grants associated with this agreement during 2010 and no costs
were recorded. As of December 31, 2010, there were no
protection warrants outstanding and no additional warrant rights
may be earned under this agreement. For additional information
regarding our relationship with Ascension Health, see
Related Person Transactions Transactions With
Ascension Health.
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Warrant. Pursuant to a
supplemental warrant agreement that became effective in November
2004, Ascension Health had the right to purchase up to
3,537,306 shares of our common stock based upon the
achievement of specified milestones relating to its sales and
marketing assistance. The supplemental warrant agreement expired
on the closing of our initial public offering in May 2010.
|
During March 2008, Ascension Health earned the right to purchase
437,268 shares of common stock for $10.25 per share, and we
recorded $2.4 million in marketing expense.
During March 2009, Ascension Health earned the right to purchase
437,264 shares of common stock for $13.02 per share, and we
recorded $2.8 million in marketing expense. No warrants
were earned during year ended December 31, 2010. Ascension
Health was issued 615,649 shares of common stock as a
result of cashless exercise of outstanding supplemental warrants
during the year ended December 31, 2010. The supplemental
warrant with respect to 437,264 shares of common stock
expired in connection with our initial public offering.
As of December 31, 2010, there were no supplemental
warrants outstanding; no additional warrant rights may be earned
under the Supplemental Warrant Agreement.
Licensing and Consulting Warrant. In
conjunction with the start of our business, in February 2004, we
executed a term sheet with a consulting firm and its principal,
Zimmerman LLC (formerly known as Zimmerman and Associates) and
Michael Zimmerman, respectively, contemplating that we would
grant to Mr. Zimmerman a warrant, with an exercise price
equal to the fair market value of our common stock upon
58
grant, to purchase shares of our common stock then representing
2.5% of our equity in exchange for exclusive rights to certain
revenue cycle methodologies, tools, technology, benchmarking
information and other intellectual property, plus up to another
2.5% of our equity at the time of grant if the firms
introduction of us to senior executives at prospective customers
resulted in the execution of managed service contracts between
us and such customers. In January 2005, we formalized the
license and warrant grant contemplated by the term sheet and
granted to Mr. Zimmerman a warrant to purchase
3,266,668 shares of our common stock for $0.29 per share,
representing 5% of our equity at that time. In 2005, we recorded
$0.5 million in selling, general and administrative expense
in conjunction with this warrant grant. Mr. Zimmerman
subsequently assigned certain of the warrant rights to trusts,
the beneficiaries of which are members of
Mr. Zimmermans immediate family. In December 2010,
Mr. Zimmerman and the trusts exercised the warrant rights
in full to purchase 3,266,668 shares of our common stock
for $0.29 per share. As of December 31, 2010, the warrant
was no longer outstanding and no additional warrant rights may
be earned under this agreement.
We used the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the
estimated fair value of the above purchase rights at the date
earned. The following table sets forth the significant
assumptions used in the model during 2008 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
Future dividends
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
3.45%
|
|
2.91%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
50%
|
|
50%
|
Expected life(1)
|
|
6.6 years
|
|
5.6 years
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Expected life applies to Ascension Healths supplemental
warrant only, since the other warrants were fully vested upon
grant. |
Stock Option Plans. In December 2005,
our board of directors approved a stock option plan, which
provided for the grant of stock options to employees, directors
and consultants. The plan was amended and restated in February
2006 and further amended in May 2007, October 2008, January 2009
and November 2009. In April 2010, we adopted a new 2010 stock
incentive plan, or the 2010 plan, which became effective
immediately prior to the closing of our initial public offering
and, accordingly, no further stock option grants will be made
under the 2006 plan. The 2010 plan provides for the grant of
incentive stock options, non-statutory stock options, restricted
stock awards and other stock-based awards.
As of December 31, 2010, an aggregate of
15,749,404 shares were subject to outstanding options under
both plans, and 8,054,762 shares were available for grant.
To the extent that previously granted awards under the 2006 plan
or 2010 plan expire, terminate or are otherwise surrendered,
cancelled, forfeited, or repurchased by us, the number of shares
available for future awards under the 2010 plan will increase,
up to a maximum of 24,374,756 shares. Under the terms of
both plans, all options will expire if they are not exercised
within ten years after the grant date. Substantially all of the
options vest over four years at a rate of 25% per year on each
grant anniversary date. Options granted under the 2006 plan can
be exercised immediately upon grant, but upon exercise the
shares issued are subject to the same vesting and repurchase
provisions that applied before the exercise. Options granted
under the 2010 plan cannot be exercised prior to vesting.
We use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the
estimated fair value of each option as of its grant date. These
inputs are subjective and generally require significant analysis
and judgment to develop.
59
The following table sets forth the significant assumptions used
in the Black-Scholes model to calculate stock-based compensation
expense for grants made during 2008, 2009 and 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
Future dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
2.8 to 4.0%
|
|
1.6% to 3.2%
|
|
1.6% to 2.6%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
50%
|
|
50%
|
|
50%
|
Expected life
|
|
6.25 years
|
|
6.25 years
|
|
6.25 years
|
Forfeitures
|
|
3.75% annually
|
|
4.25% annually
|
|
4.25% annually
|
As a newly public company, it is not practical for us to
estimate the expected volatility of our share prices based on
our limited public trading history. Therefore, we estimated the
expected volatility by reviewing the historical volatility of
the common stock of public companies that operate in similar
industries or were similar in terms of stage of development or
size and then projecting this information toward our future
expected results. We used judgment in selecting these companies,
as well as in evaluating the available historical and implied
volatility for these companies.
We aggregated all employees into one pool for valuation
purposes. The risk-free rate is based on the U.S. treasury
yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The plan was not in existence a sufficient period for us to have
used our historical experience to estimate expected life.
Furthermore, data from other companies was not readily
available. Therefore, we estimated our stock options
expected life using a simplified method based on the average of
each options vesting term and original contractual term.
An estimated forfeiture rate derived from our historical data
and our estimates of the likely future actions of option holders
was applied when recognizing the share-based compensation
expense of the options.
We continue to use judgment in evaluating the expected term,
volatility and forfeiture rate related to our share-based
compensation on a prospective basis, and in incorporating these
factors into the Black-Scholes pricing model. Higher volatility
and longer expected lives result in an increase to total
share-based compensation expense determined at the date of
grant. In addition, any changes in the estimated forfeiture rate
can have a significant effect on reported share-based
compensation expense, as the cumulative effect of adjusting the
rate for all expense amortization is recognized in the period
that the forfeiture estimate is changed. If a revised forfeiture
rate is higher than the previously estimated forfeiture rate, an
adjustment is made that will result in a decrease to the
share-based compensation expense recognized in our consolidated
financial statements. If a revised forfeiture rate is lower than
the previously estimated forfeiture rate, an adjustment is made
that will result in an increase to the share based compensation
expense recognized in our consolidated financial statements.
These adjustments will affect our infused management and
technology expenses and selling, general and administrative
expenses.
For service-based equity awards, which represent all outstanding
option grants as of December 31, 2010, compensation expense
is recognized, net of forfeitures, using a straight-line method
over the applicable vesting period. Quarterly, the stock based
compensation expense is adjusted to reflect 100% of expense for
options that vested during the period. The allocation of this
cost between cost of services, selling, general and
administrative expenses and infused management and technology
expenses will depend on the salaries and work assignments of the
personnel holding these stock options.
Prior to our initial public offering, stock options represented
the right to purchase shares of our non-voting common stock. All
outstanding non-voting common stock converted into voting common
stock on a
share-for-share
basis effective May 19, 2010, and accordingly, stock
options to purchase non-voting common stock represent stock
options to purchase voting common stock, with no other changes
in their terms.
As of December 31, 2010, we had $52.0 million of total
unrecognized share-based compensation expense related to
employee stock options. We expect to recognize this cost over a
weighted-average period of 2.8 years after January 1,
2011. The allocation of this cost between cost of services,
selling, general and administrative
60
expenses and infused management and technology expenses will
depend on the salaries and work assignments of the personnel
holding these stock options.
Determination of Fair Value. Valuing the share
price of a privately-held company is complex. We believe that
prior to our initial public offering we used reasonable
methodologies, approaches and assumptions in assessing and
determining the fair value of our common stock for financial
reporting purposes. Prior to our initial public offering, we
determined the fair value of our common stock through periodic
internal valuations that were approved by our board of
directors. The fair value approved by our board was used for all
option grants until such time as a new determination of fair
value was made. To date, and as permitted by our stock option
plan, our chief executive officer has selected option recipients
and determined the number of shares covered by, and the timing
of, option grants.
Our stock valuations used a combination of the market-comparable
approach and the income approach to estimate an enterprise value
of our company at each valuation date. Our board considered the
following factors when determining the fair value of our common
stock:
|
|
|
|
|
our financial condition, sales levels and results of operations
during the relevant period;
|
|
|
|
developments in our business;
|
|
|
|
hiring of key personnel;
|
|
|
|
forecasts of our financial results and market conditions
affecting our industry;
|
|
|
|
market values, sales levels and results of operations for public
companies that we consider comparable in terms of size, service
offerings and maturity;
|
|
|
|
the superior rights and preferences of outstanding securities
that were senior to our common stock; and
|
|
|
|
the illiquid nature of our common stock
|
There is inherent uncertainty in the forecasts and projections
that were used in our common stock valuations prior to our
initial public offering. If we had made different assumptions
and estimates than those described above, the amount of our
share-based compensation expense, net income or loss and related
per-share amounts could have been materially different.
For grants following the initial public offering, we utilized
market-based share prices of our common stock in the
Black-Scholes option pricing model to calculate the fair value
of our common stock option awards. The Black-Scholes model
involves a number of highly subjective estimates such as the
length of time employees will retain their vested stock options
before exercising them (the expected term), the
estimated forfeitures over the applicable vesting period, and
the estimated volatility of our common common stock over the
expected term.
Legal
Proceedings
In the normal course of business, we are involved in legal
proceedings or regulatory investigations. We evaluate the need
for loss accruals using the requirements of ASC 450,
Contingencies. When conducting this evaluation we
consider factors such as the probability of an unfavorable
outcome and the ability to make a reasonable estimate of the
amount of loss. We record an estimated loss for any claim,
lawsuit, investigation or proceeding when it is probable that a
liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can
reasonably be estimated. If the reasonable estimate of a
probable loss is a range, and no amount within the range is a
better estimate, then we record the minimum amount in the range
as our loss accrual. If a loss is not probable or a probable
loss cannot be reasonably estimated, no liability is recorded.
