sv1
As filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on March 9, 2011
Registration
No. 333-
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
ACCRETIVE HEALTH,
INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as
Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
7389
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code No.)
|
|
02-0698101
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
401 North Michigan
Avenue
Suite 2700
Chicago, Illinois
60611
(312) 324-7820
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number, including area code, of registrants
principal executive offices)
Mary A. Tolan
Founder, President and Chief
Executive Officer
401 North Michigan
Avenue
Suite 2700
Chicago, Illinois
60611
(312) 324-7820
(Name, address, including zip
code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for
service)
Copies to:
|
|
|
David A. Westenberg, Esq.
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
60 State Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
(617) 526-6000
|
|
Gregory A. Fernicola, Esq.
Jennifer A. Bensch, Esq.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Four Times Square
New York, New York 10036
(212) 735-3000
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after this
Registration Statement is declared effective.
If any of the securities being registered on this form are
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the
Securities Act) please check the following
box. o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
please check the following box and list the Securities Act
registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, please check the
following box and list the Securities Act registration statement
number of the earlier effective registration statement for the
same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, please check the
following box and list the Securities Act registration statement
number of the earlier effective registration statement for the
same
offering. o
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 12b2 of the Exchange Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer o
|
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer þ
|
|
Smaller reporting
company o
|
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
CALCULATION OF
REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
Amount of
|
Title of Each Class of
|
|
|
Amount to be
|
|
|
Offering Price per
|
|
|
Aggregate Offering
|
|
|
Registration
|
Securities to be Registered
|
|
|
Registered(1)
|
|
|
Share(2)
|
|
|
Price(2)
|
|
|
Fee
|
Common Stock, par value $0.01 par value
|
|
|
7,475,000
|
|
|
$20.21
|
|
|
$151,069,750
|
|
|
$17,540
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Includes 975,000 shares of common stock that may be purchased by
the underwriters.
|
|
(2)
|
Estimated solely for the purpose of computing the registration
fee in accordance with Rule 457(c) under the Securities
Act, and is based on the average high and low prices of the
registrants common stock on March 2, 2011.
|
The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act or until the Registration Statement shall
become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant
to Section 8(a), may determine.
The
information in this prospectus is not complete and may be
changed. The selling stockholders may not sell these securities
until the registration statement filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an
offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting offers
to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is
not permitted.
|
Subject to Completion, dated
March 9, 2011
Filed Pursuant to
Rule 424(b)(4)
File No. 333-162186
6,500,000 Shares
Common Stock
All of the shares in this offering are being sold by the selling
stockholders identified in this prospectus. Accretive Health
will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the shares
being sold by the selling stockholders.
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under
the symbol AH. The last reported sale price of our
common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on March 8,
2011 was $24.96 per share.
See Risk Factors beginning on page 10 to
read about factors you should consider before buying shares of
our common stock.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other
regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities
or passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this prospectus. Any
representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
Total
|
|
Price to the public
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Underwriting discount
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds to the selling stockholders
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
To the extent that the underwriters sell more than
6,500,000 shares of common stock, the underwriters have the
option to purchase up to an additional 975,000 shares from
the selling stockholders on the same terms set forth above. See
Underwriting.
The underwriters expect to deliver the shares against payment in
New York, New York
on ,
2011.
|
|
|
Goldman,
Sachs & Co. |
Credit Suisse |
J.P.Morgan |
Baird
Prospectus
dated ,
2011.
ACCRETIVE HEALTH
results providers trust
Delivering Results Through:
People
A talented team with revenue cycle management skills an a focus on outstanding customer service.
Process
Standardized implementation process and continuing analysis using sophisticated analytics and proprietary algorithms.
Technology
Integrated proprietary technology suite delivered as a web interface.
Helping Our Customers Achieve:
Improved Net Revenue Yield
Increased Charge Capture
More Efficient Revenue Cycle Operations
|
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Prospectus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
|
|
130
|
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
|
F-1
|
|
EX-10.5 |
EX-23.1 |
No dealer, salesperson or other person is authorized to give any
information or to represent anything not contained in this
prospectus. You must not rely on any unauthorized information or
representations. This prospectus is an offer to sell only the
shares offered hereby, but only under circumstances and in
jurisdictions where it is lawful to do so. The information
contained in this prospectus is current only as of its date.
PROSPECTUS
SUMMARY
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in
this prospectus. You should read the following summary together
with the more detailed information appearing in this prospectus,
including our consolidated financial statements and related
notes, and the risk factors beginning on page 10, before
deciding whether to purchase shares of our common stock. Unless
the context otherwise requires, we use the terms Accretive
Health, our company, we, us
and our in this prospectus to refer to Accretive
Health, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
Accretive
Health
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.
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. Our integrated technology and
services offerings, which we refer to as our solutions, helps
our customers realize sustainable improvements in their
operating margins and healthcare quality and improve the
satisfaction of their patients, physicians and staff. Our
solutions 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. 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, and
our quality and total cost of care service offering to one of
these customers, representing seven hospitals and
42 clinics.
The revenue cycle operations of a typical healthcare provider
often fail to capture and collect the total amounts
contractually owed to it from third-party payors and patients
for medical services rendered. Our revenue cycle management
solution spans our customers entire revenue cycle, unlike
competing services that we believe address only a portion of the
revenue cycle or focus solely on cost reductions. Through the
implementation of our distinctive operating model that includes
people, process and technology, our revenue cycle management
services customers have historically achieved significant
improvements in cash collections measured against the
contractual amount due for medical services, which we refer to
as net revenue yield, within 18 to 24 months of
implementing our solution. Revenue cycle management customers
operating under mature managed service contracts typically
realize 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.
Introduced in 2010, our quality and total cost of care service
solution consists of a combination of people, processes and
technology that enable our customers to effectively manage the
health of a defined patient population. Our technology and
service infrastructure can help our customers identify the
individuals who are most likely to experience an adverse health
event, and as a result, incur high
1
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.
In assuming responsibility for the management and cost of a
customers revenue cycle or quality and total cost of care
operations, we supplement the existing staff involved in the
customers operations with seasoned Accretive Health
personnel. We also seek to embed our technology, personnel,
know-how and culture within each customers activities with
the expectation that we will serve as the customers
on-site
operational manager beyond the contracts initial term. To
date, we have experienced a contract renewal rate of 100%
(excluding exploratory new services 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 for revenue cycle management services
represent our portion of the increase in our customers net
revenue yield. When providing quality and total cost of care
services, we will also 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 and our customers share financial gains resulting from our
solution, which directly aligns our objectives and interests
with those of our customers. We believe that over time, this
alignment of interest fosters greater innovation and
incentivizes us to improve our customers operations.
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 rate of 39% since January 1, 2006.
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.
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
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 percentage 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 solutions
address. We expect this market opportunity will continue to
grow. In addition, the continued operating pressures facing
U.S. hospitals coupled with some of the themes underlying
healthcare reform legislation enacted in March 2010 make the
efficient management of the revenue cycle and collection of the
full amount of payments due for patient services 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
are 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.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
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; however, we believe most
hospitals are not very well prepared to address consumer needs
regarding the patients payment obligation.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
In addition, we believe there is a significant market for our
quality and total cost of care 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 improperly
aligned incentives, non-coordination of care across healthcare
settings and lack of integrated technology systems and
information sharing processes are among the trends that have
contributed to increases in healthcare costs in excess of
increases in the consumer price index.
The Accretive
Health Solutions
Our revenue cycle management services solution is intended to
address the full spectrum of revenue cycle operational issues
faced by healthcare providers. 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. We deliver improved operating margins to our
customers by helping them to improve their net revenue yield;
increase their charge capture, which involves ensuring that all
charges for medical treatment are included in the associated
bill; and make their revenue cycle operations more efficient by
implementing advanced technologies, streamlining operations and
avoiding unnecessary re-work. While improvements in net revenue
yield generally represent the majority of a customers
operating margin improvement, we are able to deliver additional
margin improvement through improvements in charge capture and
through revenue cycle cost reductions. We typically achieve
revenue cycle cost reductions by implementing our proprietary
technology and procedures, which reduce manual processes and
duplicative work; migrating selected tasks to our shared
operating facilities; and transferring certain third-party
services, such as Medicaid eligibility review, to our own
operations center, which allows us to leverage centralized
processing capabilities to perform these tasks more efficiently.