61
Results
of Operations
The following table sets forth consolidated operating results
and other operating data for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net services revenue
|
|
$
|
398,469
|
|
|
$
|
510,192
|
|
|
$
|
606,294
|
|
Costs of services
|
|
|
335,211
|
|
|
|
410,711
|
|
|
|
478,276
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
63,258
|
|
|
|
99,481
|
|
|
|
128,018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infused management and technology expense
|
|
|
39,234
|
|
|
|
51,763
|
|
|
|
64,029
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expense
|
|
|
21,227
|
|
|
|
30,153
|
|
|
|
41,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
60,461
|
|
|
|
81,916
|
|
|
|
105,700
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
2,797
|
|
|
|
17,565
|
|
|
|
22,318
|
|
Net interest income (expense)
|
|
|
710
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before provision for income taxes
|
|
|
3,507
|
|
|
|
17,556
|
|
|
|
22,347
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
|
|
9,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expense Details:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infused management and technology expense, excluding
depreciation and amortization expense and share-based
compensation expense
|
|
$
|
35,079
|
|
|
$
|
45,365
|
|
|
$
|
53,230
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expense, excluding
depreciation and amortization expense and share-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
16,879
|
|
|
|
22,940
|
|
|
|
32,280
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense(1)
|
|
|
2,540
|
|
|
|
3,921
|
|
|
|
4,866
|
|
Share-based compensation expense(1)(2)
|
|
|
5,963
|
|
|
|
9,690
|
|
|
|
15,324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
$
|
60,461
|
|
|
$
|
81,916
|
|
|
$
|
105,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In 2010, as our shared services centers model adoption by
customers increased, we started allocating a portion of our
share-based compensation expense and depreciation and
amortization expense to cost of services. For the year ended
December 31, 2010, $1,291 of depreciation and amortization
expense was allocated to cost of services. |
|
(2) |
|
Share-based compensation expense includes share-based
compensation expense and warrant-related expense, exclusive of
warrant expense of $921 and $1,736 which was classified as a
reduction in base fee revenue for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2009, respectively. No such reduction
was recorded for the year ended December 31, 2010 as all
warrants had been earned and therefore there was no stock
warrant expense. For the year ended December 31, 2010,
$1,225 of share-based compensation expense was allocated to cost
of services. |
62
Year
Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2010
Net
Services Revenue
The following table summarizes the composition of our net
services revenue for the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Net base fees for managed service contracts
|
|
$
|
434,281
|
|
|
$
|
518,243
|
|
Incentive payments for managed service contracts
|
|
|
64,033
|
|
|
|
74,663
|
|
Other services
|
|
|
11,878
|
|
|
|
13,388
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
510,192
|
|
|
$
|
606,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net services revenue increased by $96.1 million, or 18.8%,
to $606.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $510.2 million for the year ended December 31,
2009. The largest component of the increase, net base fee
revenue, increased by $84.0 million, or 19.3%, to
$518.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $434.3 million for the year ended December 31,
2009, primarily due to an increase in the number of hospitals
with whom we had managed service contracts. The number of
hospitals increased to 66 as of December 31, 2010 from 54
as of December 31, 2009. Of the $84.0 million increase
in net base fee revenues, $65.2 million was attributable to
new managed service contracts entered into during 2010. In
addition, incentive payment revenues increased by
$10.6 million, or 16.6%, to $74.7 million for the year
ended December 31, 2010 from $64.0 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009, consistent with the increases
that generally occur as our managed service contracts mature.
All other revenues increased by $1.5 million, or 12.7%, to
$13.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $11.9 million for the year ended December 31,
2009, as we increased the number of customers using our dormant
patient accounts receivable collection services and continued to
expand our specialized services such as emergency room physician
advisory services. We recognized no revenue from our quality and
total cost of care offering in 2010. Our projected contracted
annual revenue run rate at December 31, 2010 was
$698 million to $713 million compared to
$509 million to $519 million at December 31,
2009. Based on the midpoint of the two ranges, our projected
contracted annual revenue run rate as of December 31, 2010
increased by $192 million, or 37.3%.
Costs
of Services
Our costs of services increased by $67.6 million, or 16.5%,
to $478.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $410.7 million for the year ended December 31,
2009. The increase in costs of services was primarily
attributable to the increase in the number of hospitals for
which we provide managed services.
Operating
Margin
Operating margin increased by $28.5 million, or 28.7%, to
$128.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $99.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2009. The increase consisted primarily of:
|
|
|
|
|
$10.6 million in additional incentive payments under
managed service contracts;
|
|
|
|
an increase of $16.5 million in the operating efficiencies
associated with our revenue cycle operations including the
impact of shared service center adoptions; and
|
|
|
|
reduction of $1.7 million in costs related to the issuance
of warrants to Ascension Health as there were no warrants issued
to Ascension Health in the year ended December 31, 2010.
|
The increase in operating margin in absolute dollars was
accompanied by an increase in operating margin as a percentage
of net services revenue to 21.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2010 from 19.5% for the
63
year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to an increased
ratio of mature managed service contracts to new managed service
contracts.
Operating
Expenses
Infused management and technology expenses increased by
$12.3 million, or 23.7%, to $64.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2010 from $51.8 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in infused
management and technology expenses was primarily due to the
increase in the number of our management personnel deployed at
customer facilities, reflecting an increase in the number of
hospitals with whom we had managed service contracts, and an
increase of $1.0 million in costs to operate our inaugural
quality and total cost of care contract, as well as the items
noted below.
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased by
$11.5 million, or 38.2%, to $41.7 million for the year
ended December 31, 2010 from $30.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009. The increase included
$3.4 million to develop our new quality and total cost of
care offering, $2.8 million for increases in sales and
marketing personnel costs, $1.5 million for a provision for
bad debt expense, and $1.3 million in costs related to
becoming a public company. The increase also included
$2.2 million of additional depreciation, amortization and
share-based compensation expense as discussed below.
We allocate share-based compensation expense and depreciation
and amortization expense between cost of services, infused
management expenses and selling, general and administrative
expenses. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the
following changes affected the operating expenses categories:
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization expense increased by
$0.9 million, or 24.1%, to $4.9 million for the year
ended December 31, 2010 from $3.9 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009, due to the addition of computer
equipment, furniture and fixtures, and other property to support
our growing operations. Amortization expense increased mainly
due to amortization of internally developed software.
|
|
|
|
Share-based compensation expense, which includes both
stock-based compensation expense and stock warrant expense,
increased $5.6 million, or 58.1%, to $15.3 million in
the year ended December 31, 2010 from $9.7 million for
the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase was due to
an additional $8.4 million of option expense relating to
stock option grants during the current year and vesting of
previously granted stock options associated with the continued
increase in the number of employees, offset by a decrease in
stock warrant expense charge of $2.8 million.
|
In 2010, approximately $1.2 million and $1.3 million
of stock-based compensation expense and depreciation and
amortization expense, respectively was allocated to cost of
services due to the expansion of our shared services centers.
Income
Taxes
Tax expense increased by $6.8 million, to $9.7 million
for the year ended December 31, 2010 from $3.0 million
for the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in 2010
tax expense was primarily due to the increase in taxable income
during the period and release of deferred tax asset valuation
allowance of $3.5 million in 2009. Our tax provision for
the year ended December 31, 2010 was equal to approximately
44% of our pre-tax income and differed from the federal
statutory rate of 35% mainly due to the impact of certain state
taxes which are based on gross receipts, as compared to 17% for
the year ended December 31, 2009. The 17% tax rate in 2009
was mainly due to the release of the tax valuation allowance in
2009.
Net
Income
Net income decreased $2.0 million, to $12.6 million
for the year ended December 31, 2010 from net income of
$14.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Although our income from operations increased by $4.8 million
during the year ended December 31, 2010, it was offset by
the increase in our income tax expense of $6.8 million. The
increase in 2010 income tax expense was primarily the result of
the
64
increase in taxable income during 2010 and release of deferred
tax valuation allowance of $3.5 million in 2009, which
reduced our overall tax liability in that year.
Year
Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2009
Net
Services Revenue
The following table summarizes the composition of our net
services revenue for the years ended December 31, 2008 and
2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Net base fees for managed service contracts
|
|
$
|
350,085
|
|
|
$
|
434,281
|
|
Incentive payments for managed service contracts
|
|
|
38,971
|
|
|
|
64,033
|
|
Other services
|
|
|
9,413
|
|
|
|
11,878
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
398,469
|
|
|
$
|
510,192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net services revenue increased $111.7 million, or 28.0%, to
$510.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $398.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2008. The largest component of the increase, net base fee
revenue, increased $84.2 million, or 24.1%, to
$434.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $350.1 million for the year ended December 31,
2008, primarily due to an increase in the number of hospitals
with whom we had managed service contracts from 46 as of
December 31, 2008 to 54 as of December 31, 2009. Of
the $84.2 million increase in net base fee revenues,
$61.1 million was attributable to new managed service
contracts entered into during 2009. In addition, incentive
payment revenues increased by $25.1 million, or 64.3%, to
$64.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $39.0 million for the year ended December 31,
2008, consistent with the increases that generally occur as our
managed service contracts mature. All other revenues increased
by $2.5 million, or 26.2%, to $11.9 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009 from $9.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2008, as we increased the number of
customers using our dormant patient accounts receivable
collection services and continued to expand our specialized
services such as emergency room physician advisory services. Net
patient revenue under our management increased by
$2.7 billion, or 29.7%, to $12.0 billion for the year
ended December 31, 2009 from $9.2 billion for the year
ended December 31, 2008. Our projected contracted annual
revenue run rate at December 31, 2009 was $509 million
to $519 million compared to $421 million to
$430 million at December 31, 2008. Based on the
midpoint of the two ranges, our projected contracted annual
revenue run rate as of December 31, 2009 increased by
$89 million, or 20.8%.
Costs
of Services
Our costs of services increased $75.5 million, or 22.5%, to
$410.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $335.2 million for the year ended December 31,
2008. The increase in costs of services was primarily
attributable to the increase in the number of hospitals for
which we provide managed services.
Operating
Margin
Operating margin increased $36.2 million, or 57.3%, to
$99.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $63.3 million for the year ended December 31,
2008. The increase consisted primarily of:
|
|
|
|
|
$25.1 million in additional incentive payments under
managed service contracts;
|
|
|
|
an increase of $0.6 million in the operating margin
associated with our other services, as a result of the continued
expansion of our dormant patient accounts receivable collection
and other ancillary services; and
|
|
|
|
a reduction of $11.3 million in revenue cycle operating
costs under managed service contracts, net of customer cost
sharing.
|
65
The above was partially offset by an increase of
$0.8 million in costs related to the issuance of warrants
to Ascension Health during the year ended December 31, 2009.
The increase in operating margin in absolute dollars was
accompanied by an increase in operating margin as a percentage
of net services revenue from 15.9% for the year ended
December 31, 2008 to 19.5% for the year ended
December 31, 2009, primarily due to an increased ratio of
mature managed service contracts to new managed service
contracts.
Operating
Expenses
Infused management and technology expenses increased
$12.6 million, or 31.9%, to $51.8 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009 from $39.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2008. The increase in infused
management and technology expenses was primarily due to the
increase in the number of our management personnel deployed at
customer facilities, reflecting an increase in the number of
hospitals with whom we had managed service contracts, as well as
the items noted below.
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased
$8.9 million, or 42.1%, to $30.2 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009 from $21.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2008. The increase included
$1.4 million of costs, or 15.3% of the increase, for
enhancing and maintaining our accounting systems, documenting
internal controls, establishing an internal audit function and
other costs associated with our preparation to be a public
company. The increase also included additional research and
development costs of $1.0 million, or 11.4% of the
increase, to develop our new quality/cost service initiative.
The increase also included $2.8 million, or 31.8% of the
increase, related to additional depreciation, amortization and
share-based compensation expenses, as discussed below. The
remaining increase of $3.7 million, or 41.5% of the
increase, was primarily due to increases in our personnel costs
to support our expanding customer base.
We allocate our other operating expenses between the infused
management expenses and selling, general and administrative
expenses. During the year ended December 31, 2009, the
following changes affected both categories:
|
|
|
|
|
Share-based compensation expense increased $3.4 million, or
94.8%, to $6.9 million for the year ended December 31,
2009 from $3.6 million for the year ended December 31,
2008 due to employee option grants and vesting of previously
granted stock options associated with the continued expansion of
our personnel and the increase in the fair market value of our
stock, which increases the cost of option grants calculated
using the provisions of ASC 718.
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense increased $0.7 million, or 50.6%, to
$2.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2008, due
to the addition of computer equipment, furniture and fixtures,
and other property to support our growing operations.
|
|
|
|
Amortization expense increased $0.7 million, or 58.5%, to
$1.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. The
majority of this increase resulted from amortization of
internally developed software.
|
Income
Taxes
Tax expense increased $0.7 million, or 31.0%, to
$3.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. The
increase in 2009 tax expense was primarily due to the increase
in taxable income during the period, offset by the release of
deferred tax asset valuation allowance of $3.5 million. Our
tax provision for the year ended December 31, 2009 was
equal to approximately 17% of our pre-tax income as compared to
65% for the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease was
mainly due to the release of the tax valuation allowance.
66
Net
Income
Net income increased $13.3 million, to $14.6 million
for the year ended December 31, 2009 from net income of
$1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. The
increase in net income was primarily due to the increase in
operating income, offset by a decrease of $0.7 million in
net interest income.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Our primary source of liquidity is our cash flows from
operations. Given our current cash and cash equivalents, which
consist primarily of demand deposits, highly liquid money market
funds and treasury securities, and accounts receivable, we
believe that we will have sufficient liquidity to fund our
business and meet our contractual obligations for at least the
next 12 months. We expect that the combination of our
current liquidity and expected additional cash generated from
operations will be sufficient for our planned capital
expenditures, which are expected to consist primarily of
capitalized software, and other investing activities, in the
next 12 months.
Cash and cash equivalents increased by $111.9 million from
$43.7 million at December 31, 2009 to
$155.6 million at December 31, 2010, primarily as a
result of proceeds received from our initial public offering in
May 2010 and cash flows from operations. Cash and cash
equivalents decreased $8.0 million, from $51.7 million
at December 31, 2008 to $43.7 million at
December 31, 2009, primarily due to the payment of
dividends.
Our receivables could be exposed to financial risks, such as
credit risk and liquidity risk. Credit risk is the risk of
financial loss to us if a counterparty fails to meet its
contractual obligations. Liquidity risk is the risk that we will
not be able to meet our obligations as they come due. We seek to
limit our exposure to credit risk through efforts to reduce our
customer concentration and our quarterly assessment of customer
creditworthiness, and to liquidity risk by managing our cash
flows.
Operating
Activities
Cash flows generated by operating activities totaled
$39.5 million, $15.1 million and $32.0 million
for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010,
respectively. Our net income plus our non-cash adjustments to
net income for depreciation, amortization and share-based
compensation increased by $5.4 million during the year
ended December 31, 2010 as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2009, primarily due to the higher net services
revenue and operating margin. While our net income increased by
$13.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2009
as compared to the year ended December 31, 2008, cash
provided by operations was lower in 2009 than 2008 due to the
timing of payments from customers and to vendors. Receivables
from customers increased by $4.3 million, $7.3 million
and $26.4 million during the years ended December 31,
2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively, primarily due to increased
net services revenue and the timing of customer payments.
Non-cash adjustments for excess tax benefits were
$11.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 due
to warrant and stock option exercises. Payables increased by
$15.5 million and $18.1 million for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2010, respectively, primarily due to
growth in our business and decreased by $6.1 million during
2009 due to the timing of payments at year end. Accrued service
costs increased by $3.7 million, $4.2 million and
$10.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2008,
2009 and 2010, respectively, as we grew our customer base from
46 sites at the beginning of 2008 to 66 at the end of 2010.
While our business continued to grow during the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2010, deferred revenue decreased by
$0.4 million and $0.8 million, respectively, as a
result of the timing of customer payments at year end. Deferred
revenue increased by $10.3 million during the year ended
December 31, 2008, primarily due to growth in our business
and timing of customer payments.
Investing
Activities
Cash used in investing activities was $6.1 million,
$7.2 million and $16.9 million for the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. For all
three years, use of cash primarily related to our purchases of
furniture, fixtures, computer hardware, software and other
property to support the growth of our business.
67
Financing
Activities
Cash provided by financing activities was $97.1 million for
the year ended December 31, 2010, primarily due to the
receipt of proceeds from our initial public offering in May 2010.
Cash used in financing activities was $16.0 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009 as compared to
$16.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2008.
These uses of cash are primarily due to the $15 million and
$14.9 million of dividends declared by our board of
directors in July 2008 and August 2009, respectively. The 2009
dividend was paid on all outstanding shares of common and
preferred stock and aggregated $14.9 million. The reported
figures are net of proceeds from stock option exercises and the
repayment of non-executive employee loans. The net cash used in
2008 includes $1.5 million related to the repurchase of
common stock from one of our initial employees. There were
nominal repurchases in 2009 and none in 2010. Additionally, we
incurred $2.9 million and $2.7 million of cash costs
related to our efforts to prepare for our initial public
offering during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2010,
respectively. No such costs were incurred in 2008.
Revolving
Credit Facility
On September 30, 2009, we entered into a $15 million
revolving line of credit with the Bank of Montreal, which may be
used for working capital and general corporate purposes. Any
amounts outstanding under the line of credit will accrue
interest at LIBOR plus 4% and are secured by substantially all
of our assets. Advances under the line of credit are limited to
a borrowing base and a cash deposit account which will be
established at the time borrowings occur. The line of credit has
an initial term of two years and is renewable annually
thereafter. As of December 31, 2010, we had no amounts
outstanding under this line of credit; however, letters of
credit to various landlords in the aggregate of approximately
$1.9 million reduced our available line of credit to
$13.1 million. The line of credit contains restrictive
covenants which limit our ability to, among other things, enter
into other borrowing arrangements and pay dividends.
Future
Capital Needs
We intend to fund our future growth over the next 12 months
with funds generated from operations, our net proceeds from our
2010 initial public offering and our revolving line of credit.
Over the longer term, we expect that cash flows from operations,
supplemented by short-term and long-term financing, as
necessary, will be adequate to fund our
day-to-day
operations and capital expenditure requirements. Our ability to
secure short-term and long-term financing in the future will
depend on several factors, including our future profitability,
the quality of our accounts receivable, our relative levels of
debt and equity, and the overall condition of the credit markets.
Contractual
Obligations
The following table presents our obligations and commitments to
make future payments under contracts, such as lease agreements,
and under contingent commitments as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015 and
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2012
|
|
2013
|
|
2014
|
|
Beyond
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Minimum lease payments
|
|
$
|
3,196
|
|
|
$
|
2,593
|
|
|
$
|
2,470
|
|
|
$
|
2,466
|
|
|
$
|
12,751
|
|
|
$
|
23,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
3,196
|
|
|
$
|
2,593
|
|
|
$
|
2,470
|
|
|
$
|
2,466
|
|
|
$
|
12,751
|
|
|
$
|
23,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We rent office space and equipment under a series of operating
leases, primarily for our Chicago corporate office, shared
service centers and India operations. Lease payments are
amortized to expense on a straight-line basis over the lease
term. As of December 31, 2010, the Chicago corporate office
consisted of approximately 50,000 square feet in a
multi-story office building.
Pursuant to the master services agreement between us and
Ascension Health and our individual agreements with hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health that contract for our services,
our fees are subject
68
to adjustment in the event specified performance milestones are
not met, which could result in a reduction in future fees
payable to us by such hospitals but would not obligate us to
refund any payments. These potential reductions in future fees
are not reflected in the above table because the amounts cannot
be quantified and because, based on our experience to date, we
do not anticipate that there will be any permanent reduction in
future fees under these provisions. For additional information
regarding these contract provisions, see Related Person
Transactions Transactions With Ascension
Health.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We have not entered into any off-balance sheet arrangements.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update,
or ASU,
No. 2010-09
to amend ASC 855, Subsequent Events, which applies with
immediate effect. The ASU removes the requirement to disclose
the date through which subsequent events were evaluated in both
originally issued and reissued financial statements for SEC
filers.
In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU
No. 09-13,
Revenue Recognition Multiple Deliverable Revenue
Arrangements, or ASU
09-13. ASU
09-13
updates the existing multiple-element revenue arrangements
guidance currently included in FASB
ASC 605-25.
The revised guidance provides for two significant changes to the
existing multiple element revenue arrangements guidance. The
first change relates to the determination of when the individual
deliverables included in a multiple element arrangement may be
treated as separate units of accounting. The second change
modifies the manner in which the transaction consideration is
allocated across the separately identified deliverables.
Together, these changes are likely to result in earlier
recognition of revenue and related costs for multiple-element
arrangements than under the previous guidance. This guidance
also significantly expands the disclosures required for
multiple-element revenue arrangements. The revised multiple
element revenue arrangements guidance will be effective for the
first annual reporting period beginning on or after
June 15, 2010, however, early adoption is permitted,
provided that the revised guidance is retroactively applied to
the beginning of the year of adoption. We expect that the
adoption of the ASU will have no material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU
No. 2010-06,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. ASU
2010-06
provides new and amended disclosure requirements related to fair
value measurements. Specifically, this ASU requires new
disclosures relating to activity within Level 3 fair value
measurements, as well as transfers in and out of Level 1
and Level 2 fair value measurements. ASU
2010-06 also
amends the existing disclosure requirements relating to
valuation techniques used for fair value measurements and the
level of disaggregation a reporting entity should include in
fair value disclosures. This update is effective for interim and
annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009.
We adopted this ASU as of January 1, 2010. The adoption did
not have a significant impact on our condensed consolidated
financial statements.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Qualitative
and Quantitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
Interest Rate Sensitivity. Our interest
income is primarily generated from interest earned on operating
cash accounts. Our exposure to market risks related to interest
expense is limited to borrowings under our revolving line of
credit, which bears interest at LIBOR plus 4%. To date, there
have been no borrowings under this facility. We do not enter
into interest rate swaps, caps or collars or other hedging
instruments.
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk. Our
results of operations and cash flows are subject to fluctuations
due to changes in the Indian rupee because a portion of our
operating expenses are incurred by our subsidiary in India and
are denominated in Indian rupees. However, we do not generate
any revenues outside of the United States. For the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, 0.7%, 0.6% and 1.6%,
respectively, of our expenses were denominated in Indian rupees.
As a result, we believe that the risk of a significant impact on
our operating income from foreign currency fluctuations is not
substantial.
69
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
The financial statements required by this Item are located
beginning on
page F-1
of this report.
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness
of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in
Rule 13a-15(e)
under the Exchange Act as of December 31, 2010. Our
disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide
reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives of ensuring
that information we are required to disclose in the reports we
file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosures, and is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time
periods specified in the SECs rules and forms. There is no
assurance that our disclosure controls and procedures will
operate effectively under all circumstances. Based upon the
evaluation described above our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2010,
our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the
reasonable assurance level.
Internal
Control Over Financial Reporting
This annual report does not include a report of
managements assessment regarding internal control over
financial reporting or an attestation report of the
companys registered public accounting firm due to a
transition period established by rules of the SEC for newly
public companies.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
No changes in our internal control over financial reporting
occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2010 that
have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
The information required by this item with respect to our
directors and executive officers will be contained in our 2011
Proxy Statement under the caption Information About Our
Directors, Officers and 5% Stockholders and is
incorporated in this report by reference.
The information required by this item with respect to
Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting compliance
will be contained in our 2011 Proxy Statement under the caption
Section 16(A) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance and is incorporated in this report by reference.
The information required by this item with respect to corporate
governance matters will be contained in our 2011 Proxy Statement
under the caption Corporate Governance and is
incorporated in this report by reference.
70
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information required by this item will be contained in our
2011 Proxy Statement under the captions Director
Compensation, Compensation Discussion and
Analysis and Executive Compensation and is
incorporated in this report by reference.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information required by this item with regard to security
ownership of certain beneficial owners and management will be
contained in our 2011 Proxy Statement under the caption
Information About Our Directors, Officers and 5%
Stockholders -Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
and Management and is incorporated in this report by
reference.
The information required by this item with regard to securities
authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans will be
contained in our 2011 Proxy Statement under the caption
Executive Compensation Securities
Authorized for Issuance under our Equity Compensation
Plans and is incorporated in this report by reference.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The information required by this item will be contained in our
2011 Proxy Statement under the captions Related-Party
Transactions and Corporate Governance and is
incorporated in this report by reference
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The information required by this item will be contained in our
2011 Proxy Statement under the caption Ratification
of the Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm and is incorporated in this report by reference.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
a) The following documents are filed as a part of this
report:
(1) Financial Statements
The financial statements and notes thereto annexed to this
report beginning on page
F-1.
71
(2) Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule of Valuation and Qualifying Accounts Disclosure
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
ACCRETIVE
HEALTH, INC.
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Column A
|
|
Column B
|
|
|
Column C
|
|
|
Column D
|
|
|
Column E
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
|
Beginning of
|
|
|
Costs and
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of
|
|
Description
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Accounts
|
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
1,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,582
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
432
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
350
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
Deferred Tax Valuation Allowance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
139
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
157
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
3,629
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,490
|
|
|
$
|
139
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
4,733
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,104
|
|
|
$
|
3,629
|
|
All other supplemental schedules are omitted because of the
absence of conditions under which they are required.