Improvements in charge capture are typically attributable to
reduced payment denials by payors and identification of
additional items that can be billed to payors based on the
actual procedures performed. 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 employ a variety of techniques intended to achieve our
objectives for our customers:
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering Complete Patient and Payor
Information. We focus on gathering complete
patient information and educating the patient as to his or her
potential financial responsibilities before receiving care so
the services can be recorded and billed to the appropriate
parties. Our systems automatically measure the completeness and
accuracy of up-front patient profile information and other data,
as well as billing and collections throughout the lifecycle of
each patient account. Our analyses of these data 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 and
reduced billing cycles.
|
|
|
|
Improving Claims Filing and Third-Party Payor
Collections. We implement sophisticated analytics
designed to improve claims filing and collection of claims from
third-party insurance payors. By employing proprietary
algorithms and modeling to determine how hospital staff involved
in the revenue cycle should allocate time and resources across a
pool of outstanding claims prioritized by level of risk, we can
increase the likelihood that patient services will be reimbursed.
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
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. 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. Our systems are designed to streamline work
processes through the use of proprietary algorithms that focus
effort on those accounts deemed to have the greatest potential
for improving net revenue yield or charge capture.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Our quality and total cost of care service offering, which we
introduced in 2010, consists of a combination of people,
processes and technology that 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. 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 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
maintaining or improving overall medical quality. 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.
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 for our customers by
providing services that span the entire revenue cycle;
|
|
|
|
continuing to develop innovative approaches to increase the
collection rate on patient-owed obligations for medical services
received;
|
|
|
|
enhancing and developing proprietary algorithms to identify
potential errors and to make process corrections in the
collection of reimbursements from third-party payors;
|
|
|
|
expanding our shared services program;
|
|
|
|
hiring, training and retaining our personnel;
|
|
|
|
continuing to diversify our customer base; and
|
|
|
|
developing enhanced service offerings, such as our quality and
total cost of care services, which we introduced in 2010, that
offer us long-term opportunities.
|
4
Risks Associated
with Our Business
Our business is subject to a number of risks which you should be
aware of before making an investment decision. Those risks are
discussed more fully in Risk Factors beginning on
page 10. For example:
|
|
|
|
|
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;
|
|
|
|
hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health account for a
majority of our net services revenue;
|
|
|
|
we face competition from the internal revenue cycle management
staff of hospitals as well as from a variety of external
participants in the revenue cycle market;
|
|
|
|
if we are unable to retain our existing customers, or if our
customers fail to renew their managed service contracts with us
upon expiration, our financial condition will suffer; and
|
|
|
|
existing and prospective government regulation of the healthcare
industry creates risks and challenges for our business.
|
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.
Our website address is www.accretivehealth.com. Information
contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into
this prospectus, and you should not consider information
contained on our website to be part of this prospectus or in
deciding whether to purchase shares of our common stock.
Accretive
Healthtm,
the Accretive Health logo, Accretive
PAStm,
AccretiveQ,
AHtoAccess®,
AHtoCharge®,
AHtoContract®,
AHtoLinktm,
AHtoPosttm,
AHtoRemit,
AHtoScribetm,
AHtoScribe
Administrator®,
AHtoTrac®,
A2A®,
Charge Integrity Services, Medicaid Eligibility Hub,
YBFU®,
Yield-Based Follow
Up®
and other trademarks or service marks of Accretive Health
appearing in this prospectus are the property of Accretive
Health.