(3) Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, as
amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to
Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.4 to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Specimen Certificate evidencing shares of Common Stock
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Amendment
No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.1*
|
|
Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan, as amended (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.2*
|
|
Form of Acknowledgement of Grant, used to evidence option grants
under the Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.3*
|
|
Restricted Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.4*
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the Restricted
Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Third Amended and Restated Stockholders Agreement, dated
as of February 22, 2009, among the Registrant and the
parties named therein, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.5 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on March 9, 2011)
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Form of Share Exchange Agreement, entered into in February 2009,
with each of Etienne H. Deffarges, Steven N. Kaplan, Gregory N.
Kazarian, The Shultz 1989 Family Trust, Spiegel Family LLC and
John T. Staton Declaration of Trust (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.6 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated as of May 4, 2005, between the
Registrant and Zeller Management Corporation, as amended by
First Lease Amendment, dated as of January 30, 2007, and
Second Lease Amendment, dated as of November 26, 2008
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.8+
|
|
Amended and Restated Master Services Agreement, dated as of
December 13, 2007, between the Registrant and Ascension
Health (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to
Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.17*
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of January 2004, between the
Registrant and Mary A. Tolan, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.18 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.18*
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of June 17, 2005, between
the Registrant and John T. Staton, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.19 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.19*
|
|
Offer Letter, dated December 9, 2003, between the
Registrant and Gregory N. Kazarian, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.20 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.20*
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement, entered into between the
Registrant and each director and executive officer (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to Amendment No. 1 to
the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on November 19, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.21+
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2009, between
the Registrant and Bank of Montreal (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.21 to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.22+
|
|
Security Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2009, among
the Registrant, Bank of Montreal and specified subsidiaries of
the Registrant (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22
to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.23*
|
|
2010 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.23 to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.24*
|
|
Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement under the 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24
to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.25*
|
|
Form of Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreement under the 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25
to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 21.1 to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
Rules 13a-14(a)
and 15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
Rules 13a-14(a)
and 15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required
to be filed pursuant to Item 15(b) of
Form 10-K. |
|
+ |
|
Confidential treatment requested as to certain portions, which
portions have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |
73
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
ACCRETIVE HEALTH, INC.
Mary A. Tolan
Founder, President and Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, this
report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the
registrant in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mary
A. Tolan
Mary
A. Tolan
|
|
Director, Founder, President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John
T. Staton
John
T. Staton
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial
Officer)
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ James
M. Bolotin
James
M. Bolotin
|
|
Corporate Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ J.
Michael Cline
J.
Michael Cline
|
|
Founder and Chairman of the Board
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Edgar
M. Bronfman, Jr.
Edgar
M. Bronfman, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Steven
N. Kaplan
Steven
N. Kaplan
|
|
Director
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Denis
J. Nayden
Denis
J. Nayden
|
|
Director
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ George
P. Shultz
George
P. Shultz
|
|
Director
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Arthur
H. Spiegel, III
Arthur
H. Spiegel, III
|
|
Director
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mark
A. Wolfson
Mark
A. Wolfson
|
|
Director
|
|
March 18, 2011
|
74
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
Audited Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
|
|
|
|
|
F-8
|
|
F-1
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
of Accretive Health, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Accretive Health, Inc. as of December 31, 2009 and 2010,
and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2010. Our audits
also included the financial statement schedule listed in the
index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and
schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements and schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. We were not engaged to perform an
audit of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control
over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not
for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of
the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Accretive Health, Inc. at
December 31, 2009 and 2010, and the consolidated results of
its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in our
opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken
as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
Chicago, Illinois
March 9, 2011
F-2
Accretive
Health, Inc.
(In
thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
43,659
|
|
|
$
|
155,573
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of
$82 and $1,582 at December 31, 2009 and 2010, respectively
|
|
|
27,519
|
|
|
|
53,894
|
|
Prepaid assets
|
|
|
4,283
|
|
|
|
13,336
|
|
Due from related party
|
|
|
1,273
|
|
|
|
1,283
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
1,337
|
|
|
|
1,659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
78,071
|
|
|
|
225,745
|
|
Deferred income tax
|
|
|
7,739
|
|
|
|
11,405
|
|
Furniture and equipment, net
|
|
|
12,901
|
|
|
|
21,698
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
3,293
|
|
|
|
2,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
103,472
|
|
|
$
|
262,619
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
11,967
|
|
|
$
|
30,073
|
|
Accrued service costs
|
|
|
27,742
|
|
|
|
38,649
|
|
Accrued compensation and benefits
|
|
|
12,114
|
|
|
|
13,331
|
|
Deferred income tax
|
|
|
4,188
|
|
|
|
6,016
|
|
Accrued income taxes
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
3,531
|
|
|
|
6,062
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
22,610
|
|
|
|
21,857
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
82,193
|
|
|
|
115,988
|
|
Non-current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,912
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,912
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
82,193
|
|
|
$
|
119,900
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible preferred stock, Series A, $0.01 par
value, 32,317 shares authorized, issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2009; no shares authorized, issued or
outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible preferred stock, Series D, $0.01 par
value, 1,267,224 shares authorized, issued, and outstanding
at December 31, 2009; no shares authorized, issued or
outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; no shares authorized; issued
or outstanding, at December 31, 2009; 5,000,000 shares
authorized and no shares issued or outstanding at
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series B common stock, $0.01 par value,
68,600,000 shares authorized, 32,156,932 shares issued
and outstanding at December 31, 2009; no shares authorized,
issued or outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series C common stock, $0.01 par value,
31,360,000 shares authorized, 5,257,727 shares issued
and outstanding at December 31, 2009; no shares authorized,
issued or outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 par value, no shares authorized, issued or
outstanding at December 31, 2009;
500,000,000 shares
authorized, 94,826,509 shares issued and outstanding as of
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
948
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
51,777
|
|
|
|
159,780
|
|
Non-executive employee loans for stock option exercises
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(30,452
|
)
|
|
|
(17,834
|
)
|
Cumulative translation adjustment
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
(134
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
21,279
|
|
|
|
142,719
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
103,472
|
|
|
$
|
262,619
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-3
Accretive
Health, Inc.
(In
thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Net services revenue
|
|
$
|
398,469
|
|
|
$
|
510,192
|
|
|
$
|
606,294
|
|
Costs of services
|
|
|
335,211
|
|
|
|
410,711
|
|
|
|
478,276
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
63,258
|
|
|
|
99,481
|
|
|
|
128,018
|
|
Other operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infused management and technology
|
|
|
39,234
|
|
|
|
51,763
|
|
|
|
64,029
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
21,227
|
|
|
|
30,153
|
|
|
|
41,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
60,461
|
|
|
|
81,916
|
|
|
|
105,700
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
2,797
|
|
|
|
17,565
|
|
|
|
22,318
|
|
Net interest income (expense)
|
|
|
710
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income before provision for income taxes
|
|
|
3,507
|
|
|
|
17,556
|
|
|
|
22,347
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
|
|
9,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
Dividends on preferred shares
|
|
|
(8,048
|
)
|
|
|
(8,044
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) applicable to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
(6,805
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,546
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
0.13
|
|
Weighted-average shares used in calculating net income (loss)
per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
36,122,470
|
|
|
|
36,725,194
|
|
|
|
70,732,791
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
36,122,470
|
|
|
|
43,955,167
|
|
|
|
94,206,677
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared per common share
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-4
Accretive
Health, Inc.
(In
thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Executive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible
|
|
|
Convertible
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Series B
|
|
|
Series C
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
for Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A
|
|
|
Series D
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Exercises
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
32,317
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
1,267,224
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
18,756,251
|
|
|
$
|
48
|
|
|
|
17,491,592
|
|
|
$
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
32,361
|
|
|
$
|
(320
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,246
|
)
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
15,910
|
|
|
$
|
784
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implementation of FASB Interpretation No. 48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange of Series C to Series B Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,975,007
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
(12,975,007
|
)
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of class B common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
261,277
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of vested stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of previously exercised options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
589,470
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
649
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
651
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of amounts loaned to employees related to stock
option exercises, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share repurchases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(135,566
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,510
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,510
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,332
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,332
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to restricted common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
Dividends declared
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,001
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,001
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,243
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,243
|
|
|
|
1,243
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2008
|
|
32,317
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
1,267,224
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
31,992,535
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
|
4,985,189
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
38,401
|
|
|
$
|
(263
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30,101
|
)
|
|
$
|
(222
|
)
|
|
$
|
7,923
|
|
|
$
|
1,011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of vested stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,620
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of previously exercised options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
161,210
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of class B common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
164,397
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of amounts loaned to employees related to stock
option exercises, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share repurchases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,292
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess tax benefit from equity-based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,539
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,539
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
Dividends declared
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,941
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,941
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,590
|
|
|
|
14,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009
|
|
32,317
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
1,267,224
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
32,156,932
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
|
5,257,727
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
51,777
|
|
|
$
|
(120
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30,452
|
)
|
|
$
|
(34
|
)
|
|
$
|
21,279
|
|
|
$
|
14,778
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Consolidated
Statements of Stockholders Equity
(Continued)
(In
thousands, except share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Executive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible
|
|
|
Convertible
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
Series B
|
|
|
Series C
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
for Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A
|
|
|
Series D
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Exercises
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
32,317
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
1,267,224
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
32,156,932
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
|
5,257,727
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
51,777
|
|
|
$
|
(120
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30,452
|
)
|
|
$
|
(34
|
)
|
|
$
|
21,279
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of Class B common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of vested stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,320
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
517,375
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
1,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,253
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting of previously exercised options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,830
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,806
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion to common stock
|
|
|
(32,317
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,267,224
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(32,186,858
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(5,372,877
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
81,356,333
|
|
|
|
814
|
|
|
|
(706
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of shares in the initial public offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,666,667
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
86,403
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,480
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidation preference payment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,265,012
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
(879
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(866
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Initial public offering costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,000
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(5,664
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,663
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of amounts loaned to employees related to stock
option exercises, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,882,316
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
896
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
934
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,549
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,549
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess tax benefit from equity-based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
94,826,509
|
|
|
$
|
948
|
|
|
$
|
159,780
|
|
|
$
|
(41
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17,834
|
)
|
|
$
|
(134
|
)
|
|
$
|
142,719
|
|
|
$
|
12,518
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-6
Accretive
Health, Inc.