5
The
Offering
|
|
|
Common stock offered by the selling stockholders |
|
6,500,000 shares |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
95,126,464 shares |
|
Use of proceeds |
|
The selling stockholders will receive all of the net proceeds
from the sale of the shares in this offering. We will not
receive any of the proceeds from the sale of shares in this
offering. |
|
Risk Factors |
|
You should read the Risk Factors section and other
information included in this prospectus for a discussion of
factors to consider carefully before deciding to invest in
shares of our common stock. |
|
New York Stock Exchange symbol |
|
AH |
The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding after
this offering is based on 95,126,464 shares of common stock
outstanding as of February 28, 2011 and excludes:
|
|
|
|
|
15,189,144 shares of common stock issuable upon the
exercise of stock options outstanding and exercisable as of
February 28, 2011 at a weighted-average exercise price of
$9.56 per share, of which 7,643,688 shares with a weighted
average exercise price of $6.06 per share would be vested if
purchased upon exercise of these options as of February 28,
2011; and
|
|
|
|
7,952,122 shares of common stock available for future
issuance under our equity compensation plans as of
February 28, 2011.
|
Except as otherwise noted, all information in this prospectus
assumes no exercise by the underwriters of their option to
purchase up to an additional 975,000 shares from the
selling stockholders.
6
SUMMARY
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following tables summarize our consolidated financial data
for the periods presented. The summary statements of operations
for the three years ended December 31, 2010 and the summary
balance sheet as of December 31, 2010 are derived from our
audited financial statements for the three years ended
December 31, 2010 included elsewhere in this prospectus.
You should read this data together with our consolidated
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus and the information under Selected
Consolidated Financial Data and Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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) (1)
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 computing 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Operating Data (unaudited):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA (2)
|
|
$
|
12,220
|
|
|
$
|
32,912
|
|
|
$
|
45,024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
Projected contracted annual revenue run rate
(in millions) (3)
|
|
$
|
421 to $430
|
|
|
$
|
509 to $519
|
|
|
$
|
698 to $713
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
155,573
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
109,757
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
262,619
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
142,719
|
|
7
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Interest income results from earnings associated with our cash
and cash equivalents. No debt or other interest-bearing
obligations were outstanding during any of the periods
presented. Interest expense for 2009 is a result of a $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 prospectus, and not to rely on any single financial
measure to evaluate our business. |
8
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents a reconciliation of adjusted EBITDA
to net income, the most comparable GAAP measure: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
14,590
|
|
|
$
|
12,618
|
|
Net interest (income) expense(a)
|
|
|
(710
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
|
|
9,729
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
2,540
|
|
|
|
3,921
|
|
|
|
6,157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
$
|
5,337
|
|
|
$
|
21,486
|
|
|
$
|
28,475
|
|
Stock compensation expense(b)
|
|
|
3,551
|
|
|
|
6,917
|
|
|
|
16,549
|
|
Stock warrant expense(b)
|
|
|
3,332
|
|
|
|
4,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
|
$
|
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, $921 and $1,736 was classified as a
reduction in net services 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.
|
|
|
(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. |
9
RISK
FACTORS
An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of
risk. In deciding whether to invest, you should carefully
consider the following risk factors. Any of the following risks
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations or prospects and cause the
value of our common stock to decline, which could cause you to
lose all or part of your investment. When deciding whether to
invest in our common stock, you should also refer to the other
information in this prospectus, including our consolidated
financial statements and related notes and the
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations section of this
prospectus.
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.
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,
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, with
which we entered into a managed service contract in 2010,
accounted for 10.7% of our total net services revenue for the
year ended December 31, 2010.
10
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.
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 market for
integrated revenue cycle management services that span the
entire revenue cycle 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. Some hospitals may be reluctant or
unwilling to implement our solution for a number of reasons,
including failure to perceive the need for improved revenue
cycle
11
operations and lack of knowledge about the potential benefits
our solution provides. Even if potential customers recognize the
need for improved revenue cycle operations, they may not select
an integrated, end-to-end revenue cycle solution such as ours
because they previously have made investments in internally
developed solutions and choose to continue to rely on their own
internal revenue cycle management staff. As a result, the market
for integrated, end-to-end revenue cycle 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.
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
12
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 decreases in our revenue and
operating margin. Any such changes or adjustments may cause our
quarter-to-quarter results of operations to fluctuate.
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.
13
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 8,164 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 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
14
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, 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
15
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.
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 increased competition to attract
and retain skilled employees and has led to a commensurate
increase in compensation costs. 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.
16
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.
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
17
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 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
18
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 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
19
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.