(In
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,540
|
|
|
|
3,921
|
|
|
|
6,157
|
|
Employee stock based compensation
|
|
|
3,551
|
|
|
|
6,917
|
|
|
|
16,549
|
|
Expense associated with the issuance of stock warrants
|
|
|
3,332
|
|
|
|
4,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,552
|
)
|
|
|
(3,736
|
)
|
Excess tax benefit from equity based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,539
|
)
|
|
|
(11,910
|
)
|
Loss on disposal of equipment
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(4,309
|
)
|
|
|
(7,313
|
)
|
|
|
(26,374
|
)
|
Prepaid and other current assets
|
|
|
(1,381
|
)
|
|
|
(1,678
|
)
|
|
|
2,560
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
15,546
|
|
|
|
(6,113
|
)
|
|
|
18,093
|
|
Accrued service costs
|
|
|
3,715
|
|
|
|
4,195
|
|
|
|
10,907
|
|
Accrued compensation and benefits
|
|
|
3,563
|
|
|
|
2,960
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
(253
|
)
|
|
|
3,517
|
|
Accrued income taxes
|
|
|
1,208
|
|
|
|
(1,168
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Deferred rent expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,199
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
10,275
|
|
|
|
(377
|
)
|
|
|
(753
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
39,525
|
|
|
|
15,099
|
|
|
|
31,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of furniture and equipment
|
|
|
(1,843
|
)
|
|
|
(3,514
|
)
|
|
|
(9,670
|
)
|
Acquisition of software
|
|
|
(4,988
|
)
|
|
|
(4,348
|
)
|
|
|
(5,355
|
)
|
Collection (issuance) of note receivable
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
618
|
|
|
|
(1,844
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(6,133
|
)
|
|
|
(7,244
|
)
|
|
|
(16,869
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from initial public offering, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,756
|
|
Liquidation preference payment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(866
|
)
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock from warrant exercises
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
934
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock from employee stock
option exercise
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
1,253
|
|
Collection of non-executive employee notes receivable
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
Excess tax benefit from equity based awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,539
|
|
|
|
11,910
|
|
Deferred offering costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,939
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of dividends
|
|
|
(15,001
|
)
|
|
|
(14,941
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
(1,510
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
(16,303
|
)
|
|
|
(15,997
|
)
|
|
|
97,066
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes in cash
|
|
|
(178
|
)
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
(279
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
16,911
|
|
|
|
(7,997
|
)
|
|
|
111,914
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
34,745
|
|
|
|
51,656
|
|
|
|
43,659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
51,656
|
|
|
$
|
43,659
|
|
|
$
|
155,573
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Taxes paid
|
|
|
1,137
|
|
|
|
8,254
|
|
|
|
9,460
|
|
Exercise of unvested stock options
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of noncash financing transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of notes receivable to non-executive employees
|
|
$
|
(585
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Vesting of previously exercised stock options
|
|
|
651
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-7
Accretive
Health, Inc.
|
|
1.
|
Description
of Business
|
Accretive Health, Inc. (the Company) is a leading
provider of healthcare revenue cycle management services. The
Companys business purpose is to help U.S. hospitals,
physicians and other healthcare providers manage their revenue
cycle operations more efficiently. The Companys
integrated, end-to-end technology and services offering, which
is referred to as Accretives solution, helps customers
realize sustainable improvements in their operating margins and
improve the satisfaction of their patients, physicians and
staff. The Company enables these improvements by helping
customers increase the portion of the maximum potential revenue
received while reducing total revenue cycle costs.
|
|
2.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Basis
of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include the Company and
its wholly owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions and
balances have been eliminated in consolidation. These financial
statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States.
Stock
Split
Immediately prior to the consummation of the initial public
offering of the Companys common stock in May 2010, the
number of authorized common and preferred shares was increased
to 500,000,000 and 5,000,000, respectively. In addition, all
common share and per share amounts in the consolidated financial
statements and notes thereto have been restated to reflect a
stock split effective on May 3, 2010 whereby each share of
common stock was reclassified into 3.92 shares of common
stock.
Use of
Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the consolidated financial statements, and the reported amounts
of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.
The Company regularly evaluates its accounting policies and
estimates. In general, estimates are based on historical
experience and on assumptions believed to be reasonable given
the Companys operating environment. These estimates are
based on managements best knowledge of current events and
actions the Company may undertake in the future. Actual results
may differ from these estimates.
Revenue
Recognition
The Companys managed service contracts generally have an
initial term of four to five years and various start and end
dates. After the initial terms, these contracts renew annually
unless canceled by either party. Revenue from managed service
contracts consists of base fees and incentive payments.
The Company records net services revenue in accordance with the
provisions of Staff Accounting Bulletin 104. As a result,
the Company only records revenue once there is persuasive
evidence of an arrangement, services have been rendered, the
amount of revenue has become fixed or determinable and
collectibility is reasonably assured. The Company recognizes
base fee revenues on a straight-line basis over the life of the
contract. Base fees for managed service contracts which are
received in advance of services delivered are classified as
deferred revenue in the consolidated balance sheets until
services have been provided.
F-8
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
Some of the Companys service contracts entitle customers
to receive a share of the cost savings achieved from operating
their revenue cycle. This share is credited to the customers as
a reduction in subsequent base fees. Services revenue is
reported net of cost sharing and is referred to as net services
revenue.
The Companys managed service contracts generally allow for
adjustments to the base fee. Adjustments typically occur at 90,
180 or 360 days after the contract commences, but can also
occur at subsequent dates as a result of factors including
changes to the scope of operations and internal and external
audits. All adjustments, the timing of which is often dependent
on factors outside of the Companys control and which can
increase or decrease revenue and operating margin, are recorded
in the period the changes are known and collectibility of any
additional fees is reasonably assured. Any such adjustments may
cause the Companys quarter-to-quarter results of
operations to fluctuate.
The Company records revenue for incentive payments once the
calculation of the incentive payment earned is finalized and
collectibility is reasonably assured. The Company uses a
proprietary technology and methodology to calculate the amount
of benefit each customer receives as a result of the
Companys services. The Companys calculations are
based in part on the amount of revenue each customer is entitled
to receive from commercial and private insurance carriers,
Medicare, Medicaid and patients. Because the laws, regulations,
instructions, payor contracts and rule interpretations governing
how the Companys customers receive payments from these
parties are complex and change frequently, estimates of a
customers prior period benefits could change. All changes
in estimates are recorded when new information is available and
calculations are completed.
Incentive payments are based on the benefits a customer has
received throughout the life of the contract. Each quarter, the
Company records its share of the increase in the cumulative
benefits the customer has received to date. If a quarterly
calculation indicates that the cumulative benefits to date have
decreased, the Company records a reduction in revenue. If the
decrease in revenue exceeds the amount previously paid by the
customer, the excess is recorded as deferred revenue.
The Companys services also include collection of dormant
patient accounts receivable that have aged 365 days or more
directly from individual patients. The Company shares all cash
generated from these collections with its customers in
accordance with specified arrangements. The Company records as
revenue its portion of the cash received from these collections
when each customers cash application is complete.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with a
maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash
equivalents.
Accounts
Receivable and Allowance for Uncollectible
Accounts
Base fees and incentive payments are billed to customers
quarterly. Base fees received prior to when services are
delivered are classified as deferred revenue.
The Company assesses its customers creditworthiness as a
part of its customer acceptance process. The Company maintains
an estimated allowance for doubtful accounts to reduce its gross
accounts receivable to the amount that it believes will be
collected. This allowance is based on the Companys
historical experience, its assessment of each customers
ability to pay and the status of any ongoing operations with
each applicable customer.
The Company performs quarterly reviews and analyses of each
customers outstanding balance and assesses, on an
account-by-account
basis, whether the allowance for doubtful accounts needs to be
adjusted based on currently available evidence such as
historical collection experience, current economic trends and
F-9
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
changes in customer payment terms. In accordance with the
Companys policy, if collection efforts have been pursued
and all avenues for collections exhausted, accounts receivable
would be written off as uncollectible.
Activity in the allowance for doubtful accounts is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
432
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
Provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,500
|
|
Write-offs and adjustments
|
|
|
(350
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
82
|
|
|
$
|
1,582
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
Service Costs
Accrued service costs represent estimated amounts due to
customers and vendors for hospital operating costs for which the
Company has not yet received invoices and other costs directly
related to managed service contracts.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
The Company records its financial assets and liabilities at fair
value. The accounting standard for fair value (i) defines
fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset
or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date,
(ii) establishes a framework for measuring fair value,
(iii) establishes a hierarchy of fair value measurements
based upon the observability of inputs used to value assets and
liabilities, (iv) requires consideration of nonperformance
risk, and (v) expands disclosures about the methods used to
measure fair value.
The accounting standard establishes a three-level hierarchy of
measurements based upon the reliability of observable and
unobservable inputs used to arrive at fair value. Observable
inputs are independent market data, while unobservable inputs
reflect the Companys assumptions about valuation. The
three levels of the hierarchy are defined as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1: Observable inputs such as quoted prices in active
markets for identical assets and liabilities;
|
|
|
|
Level 2: Inputs other than quoted prices but are observable
for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. These
include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in
active markets and quoted prices for identical or similar assets
or liabilities in markets that are not active; and model-derived
valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value
drivers are observable in active markets; and
|
|
|
|
Level 3: Valuations derived from valuation techniques in
which one or more significant inputs or significant value
drivers are unobservable.
|
The Companys financial assets which are required to be
measured at fair value on a recurring basis consist of cash
equivalents, which are invested in highly liquid money market
funds and treasury securities and accordingly classified as
level 1 assets in the fair value hierarchy. The Company
does not have any financial liabilities which are required to be
measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
F-10
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
Furniture
and Equipment
Furniture and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated
depreciation determined on the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:
|
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
Shorter of 10 years or lease term
|
Office furniture
|
|
5 years
|
Capitalized software
|
|
3 to 5 years
|
Computers and other equipment
|
|
3 years
|
Software
Development
The Company applies the provisions of Accounting Standards
Codification
(ASC) 350-40,
Intangibles Goodwill and
Other Internal Use Software, which requires
the capitalization of costs incurred in connection with
developing or obtaining internal use software. In accordance
with ASC 350-40, the Company capitalizes the costs of
internally-developed, internal use software when an application
is in the development stage. This generally occurs after the
overall design and functionality of the application has been
approved and management has committed to the applications
development. Capitalized software development costs consist of
payroll and payroll-related costs for employee time spent
developing a specific internal use software application or
related enhancements, and external costs incurred that are
related directly to the development of a specific software
application.
Goodwill
Goodwill represents the excess purchase price over the net
assets acquired for a business that the Company acquired in May
2006. In accordance with ASC 350,
Intangibles Goodwill and Other, goodwill
is not subject to amortization but is subject to impairment
testing at least annually. The Companys annual impairment
assessment date is the first day of the fourth quarter. The
Company conducts its impairment testing on a company-wide basis
because it has only one operating and reporting segment. The
Companys impairment tests are based on its current
business strategy in light of present industry and economic
conditions and future expectations.
As the Company applies its judgment to estimate future cash
flows and an appropriate discount rate, the analysis reflects
assumptions and uncertainties. The Companys estimates of
future cash flows could differ from actual results. There was no
goodwill impairment during the years ended December 31,
2008, 2009 and 2010.
Foreign
Currency
The functional currency of each entity included in the
consolidated financial statements is its respective local
currency, which is also the currency of the primary economic
environment in which it operates. Transactions in foreign
currencies are re-measured into functional currency at the rates
of exchange prevailing on the date of the transaction. All
transaction foreign exchange gains and losses are recorded in
the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
The assets and liabilities of the subsidiaries which use a
functional currency other than the U.S. dollar are
translated into U.S. dollars at the rate of exchange
prevailing on the balance sheet dates. Revenues and expenses are
translated into U.S. dollars at the average exchange rate
during each month. Resulting translation adjustments are
included in the cumulative translation adjustment in the
consolidated balance sheets.
F-11
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
Impairments
of Long-Lived Assets
The Company evaluates all of its long-lived assets, such as
furniture, equipment, software and other intangibles, for
impairment in accordance with ASC 360, Property, Plant
and Equipment, when events or changes in circumstances
warrant such a review. If an evaluation is required, the
estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the
asset are compared to the assets carrying amount to
determine if an adjustment to fair value is required.
Income
Taxes
Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability
method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for
the future tax consequences attributable to differences between
the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and
liabilities and their respective tax basis and operating loss
and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to
apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary
differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect
on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates
is recognized in income in the period that includes the
enactment date. The Company records a valuation allowance for
deferred tax assets if, based upon the available evidence, it is
more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets
will not be realized.
As of December 31, 2008 and in all prior periods, a
valuation allowance was recorded for all of the Companys
net deferred tax assets. As a result of the Companys
improved operations, in 2009 the Company determined that it was
no longer necessary to maintain a valuation allowance for all of
its deferred tax assets.
Beginning January 1, 2008, with the adoption of
ASC 740-10
Income Taxes Overall, the Company recognizes
the financial statement effects of a tax position only when it
is more likely than not that the position will be sustained upon
examination. Tax positions taken or expected to be taken that
are not recognized under the pronouncement are recorded as
liabilities. Interest and penalties relating to income taxes are
recognized in our income tax provision in the statements of
consolidated operations.
As a result of the Companys adoption of
ASC 740-10,
the Company recognized a $0.2 million increase to reserves
for uncertain tax positions, of which $0.1 million was
recorded as a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings.
The remaining $0.1 million related to current year changes
and was recorded as an expense in 2008.
The Company recognizes interest and penalties relating to income
tax matters in the income tax provision.
Share-Based
Compensation
Share-based compensation expense results from awards of
restricted common stock and grants of stock options and warrants
to employees, directors, outside consultants, customers, vendors
and others. The Company recognizes the costs associated with
option and warrant grants using the fair value recognition
provisions of ASC 718, Compensation Stock
Compensation. Generally, ASC 718 requires the value of
all share-based payments to be recognized in the statement of
operations based on their estimated fair value at date of grant
amortized over the grants vesting period. The Company uses
the straight-line method to amortize compensation costs over the
grants respective vesting periods. The Company does not
hold any treasury shares, so all option exercises result in the
issuance of new shares.
Legal
Proceedings
In the normal course of business, the Company is involved in
legal proceedings or regulatory investigations. The Company
evaluates the need for loss accruals using the requirements of
ASC 450, Contingencies.
F-12
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
When conducting this evaluation, the Company considers factors
such as the probability of an unfavorable outcome and the
ability to make a reasonable estimate of the amount of loss. The
Company records an estimated loss for any claim, lawsuit,
investigation or proceeding when it is probable that a liability
has been incurred and the amount of the loss can reasonably be
estimated. If the reasonable estimate of a probable loss is a
range, and no amount within the range is a better estimate, then
the Company records the minimum amount in the range as its loss
accrual. If a loss is not probable or a probable loss cannot be
reasonably estimated, no liability is recorded.
New
Accounting Standards and Disclosures
In February 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update
(ASU)
No. 2010-09
to amend ASC 855, Subsequent Events, which applies with
immediate effect. The ASU removes the requirement to disclose
the date through which subsequent events were evaluated in both
originally issued and reissued financial statements for SEC
Filers.
In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU
No. 09-13,
Revenue Recognition Multiple Deliverable Revenue
Arrangements (ASU
09-13).
ASU 09-13
updates the existing multiple-element revenue arrangements
guidance currently included in FASB ASC
605-25. The
revised guidance provides for two significant changes to the
existing multiple element revenue arrangements guidance. The
first change relates to the determination of when the individual
deliverables included in a multiple element arrangement may be
treated as separate units of accounting. The second change
modifies the manner in which the transaction consideration is
allocated across the separately identified deliverables.
Together, these changes are likely to result in earlier
recognition of revenue and related costs for multiple-element
arrangements than under the previous guidance. This guidance
also significantly expands the disclosures required for
multiple-element revenue arrangements. The revised multiple
element revenue arrangements guidance will be effective for the
first annual reporting period beginning on or after
June 15, 2010, however, early adoption is permitted,
provided that the revised guidance is retroactively applied to
the beginning of the year of adoption. The Company expects that
the adoption of the ASU will have no material impact on the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU
No. 2010-06,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. ASU
2010-06
provides new and amended disclosure requirements related to fair
value measurements. Specifically, this ASU requires new
disclosures relating to activity within Level 3 fair value
measurements, as well as transfers in and out of Level 1
and Level 2 fair value measurements. ASU
2010-06 also
amends the existing disclosure requirements relating to
valuation techniques used for fair value measurements and the
level of disaggregation a reporting entity should include in
fair value disclosures. This update is effective for interim and
annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009.
The Company adopted this ASU as of January 1, 2010. The
adoption did not have a significant impact on the Companys
condensed consolidated financial statements.
Reclassifications
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to
the current year presentation.
F-13
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
The Companys net services revenue consisted of the
following for each of the three years ending December 31
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Net base fees for managed service contracts
|
|
$
|
350,085
|
|
|
$
|
434,281
|
|
|
$
|
518,243
|
|
Incentive payments for managed service contracts
|
|
|
38,971
|
|
|
|
64,033
|
|
|
|
74,663
|
|
Other services
|
|
|
9,413
|
|
|
|
11,878
|
|
|
|
13,388
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
398,469
|
|
|
$
|
510,192
|
|
|
$
|
606,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.
|
Infused
Management and Technology Expenses
|
Infused management and technology expenses consist primarily of
the wages, bonuses, benefits,
share-based
compensation, travel and other costs associated with deploying
the Companys employees on customer sites to guide and
manage customers revenue cycle operations. The employees
that the Company deploys on customer sites typically have
significant experience in revenue cycle operations, technology,
quality control or other management disciplines. The other
significant portion of these expenses is an allocation of the
costs associated with maintaining, improving and deploying the
Companys integrated proprietary technology suite and an
allocation of the amortization relating to software development
costs capitalized.
|
|
5.
|
Segments
and Concentrations
|
All of the Companys significant operations are organized
around the single business of providing end-to-end management
services of revenue cycle operations for
U.S.-based
hospitals and other medical providers. Accordingly, for purposes
of disclosure under ASC 280, Segment Reporting, the
Company has only one operating and reporting segment.
All of the Companys net services revenue and trade
accounts receivable are derived from healthcare providers
domiciled in the United States.
While managed independently and governed by separate contracts,
several of the Companys customers are affiliated with a
single healthcare system, Ascension Health. Pursuant to the
Companys master services agreement with Ascension Health,
the Company provides services to Ascension Healths
affiliated hospitals that execute separate contracts with the
Company. The Companys aggregate net services revenue from
these hospitals accounted for 70.7%, 60.3% and 50.7% of the
Companys total net services revenue during the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. The Company
had $17.7 million and $22.1 million of accounts
receivable from hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health as of
December 31, 2009 and 2010, respectively.
In addition, another customer, which is not affiliated with
Ascension Health, accounted for 10.6%, 9.1%, and 6.8% of the
Companys total net services revenue in the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. Henry Ford
Health System, which is not affiliated with Ascension Health,
with whom the Company entered into a managed service contract in
2009, accounted for 9.2% and 11.3% of the Companys
total net services revenue in the years ended December 31,
2009 and 2010, respectively. Furthermore, Fairview Health
Services, which is not affiliated with Ascension Health, with
which the Company entered into a managed service contract in
2010, accounted for 10.7% of the Companys total net
services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2010. No
other non-Ascension Health customer accounted for more than 10%
of the Companys total net services revenue in any of the
periods presented.
F-14
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
|
|
6.
|
Due from
Related Party
|
Pursuant to the acquisition of a business in May 2006, the
sellers, a majority of which are now employees of the Company,
are obligated to indemnify the Company for federal and state
income taxes related to periods up to and including the date of
the acquisition. The net amount due to the Company related to
this indemnity was $1.3 million as of December 31,
2009 and 2010 and is presented as due from related party in the
consolidated balance sheets. This amount is secured by
547,510 shares of the Companys common stock held in
escrow.
|
|
7.
|
Furniture
and Equipment
|
Furniture and equipment consist of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
$
|
845
|
|
|
$
|
464
|
|
Capitalized software
|
|
|
13,575
|
|
|
|
20,270
|
|
Computer equipment
|
|
|
3,582
|
|
|
|
5,750
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
1,770
|
|
|
|
6,376
|
|
Other equipment
|
|
|
608
|
|
|
|
1,017
|
|
Office furniture
|
|
|
709
|
|
|
|
2,163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,089
|
|
|
|
36,040
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(8,188
|
)
|
|
|
(14,342
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
12,901
|
|
|
$
|
21,698
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net furniture and equipment located in India accounted for
approximately 6.7% and 6.9% of total net assets at
December 31, 2009 and 2010, respectively. The Company
recorded $3.9 million and $6.1 million of depreciation
and amortization expense related to its furniture and equipment
for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2010,
respectively.
|
|
8.
|
Non-Executive
Employee Loans
|
In March 2006, certain non-executive employees of the Company
exercised options to purchase an aggregate of
4,246,147 shares of common stock. To facilitate this stock
option exercise, the Company permitted these employees to
deliver promissory notes to the Company representing the
exercise price related to these option exercises. The aggregate
amount loaned to employees for this purpose was approximately
$0.3 million. Certain employees elected under
Section 83(b) of the Internal Revenue Code to be taxed on
the difference between the stocks fair value at the
purchase date and the option exercise price. In addition,
pursuant to the promissory notes, the Company advanced an
additional $0.1 million to such employees to facilitate the
payment of such federal and state income tax obligations.
Each of the individual promissory notes bears interest at 5% per
annum. The principal of each note is payable annually in five
equal installments, commencing on March 1, 2007. Each
promissory note is secured by the shares of the Companys
common stock associated with the employees stock option
exercise. If an employee sells any shares issued pursuant to his
or her stock option exercise, then a pro rata portion of the
associated promissory note becomes immediately due. Any unpaid
balance on an employees promissory note becomes due and
payable 60 days after such employee ceases to work for the
Company.
The amounts receivable from these notes, $0.1 million and
$0.04 million at December 31, 2009 and 2010
respectively, have been deducted from stockholders equity.
F-15
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
Preferred
Stock
In conjunction with its initial public offering in May 2010, the
Company restated its certificate of incorporation and authorized
5,000,000 shares of preferred stock with a par value $0.01.
The preferred stock may be issued from time to time in one or
more series, each of which may have distinctive designations as
determined by the Companys board of directors prior to the
issuance of the preferred shares. Each series of preferred stock
may have no, limited, or full voting powers and other special
rights, conversion features, redemption features, dividend
participation criteria, qualifications, limitations, and
restrictions as stated and expressed in board resolutions
providing for the issuance of such series of preferred stock. As
of December 31, 2010, the Company does not have any shares
of preferred stock outstanding.
Conversion
of Preferred Stock to Common Stock
In conjunction with the initial public offering in May 2010,
32,317 shares of Series A preferred stock and
1,267,224 shares of Series D preferred stock were
converted into 43,796,598 shares of common stock.
Additionally, in May 2010, the preferred shareholders exercised
their right to receive an amount in cash or shares equal to the
pre-determined liquidation preference amount. The Company issued
1,265,012 shares and paid $0.9 million in satisfaction
of liquidation preference payments due to preferred shareholders.
Common
Stock
In May 2010, the Company completed its initial public offering,
in which the Company sold 7,666,667 shares of common stock
and selling stockholders sold 3,833,333 shares of common
stock at an offering price of $12.00 per share. The offering
resulted in net proceeds to the Company of $80.8 million
after underwriting discounts and offering expenses, of which
$2.9 million were incurred prior to December 31, 2009.
The Company also issued 115,000 shares of common stock to a
vendor for services performed in connection with the offering.
In addition, in connection with the offering, the Company
restated its certificate of incorporation and authorized
500,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.01. Each
share of common stock is entitled to one vote. In connection
with the initial public offering, 32,186,858 shares of
Series B common stock and 5,372,877 shares of
Series C common stock were reclassified as
37,559,735 shares of common stock.
Dividends
The Company paid a cash dividend in the aggregate amount of
$15.0 million, or $0.18 per common equivalent share, to
holders of record as of July 11, 2008 of the Companys
common stock and preferred stock.
The Company paid a cash dividend in the aggregate amount of
$14.9 million, or $0.18 per common equivalent share, to
holders of record as of September 1, 2009 of the
Companys common stock and preferred stock.
Warrants
Supplemental
Warrants
Effective in October 2004, the Company entered into a
Supplemental Warrant Agreement with Ascension Health, its
founding customer, which provided for the right to purchase up
to 3,537,306 shares of Series B common stock based
upon the achievement of specified milestones relating to the
customers sales and marketing assistance. In May and
September 2007, the Company and Ascension Health agreed to amend
and restate the Supplemental Warrant Agreement to reduce the
number of shares covered by the warrant to
F-16
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
1,749,064 and to extend the period of time covered by the
Supplemental Warrant Agreement. The measurement date for each
purchase right earned under the warrant was the date when the
founding customers performance was complete, which was the
date that the Company entered into a managed service contract
with a customer for which the founding customer provided
marketing assistance. The purchase price of the shares is equal
to the most recent per share price of the Companys
Series B common stock in a capital raising transaction or,
if there has not been a capital raising transaction within the
preceding six months, the exercise price of the Companys
most recently granted employee stock options.