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;
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
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
this Offering and Ownership of Shares of Our Common
Stock
The trading
price of our common stock may be volatile, and you may not be
able to sell your shares at or above the public offering
price.
We sold shares of our common stock in our initial public
offering in May 2010 at a price of $12.00 per share, and our
common stock has subsequently traded at a price per share as
high as $25.55 and as low as $8.30. An active public market for
our shares may not be sustained after this offering. The trading
price of our common stock is likely to continue to be highly
volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response
to various factors. In addition to the risks described in this
section, factors that may cause the market price of our common
stock to fluctuate include:
|
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in our quarterly financial results or the quarterly
financial results of companies perceived to be similar to us;
|
|
|
|
changes in estimates of our financial results or recommendations
by securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
investors general perception of us; and
|
|
|
|
changes in general economic, industry and market conditions.
|
In addition, if the stock market in general experiences a loss
of investor confidence, the trading price of our common stock
could decline for reasons unrelated to our business, financial
condition or results of operations.
Some companies that have had volatile market prices for their
securities have had securities class actions filed against them.
If a suit were filed against us, regardless of its merits or
outcome, it would likely result in substantial costs and divert
managements attention and resources. This could have a
material adverse effect on our business, operating results and
financial condition.
21
Future sales
of shares by existing stockholders could cause our stock price
to decline.
If our existing stockholders sell, or indicate an intention to
sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public
market following this offering, the trading price of our common
stock could decrease significantly. Based on shares outstanding
as of February 28, 2011, upon the closing of this offering,
we will have outstanding 95,126,464 shares of common stock.
Of these
shares, shares
of common stock are eligible for sale in the public market
and shares
of common stock will be subject to a
90-day
contractual
lock-up with
the underwriters. Goldman, Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse
Securities (USA) LLC and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, acting as
representatives of the underwriters, may permit our officers,
directors and selling stockholders who are subject to the
contractual
lock-up to
sell shares prior to the expiration of the
lock-up
agreements. Upon expiration of the contractual
lock-up
agreements with the underwriters, and based on shares
outstanding as of February 28, 2011, an
additional shares
will be eligible for sale in the public market.
Some of our existing stockholders have demand and incidental
registration rights to require us to register with the SEC up
to shares
of our common stock, following the closing of this offering and
expiration of the lock-up agreements, assuming no exercise of
the underwriters option to purchase additional shares. If
we register these shares of common stock, the stockholders would
be able to sell those shares freely in the public market.
See Shares Eligible for Future Sale for further
details regarding the number of shares eligible for sale in the
public market after this offering.
Insiders will
continue to have substantial control over us after this offering
and will be able to determine substantially all matters
requiring stockholder approval.
Upon the closing of this offering, our directors and executive
officers and their affiliates will beneficially own, in the
aggregate, approximately % of our
outstanding common stock, assuming no exercise of the
underwriters option to purchase additional shares. As a
result, these stockholders will be able to determine
substantially all matters requiring stockholder approval,
including the election of directors and approval of significant
corporate transactions, such as a merger or other sale of our
company or its assets. This concentration of ownership could
limit your ability to influence corporate matters and may have
the effect of delaying or preventing a third-party from
acquiring control over us. For information regarding the
ownership of our outstanding stock by our executive officers and
directors and their affiliates, see Principal and Selling
Stockholders.
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 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;
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
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 following the closing of this
offering.
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.
23
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus 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 prospectus 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 solution as compared to those of others;
|
|
|
|
our new quality/cost 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
prospectus, 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 prospectus and the documents that we have
filed as exhibits to the registration statement, of which this
prospectus is a part, 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.
INDUSTRY AND
MARKET DATA
We obtained the industry and market data in this prospectus from
our own research as well as from industry and general
publications, surveys and studies conducted by third parties.
Industry and general publications, studies and surveys generally
state that they have been obtained from sources believed to be
reliable, although they do not guarantee the accuracy or
completeness of such information. While we believe that these
publications, studies and surveys are reliable, we have not
independently verified the data contained in them. In addition,
while we believe that the results and estimates from our
internal research are reliable, such results and estimates have
not been verified by any independent source.