During March 2008, the founding customer earned the right to
purchase 437,268 shares of Series B common stock under
the Amended Supplemental Warrant Agreement. The warrants have an
exercise price of $10.25 per share. The Company recorded
$2.4 million as marketing expenses during the year ended
December 31, 2008 in conjunction with the issuance of this
warrant.
During March 2009, the founding customer earned the right to
purchase 437,264 shares of Series B common stock under
the Amended Supplemental Warrant Agreement. The warrants have an
exercise price of $13.02 per share. The Company recorded
$2.8 million as marketing expenses during the year ended
December 31, 2009 in conjunction with the issuance of this
warrant.
No warrants were earned during the year ended December 31,
2010. The Companys founding customer was issued
615,649 shares of common stock as a result of cashless
exercise of outstanding supplemental warrants during the year
ended December 31, 2010. The supplemental warrant with
respect to 437,264 shares of common stock issued in
March 2009, expired on the date of the Companys
initial public offering.
As of December 31, 2010, there were no supplemental
warrants outstanding; no additional warrant rights may be earned
under the Supplemental Warrant Agreement.
Protection
Warrants
Effective November 2004, the Company entered into a Protection
Warrant Agreement with the founding customer whereby the Company
granted the customer anti-dilution rights by entering into an
agreement whereby the founding customer is granted warrants to
purchase the Companys Series B common stock from time
to time at an exercise price of $0.003 per share when the
customers original ownership percentage declines as a
result of the Company offering more common share equivalents.
In the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, warrants to
purchase 91,183 and 136,372 shares of Series B common
stock, respectively, were earned under the Protection Warrant.
None were earned in 2010. As a result of these grants, revenue
recorded was reduced by $0.9 million and $1.7 million
during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009,
respectively.
During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, the
founding customer purchased 261,275 and 164,396 shares of
the Companys Series B common stock, respectively, for
$0.003 per share, pursuant to the Protection Warrant Agreement.
As of December 31, 2010, there were no protection warrants
outstanding and no additional warrant rights may be earned under
this Agreement.
Consulting
Warrant
In conjunction with the start of its business, in February 2004,
the Company executed a term sheet with a consulting firm and its
principal contemplating that the Company would grant the
consulting firm a warrant, with an exercise price equal to the
fair market value of the Companys common stock upon grant,
to purchase shares of the Companys common stock then
representing 2.5% of the Companys equity in exchange for
exclusive rights to certain revenue cycle methodologies, tools,
technology, benchmarking information and other intellectual
property, plus up to another 2.5% of the Companys equity
at the time of grant if the consulting firms introduction
of the Company to senior executives at prospective customers
resulted in the execution of managed
F-17
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
service contracts between the Company and such customers. In
January 2005, the Company formalized the warrant grant
contemplated by the term sheet and granted the consulting firm a
warrant to purchase 3,266,668 shares of the Companys
Series C common stock for $0.29 per share, representing
5.0% of the Companys equity at that time.
In December 2010, the consulting firm and its principal
exercised the warrant in full to purchase 3,266,668 shares
of the Companys common stock for $0.29 per share. As of
December 31, 2010, the warrant was no longer outstanding
and no additional warrant rights may be earned under this
agreement.
The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to
determine the estimated fair value of all of the above warrants
at the date granted. The significant assumptions used in the
model were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
Future dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
3.45%
|
|
2.91%
|
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
50%
|
|
50%
|
|
|
Expected life
|
|
6.6 years
|
|
5.6 years
|
|
|
Stock
Options
In December 2005, the Board approved a stock option plan, which
provided for the grant of stock options to employees, directors
and consultants. The plan was amended and restated in February
2006. In April 2010, the Company adopted a new 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan, or the 2010 plan, which became effective
immediately prior to the closing of the Companys initial
public offering, and accordingly, the Company ceased making
further grants under the 2006 plan. The 2010 plan provides for
the grant of incentive stock options, non-statutory stock
options, restricted stock awards and other stock-based awards.
As of December 31, 2010, an aggregate of
15,749,404 shares were subject to outstanding options under
both plans, and 8,054,762 shares were available for grant
under the 2010 plan. To the extent that previously granted
awards under the 2006 plan or 2010 plan expire, terminate or are
otherwise surrendered, cancelled, forfeited or repurchased by
the Company, the number of shares available for future awards
will increase, up to a maximum of 24,374,756 shares. Under
the terms of both plans, all options will expire if they are not
exercised within ten years after the grant date. Substantially
all of the options vest over four years at a rate of 25% per
year on each grant date anniversary. Options granted under the
2006 plan could be exercised immediately upon grant, but upon
exercise the shares issued are subject to the same vesting and
repurchase provisions that applied before the exercise. Options
granted under the 2010 plan cannot be exercised prior to vesting.
The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to
determine the estimated fair value of each option as of its
grant date. These inputs are subjective and generally require
significant analysis and judgment to develop. The following
table sets forth the significant assumptions used in the
Black-Scholes
model and the calculation of stock-based compensation cost
during 2008, 2009 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
Future dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
2.8% to 4.0%
|
|
1.6% to 3.2%
|
|
1.6% to 2.6%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
50%
|
|
50%
|
|
50%
|
Expected life
|
|
6.25 years
|
|
6.25 years
|
|
6.25 years
|
Forfeitures
|
|
3.75% annually
|
|
4.25% annually
|
|
4.25% annually
|
F-18
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
As a newly public company, it is not practicable for the Company
to estimate the expected volatility of the share prices based on
its limited public trading history. Therefore, the
Companys management estimated its expected volatility by
reviewing the historical volatility of the common stock of
public companies that operate in similar industries or are
similar in terms of stage of development or size and then
projecting this information toward its future expected results.
Judgment was used in selecting these companies, as well as in
evaluating the available historical and implied volatility for
these companies.
All employees were aggregated into one pool for valuation
purposes. The risk-free rate is based on the U.S. treasury
yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The plan has not been in existence a sufficient period for the
Companys historical experience to be used when estimating
expected life. Furthermore, data from other companies is not
readily available. Therefore, the expected life of each stock
option was calculated using a simplified method based on the
average of each options vesting term and original
contractual term.
An estimated forfeiture rate derived from the Companys
historical data and its estimates of the likely future actions
of option holders has been applied when recognizing the
stock-based compensation cost of the options.
The following table sets forth a summary of option activity
under the plans for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009
and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
(in years)
|
|
|
Intrinsic Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2008
|
|
|
6,824,955
|
|
|
$
|
1.97
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
$
|
16,836
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,736,560
|
|
|
|
10.52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised vested
|
|
|
(14,700
|
)
|
|
|
1.21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised non-vested
|
|
|
(33,516
|
)
|
|
|
3.96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(44,100
|
)
|
|
|
1.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(309,680
|
)
|
|
|
2.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
8,159,519
|
|
|
$
|
3.77
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
$
|
85,342
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
2,757,720
|
|
|
|
13.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised vested
|
|
|
(116,620
|
)
|
|
|
1.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised non-vested
|
|
|
(4,900
|
)
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(136,220
|
)
|
|
|
1.33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(457,405
|
)
|
|
|
9.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
10,202,094
|
|
|
$
|
6.16
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
$
|
86,074
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
6,763,529
|
|
|
|
14.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised vested
|
|
|
(550,695
|
)
|
|
|
2.28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(107,904
|
)
|
|
|
10.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(557,620
|
)
|
|
|
11.76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
15,749,404
|
|
|
$
|
9.45
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
$
|
107,120
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding and vested at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
6,440,139
|
|
|
$
|
4.08
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
$
|
78,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In February 2010, the Companys board of directors
granted options to purchase 5,197,257 shares to executive
officers, employees and non-employee directors. Subsequently,
the Company determined that these options have an exercise price
equal to $14.71 per share (the fair value of the Companys
common stock on February 3, 2010, as determined by the
board of directors). Prior to the initial public offering, in
April and
F-19
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
May 2010, the Company granted options to purchase
1,119,160 shares and 156,798 shares, respectively, to
various employees. These options have an exercise price of
$12.00, which was the price at which shares of the
Companys common stock were sold to the public in the
initial public offering.
The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010 was $6.20,
$6.77 and $7.19 per share, respectively. The total intrinsic
value of the options exercised in the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010 was $0.2 million,
$1.4 million, and $6.6 million, respectively. The
total fair value of options vested in the years ended
December 31, 2008 and, 2009 and 2010 was $2.8 million,
$5.4 million and 8.0 million, respectively.
Total share-based compensation cost recognized for the years
ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010 was
$3.6 million, $6.9 million and $16.5 million,
respectively, with related income tax benefits of
approximately
$1.4 million, $2.8 million and $6.6 million,
respectively. As of December 31, 2010 there was
$52.0 million of total, unrecognized share-based
compensation cost related to stock options granted under the
plans, which the Company expects to recognize over a
weighted-average period of 2.8 years.
|
|
10.
|
401(k) Retirement
Plan
|
The Company maintains a 401(k) retirement plan that is intended
to be a tax-qualified defined contribution plan under
Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. In general,
all employees are eligible to participate. The 401(k) plan
includes a salary deferral arrangement pursuant to which
participants may elect to reduce their current compensation by
up to the statutorily prescribed limit, equal to $16,500 in
2010, and have the amount of the reduction contributed to the
401(k) plan. The Company currently matches employee
contributions up to 50% of the first 3% of base compensation
that a participant contributes to the plan. In 2008, 2009 and
2010, employees who were Directors, Vice President, or higher
levels were excluded from the matching contribution feature of
the plan. For the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and
2010, total Company contributions to the plan were
$0.2 million, $0.2 million and $0.3 million,
respectively.
The Company rents office space and equipment under a series of
operating leases, primarily for its Chicago corporate office,
shared service centers and India operations. The Companys
leases contain various rent holidays and rent escalation clauses
and entitlements for tenant improvement allowances. Lease
payments are amortized to expense on a straight-line basis over
the lease term. As of December 31, 2010, the Chicago
corporate office consisted of approximately 50,000 square
feet in a multi-story office building under a lease expiring as
to certain portions of the space in 2014 and other portions in
2020. In 2010, the Company substantially expanded its Chicago
corporate headquarters. As a result of the build-out of
additional space, the Company was entitled to approximately
$2.5 million of tenant improvement allowance from the
landlord. The payments from the landlord are included in Other
Non-Current Liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet as of
December 31, 2010 and are amortized on a straight-line
basis over the duration of the lease. Approximately
$0.9 million of the tenant allowance was recorded as a note
receivable as the amount would not be available to the Company
until 2013. In addition, the Company has a right of first offer
to lease an additional 11,100 square feet of space on
another floor in the same building.
In August 2010, the Company also leased approximately
44,500 square feet of office space in another building in
Chicago for a period of 11 years. The total rental
commitment under the lease is approximately $8.0 million.
Total rent expense was $1.0 million, $1.5 million and
$2.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2008,
2009 and 2010, respectively.