24
USE OF
PROCEEDS
The selling stockholders will receive all of the net proceeds
from the sale of shares in this offering. We will not receive
any of the proceeds from the sale of shares in this offering,
including any sales pursuant to the underwriters option to
purchase additional shares. We will pay the expenses of this
offering, other than underwriting discounts and commissions.
25
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. In 2009, we entered into a
$15 million revolving line of credit, which does not permit
us to pay any future dividends without the lenders prior
consent.
26
PRICE RANGE OF
COMMON STOCK
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
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ending March 31, 2011 (through March 8, 2011)
|
|
$
|
25.55
|
|
|
$
|
16.00
|
|
|
|
|
(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 8, 2011 was $24.96. As of
February 28, 2011, there were 79 holders of record of our
common stock.
27
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and
capitalization as of December 31, 2010. You should read
this table together with our financial statements and the
related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus and the
Use of Proceeds and Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations sections of this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
155,573
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 5,000,000 shares
authorized and no shares issued or outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value; 500,000,000 shares
authorized, 94,826,509 shares issued and outstanding
|
|
|
948
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
159,780
|
|
Non-executive employee loans for stock option exercises
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(17,834
|
)
|
Cumulative translation adjustment
|
|
|
(134
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
142,719
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$
|
142,719
|
|
The table above is based on the number of shares of common stock
outstanding as of December 31, 2010, and excludes:
|
|
|
|
|
15,500,584 shares of common stock issuable upon the
exercise of stock options outstanding and exercisable as of
December 31, 2010 at a weighted-average exercise price of
$9.42 per share, of which 6,440,139 shares with a
weighted-average exercise price of $4.08 per share were
vested; and
|
|
|
|
8,054,762 shares of common stock available for future
issuance under our equity compensation plans as of
December 31, 2010.
|
28
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 prospectus and the Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations section of this prospectus.
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
prospectus. 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 prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Projected contracted annual revenue run rate
(in millions)(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
|
|
29
|
|
|
(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 $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 prospectus, and not to rely on any single financial
measure to evaluate our business.
30
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.
|
31
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 prospectus. Some of the
information contained in this discussion and analysis or set
forth elsewhere in this prospectus, 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 prospectus 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, 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 service 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
existing staff involved in the operation 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
32
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 services 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 8,164 of our
customers employees who are involved in patient
registration, health management information, procedure coding,
billing and collections. 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
33
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.
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.
34
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 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
35
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
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
36
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
prospectus. For further information on our critical and other
significant accounting policies, see note 2 to our
consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this
prospectus.
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.
37
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 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.
38
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 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 costs 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.
39
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
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.
40
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 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.
41
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. The following table sets forth the
significant assumptions used in the Black-Scholes model to
calculate stock-based compensation cost 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 cost
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.
As of December 31, 2010, we had $52.0 million of total
unrecognized share-based compensation cost 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 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 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.
42
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 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.
|
From June 2005 to January 2008, we used the market approach to
estimate our enterprise value. The market approach estimates the
fair market value of a company by applying market multiples of
publicly-traded firms in the same or similar lines of business
to the results and projected results of the company being
valued. When choosing companies for use in the market approach,
we focused on businesses that provide outsourcing, consulting or
technology services or that have high rates of growth. To obtain
our preliminary enterprise value, we calculated the multiple of
the market valuations of the comparable companies to their
annual revenues and applied this multiple to our revenue run
rate, defined as our total projected revenues for the next
12 months from existing customers. We then discounted the
preliminary enterprise value by a percentage determined by our
board to reflect our companys relative immaturity in
relation to the comparable companies. This discount changed over
time as we matured. The resulting value was then divided by the
number of shares of common stock outstanding on a fully-diluted
basis to obtain the fair value per share of common stock. We
performed a new valuation in this manner each time we signed a
managed service contract with a new customer.
For all valuations from January 1, 2008 through the date of
our initial public offering, we used both the market approach
and the income approach to estimate our aggregate enterprise
value at each valuation date. The change in valuation method was
in recognition that in 2007 we had achieved some significant
milestones, particularly positive net income and positive
adjusted EBITDA for the year, and that an initial public
offering or other type of liquidity event would eventually be
considered. When choosing companies to be used for the market
approach after January 2008, we focused on businesses with high
rates of growth and relatively low profitability that provide
services to hospitals or other medical providers, or that
provide business outsourcing solutions. The comparable companies
remained largely unchanged from January 2008 until our initial
public offering. The income approach involves applying an
appropriate risk-adjusted discount rate to projected debt-free
cash flows, based on forecasted revenue and costs. The financial
forecasts were based on assumed revenue growth rates that took
into account our past experience and future expectations. We
assessed the risks associated with achieving these forecasts and
applied an appropriate cost of capital rate based on our
boards view of our companys stage of development and
risks, the experience of our directors in managing companies
backed by private equity investors, and our managements
review of academic research on this topic.
We averaged the two values derived under the market approach and
the income approach and then added our current cash position and
cash and tax benefits, assuming that all outstanding options and
warrants were exercised, to create an enterprise value. Next, we
allocated the enterprise value to our securities with rights and
preferences that are superior to our common stock, using the
option-
43
pricing method set forth in the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants Practice Aid, Valuation of
Privately-Held-Company Equity Securities Issued as
Compensation. We then discounted the remaining value by 10%
to reflect the fact that our stockholders could not freely trade
our common stock in the public markets. We based the 10%
discount for lack of marketability primarily on the results of a
study of this topic by Bajaj, Denis, Ferris and Sarin entitled
Firm Value and Marketability Discounts
(February 26, 2001). The resulting value was then divided
by the number of shares of common stock outstanding on a
fully-diluted basis to obtain the fair value per share of common
stock.
Prior to our initial public offering, stock options and certain
warrants 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 and
warrants to purchase non-voting common stock represent stock
options and warrants to purchase voting common stock, with no
other changes in their terms. For all valuations prior to
May 18, 2009, we determined the fair value of the voting
common stock and applied it to the non-voting common stock
without a discount.
Beginning on May 18, 2009, we refined our valuation
methodology because of the increased potential for an initial
public offering or company sale. We continued to use both the
market approach and the income approach, but applied a discount
to the fair value of the non-voting common stock and modified
other variables as described below.
Because of the increased potential for an initial public
offering, in late December 2009 we stopped granting stock
options with exercise prices that were fixed at the time of
grant. All stock options granted between January 1, 2010
and April 21, 2010 had an exercise price equal to the
greater of $14.71 per share (the fair value of our common stock
as of such date, as determined by the board of directors) and
the price per share at which shares would initially be offered
to the public in our initial public offering if that offering
had occurred prior to May 15, 2010 or within 90 days
after the applicable grant date. Between April 22, 2010 and
the closing of our initial public offering, all stock options
were granted with an exercise price equal to the price per share
at which shares were to be initially offered to the public in
our initial public offering, provided that, if that offering had
not occurred within 90 days after the applicable grant
date, our board of directors would have made a new determination
of the fair value of our common stock and the exercise price of
these options would have equaled such fair value.
There was inherent uncertainty in these forecasts and
projections. 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.
Information regarding the number of shares of common stock
subject to option grants from January 1, 2008 through
March 8, 2011 is summarized in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Shares of Common Stock
|
Grant Period
|
|
Subject to Option
Grants
|
|
January 1, 2008 to January 31, 2008
|
|
|
194,040
|
|
February 1, 2008 to June 9, 2008
|
|
|
997,640
|
|
June 10, 2008 to September 2, 2008
|
|
|
301,840
|
|
September 3, 2008 to October 2, 2008
|
|
|
154,840
|
|
October 3, 2008 to January 16, 2009
|
|
|
339,080
|
|
January 17, 2009 to May 17, 2009
|
|
|
1,132,880
|
|
May 18, 2009 to July 17, 2009
|
|
|
346,920
|
|
July 18, 2009 to November 16, 2009
|
|
|
756,560
|
|
November 17, 2009 to February 2, 2010
|
|
|
270,480
|
|
February 3, 2010 to April 21, 2010
|
|
|
5,197,257
|
|
April 22, 2010 to May 19, 2010
|
|
|
1,275,960
|
|
May 20, 2010 to March 8, 2011
|
|
|
404,714
|
|
44
The analyses undertaken in determining the fair value of our
common stock for all grants between January 1, 2008 and
May 19, 2010 are summarized below. The methodology for the
fair value determination made on September 4, 2007 is
summarized above. All analyses from January 1, 2008 until
our initial public offering in May 2010 used the market approach
and the income approach summarized above, with the additional
assumptions described below. Since our initial public offering,
the exercise price per share of all option grants has been set
at the closing price of our common stock on the NYSE on the
applicable date of grant, which we believe represents the fair
value of our common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
September 4, 2007 Fair Value
Determination. For grants made between
January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2008, we used $4.43
per share as the fair value of our common stock, based on a
determination of fair value made by our board of directors on
September 4, 2007. The market approach resulted in a value
that was 1.5 times our annual revenue run rate as of the
valuation date.
|
|
|
|
February 1, 2008 Fair Value
Determination. On February 1, 2008, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our common
stock was $10.25 per share. The market approach resulted in a
value that was approximately 3.53 times our net services revenue
for the third quarter of 2007. For the income approach, we
forecasted our cash flows over a five-year period and assumed
that our terminal value would approximate 12.5 times our
adjusted EBITDA for the fifth future year. We obtained the
present value of each years cash flow by applying a 25%
discount rate. Next, we averaged the values resulting from the
income approach and the market approach and added our cash on
hand at December 31, 2007 and the estimated cash and tax
benefits that would occur assuming that all outstanding options
and warrants were exercised. The resulting value represented our
estimate of our enterprise value. We allocated 48.9% of the
estimated enterprise value to securities with rights and
preferences that are superior to our common stock, assuming a
future volatility rate of 54.25% and that a liquidity event
would occur in 18 months. We then reduced the remaining
value attributable to common stock by 10% for non-marketability,
and divided the result by the number of shares outstanding on a
fully-diluted basis to arrive at the estimated fair value per
share.
|
|
|
|
June 10, 2008 Fair Value
Determination. On June 10, 2008, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our common
stock was $12.04 per share. The increase in our value per share
was due to increases in our estimated enterprise value under
both the market approach and the income approach. We continued
to apply a 50% weighting to each value and then to increase the
result by the amount of our cash on hand and the anticipated
cash and tax benefits from option and warrant exercises. The
value determined by the market approach on June 10, 2008,
which was approximately 3.52 times our net services revenue for
the first quarter of 2008, was higher than the value determined
on February 1, 2008 because of the increase in our net
services revenue in the first quarter of 2008 as compared to the
third quarter of 2007. For the income approach, we used the same
discount rate and methodology as in the February 1, 2008
valuation and updated our cash flow projections to reflect our
new five-year plan. The percentage allocation of our estimated
enterprise value to senior securities and common stock was
unchanged from the prior valuation.
|
|
|
|
September 3, 2008 Fair Value
Determination. On September 3, 2008, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our common
stock was $14.96 per share. The increase in our value per share
was due to increases in our estimated enterprise value under
both the market approach and the income approach. We continued
to apply a 50% weighting to each value and then to increase the
result by the amount of our cash on hand and the anticipated
cash and tax benefits from option and warrant exercises. The
value determined by the market approach on September 3,
2008 was higher than the value determined on June 10, 2008
because of the increase in our net services revenue in the
second quarter of 2008 as compared to the first quarter of 2008
and because we increased the net services revenue multiple from
3.52 to 3.78 to reflect increases in market prices of the
comparable companies.
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
For the income approach, we used the same discount rate and
methodology as in the June 10, 2008 valuation, except that
we discounted the projected cash flows and terminal value for
three fewer months. The percentage allocation of our estimated
enterprise value to senior securities and common stock was
unchanged from the prior valuation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 3, 2008 Fair Value
Determination. On October 3, 2008, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our common
stock was $14.23 per share. There were no changes in the
estimated enterprise value determined under the income approach.
The board believed, however, that the significant decline in the
market values of publicly traded securities that occurred during
the month of September 2008 warranted a reduction in the net
services revenue multiple from 3.78 to 3.40, resulting in a
decrease in our estimated enterprise value under the market
approach