F-20
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
At December 31, 2010, the aggregate minimum lease
commitments under all noncancelable operating leases are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
3,196
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2,593
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2,470
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2,466
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
12,751
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
23,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, the
Companys current and deferred income tax expense
attributable to income from continuing operations are as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. federal
|
|
$
|
66
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
66
|
|
State and local
|
|
|
2,177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,177
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,264
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. federal
|
|
$
|
4,377
|
|
|
$
|
(3,206
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,171
|
|
State and local
|
|
|
2,095
|
|
|
|
(339
|
)
|
|
|
1,756
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
(98
|
)
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,609
|
|
|
$
|
(3,643
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,966
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. federal
|
|
$
|
10,454
|
|
|
$
|
(3,340
|
)
|
|
$
|
7,114
|
|
State and local
|
|
|
2,881
|
|
|
|
(283
|
)
|
|
|
2,598
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
(140
|
)
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
13,492
|
|
|
$
|
(3,763
|
)
|
|
$
|
9,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of the difference between the actual tax rate and
the U.S. federal income tax rate is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Federal statutory tax rate
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Increase (reduction) in income tax rate resulting from:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State and local income taxes, net of federal benefits
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Change in the valuation allowance
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
India tax holiday
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Meals and entertainment and other permanent differences
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Alternative minimum tax
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Anti-dilution warrants issued to customers
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual tax rate
|
|
|
65
|
%
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
|
|
44
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-21
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
The following table sets forth the Companys net deferred
tax assets (liabilities) as of December 31, 2009 and 2010
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternative minimum tax credit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
carryover
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
113
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
152
|
|
Employee stock compensation
|
|
|
4,186
|
|
|
|
10,111
|
|
Stock warrants
|
|
|
4,159
|
|
|
|
268
|
|
Bad debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
579
|
|
Research and development credit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
Minimum alternative tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
238
|
|
Other
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross deferred tax assets
|
|
|
8,562
|
|
|
|
11,562
|
|
Less valuation allowance
|
|
|
(139
|
)
|
|
|
(157
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
|
8,423
|
|
|
|
11,405
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
(2,056
|
)
|
|
|
(2,388
|
)
|
Fixed assets and intangibles
|
|
|
(2,816
|
)
|
|
|
(3,628
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(4,872
|
)
|
|
|
(6,016
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax asset
|
|
$
|
3,551
|
|
|
$
|
5,389
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2008, the Company had recorded a
valuation allowance for the full amount of its net deferred tax
assets because its cumulative net tax loss during the three-year
period ended December 31, 2008 resulted in management
concluding that it was not more likely than not that the net
deferred tax assets will be realized.
During the year ended December 31, 2009 the Company reduced
the valuation allowance recorded against the Companys net
deferred tax assets due to a change in the estimate of the
future realization of the net deferred tax assets. The reduction
resulted in a tax benefit of $3.5 million.
At December 31, 2010, the Company has cumulative net
operating loss carryforwards of approximately $0.2 million
which are available to offset future state taxable income in
future periods through 2027.
The Company has not recognized a deferred tax liability for the
undistributed earnings of its foreign subsidiary that arose in
2009 and 2010 because the Company considers these earnings to be
indefinitely reinvested outside of the United States. As of
December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, the undistributed
earnings of this subsidiary were $0.5 million,
$0.7 million and $1.3 million, respectively.
The 2008, 2009 and 2010 current tax provision includes
$0.02 million $0.1 million and $0.2 million,
respectively, for income taxes arising from the pre-tax income
of the Companys India subsidiaries. The tax provisions are
net of the impact of a tax holiday in India. The Companys
benefits from this tax holiday were approximately
$0.2 million, $0.3 million, and $0.4 million for
the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively.
F-22
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
The Companys uncertain tax positions as of
December 31, 2010, totaled $0.6 million. The following
table summarizes the activity related to the unrecognized tax
benefits (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
248
|
|
Increases in positions taken in a current period
|
|
|
196
|
|
Decreases in positions taken in prior period
|
|
|
(139
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
305
|
|
Increases in positions taken in a current period
|
|
|
325
|
|
Increases (decreases) in positions taken in prior period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
630
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010, approximately $0.6 million of
the total gross unrecognized tax benefits represented the amount
that, if recognized, would result in a reduction of the
effective income tax rate in future periods.
The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to
U.S. federal income tax as well as income tax of multiple
state and foreign jurisdictions. U.S. federal income tax
returns for 2008 and 2009 are currently open for examination.
State jurisdictions vary for open tax years. The statute of
limitations for most states ranges from 3 to 6 years.
From time to time, the Company has been and may become involved
in legal or regulatory proceedings arising in the ordinary
course of business. The Company is not presently a party to any
material litigation or regulatory proceeding and the
Companys management is not aware of any pending or
threatened litigation or regulatory proceeding that could have a
material adverse effect on the Companys business,
operating results, financial condition or cash flows.
|
|
14.
|
Earnings
(Loss) Per Common Share
|
Earnings per share (EPS) is calculated in accordance
with ASC 260, Earnings Per Share. The guidance in ASC 260
states that unvested share-based payment awards that contain
nonforfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents
(whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and shall
be included in the computation of earnings per share pursuant to
the two-class method.
Under the two-class method, earnings are allocated between
common stock and participating securities. The accounting
guidance also states that the presentation of basic and diluted
earnings per share is required only for each class of common
stock and not for participating securities. Prior to the initial
public offering, the Companys Series B and
Series C common stock had equal participation rights and
therefore the Company has presented earnings per common share
for Series B and Series C common stock as one class.
Net income per common share and weighted-average shares used in
calculating net income per common share have been restated for
all historical periods to reflect a 3.92-for-one stock split
effective on May 3, 2010.
The Companys Series A and Series D convertible
preferred stock automatically converted to shares of common
stock in connection with the Companys initial public
offering. Additionally, the unvested share-based payment awards
that contained non-forfeitable rights to dividends were
immaterial as of December 31, 2010. Accordingly, for
periods ended after the initial public offering, the two-class
computation method is no longer applicable.
F-23
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and
diluted earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Net income as reported
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
Less: Distributed earnings available to participating securities
|
|
|
8,148
|
|
|
|
8,174
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Undistributed earnings available to participating
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for basic earnings (loss) per share - Undistributed
and distributed earnings available to common shareholders
|
|
|
(6,905
|
)
|
|
|
6,416
|
|
|
|
12,618
|
|
Add: Undistributed earnings allocated to participating securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Undistributed earnings reallocated to participating
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for diluted earnings (loss) per share - Undistributed
and distributed earnings available to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
(6,905
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,416
|
|
|
|
12,618
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for basic earnings (loss) per share -
Weighted-average common shares
|
|
|
36,122,470
|
|
|
|
36,725,194
|
|
|
|
70,732,791
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,229,973
|
|
|
|
23,473,886
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for diluted earnings (loss) per share -
Weighted-average common shares adjusted for dilutive securities
|
|
|
36,122,470
|
|
|
|
43,955,167
|
|
|
|
94,206,677
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss) per share
|
|
$
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
Diluted net income (loss) per share
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
0.13
|
|
Because of their anti-dilutive effect, 55,369,976, 47,338,312
and 9,176,289 common share equivalents, comprised of convertible
preferred shares, stock options and warrants, have been excluded
from the diluted earnings (loss) per share calculation for the
years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively.
|
|
15.
|
Revolving
Credit Facility and Other Commitments
|
On September 30, 2009, the Company entered into a
$15 million line of credit with the Bank of Montreal, which
may be used for working capital and general corporate purposes.
Any amounts outstanding under the line of credit accrue interest
at LIBOR plus 4% and are secured by substantially all of the
Companys assets. Advances under the line of credit are
limited to a borrowing base and a cash deposit account which
will be established at the time borrowings occur. The line of
credit has an initial term of two years and is renewable
annually thereafter. As of December 31, 2010, the Company
had no amounts outstanding under this line of credit. The line
of credit contains restrictive covenants which limit the
Companys ability to, among other things, enter into other
borrowing arrangements and pay future dividends. The Company
recorded $0.15 million of interest expense in 2009 as a
result of the origination fee paid in conjunction with closing
this facility.
In August 2010, the Company executed a new office lease for
approximately 44,500 square feet in a multi-story building
for a period of 11 years. As a result, the Companys
lease payments are expected to increase, on average, by
approximately $0.8 million per year. Pursuant to the terms
of the lease agreement, the Company issued a stand-by letter of
credit in the amount of $1.8 million, increasing total
amount of stand-by letters of credit outstanding to
$1.9 million. This reduced the availability under the Bank
of Montreals line of credit to $13.1 million.
From time to time the Company makes commitments regarding its
performance under certain portions of its managed service
contracts. In the event that the Company does not meet any of
these performance requirements, it may incur expenses to remedy
the performance issue. The Company reviews its compliance with
its contractual performance commitments on a quarterly basis. As
of December 31, 2010, the Company met all of its
performance commitments and, as a result, has not recorded any
liabilities for potential obligations.
F-24
Accretive
Health, Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
|
|
16.
|
Quarterly
Financial Information (Unaudited)
|
Unaudited summarized financial data by quarter for the years
ended December 31, 2009 and 2010 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
Mar. 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
Sept. 30,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Mar. 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
Sept. 30,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net services revenue
|
|
$
|
112,467
|
|
|
$
|
125,682
|
|
|
$
|
134,512
|
|
|
$
|
137,531
|
|
|
$
|
125,937
|
|
|
$
|
151,905
|
|
|
$
|
158,424
|
|
|
$
|
170,029
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
19,764
|
|
|
|
22,718
|
|
|
|
28,627
|
|
|
|
28,372
|
|
|
|
23,648
|
|
|
|
33,891
|
|
|
|
32,152
|
|
|
|
38,327
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(228
|
)
|
|
|
2,919
|
|
|
|
6,984
|
|
|
|
7,889
|
|
|
|
1,172
|
|
|
|
7,434
|
|
|
|
4,481
|
|
|
|
9,232
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(638
|
)
|
|
$
|
5,851
|
|
|
$
|
4,270
|
|
|
$
|
5,106
|
|
|
$
|
314
|
|
|
$
|
3,919
|
|
|
$
|
2,858
|
|
|
$
|
5,528
|
|
Net income applicable to common shareholders(1)
|
|
$
|
(638
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,647
|
|
|
$
|
(3,774
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,318
|
|
|
$
|
314
|
|
|
$
|
3,919
|
|
|
$
|
2,858
|
|
|
$
|
5,528
|
|
Net income per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.07
|
|
|
$
|
(0.11
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.03
|
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
(0.11
|
)
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Prior to our initial public offering in May 2010, we allocated
net income between common stock and other participating
securities, primarily preferred stock shares. Therefore, at each
reporting period, income related to other participating
securities was excluded from net income available for common
shareholders. |
F-25
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, as
amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to
Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.4 to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Specimen Certificate evidencing shares of Common Stock
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Amendment
No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.1*
|
|
Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan, as amended (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.2*
|
|
Form of Acknowledgement of Grant, used to evidence option grants
under the Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registration Statement
on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.3*
|
|
Restricted Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.4*
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the Restricted
Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Third Amended and Restated Stockholders Agreement, dated
as of February 22, 2009, among the Registrant and the
parties named therein, as amended (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.5 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on March 9, 2011)
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Form of Share Exchange Agreement, entered into in February 2009,
with each of Etienne H. Deffarges, Steven N. Kaplan, Gregory N.
Kazarian, The Shultz 1989 Family Trust, Spiegel Family LLC and
John T. Staton Declaration of Trust (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.6 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated as of May 4, 2005, between the
Registrant and Zeller Management Corporation, as amended by
First Lease Amendment, dated as of January 30, 2007, and
Second Lease Amendment, dated as of November 26, 2008
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.8+
|
|
Amended and Restated Master Services Agreement, dated as of
December 13, 2007, between the Registrant and Ascension
Health (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to
Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.17*
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of January 2004, between the
Registrant and Mary A. Tolan, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.18 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.18*
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of June 17, 2005, between
the Registrant and John T. Staton, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.19 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.19*
|
|
Offer Letter, dated December 9, 2003, between the
Registrant and Gregory N. Kazarian, as amended (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.20 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.20*
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement, entered into between the
Registrant and each director and executive officer (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to Amendment No. 1 to
the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on November 19, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.21+
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2009, between
the Registrant and Bank of Montreal (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.21 to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.22+
|
|
Security Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2009, among
the Registrant, Bank of Montreal and specified subsidiaries of
the Registrant (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22
to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.23*
|
|
2010 Stock Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.23 to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.24*
|
|
Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement under the 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24
to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
10
|
.25*
|
|
Form of Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreement under the 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25
to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 21.1 to Amendment No. 4 to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on April 26, 2010)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
Rules 13a-14(a)
and 15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
Rules 13a-14(a)
and 15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required
to be filed pursuant to Item 15(b) of
Form 10-K. |
|
+ |
|
Confidential treatment requested as to certain portions, which
portions have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |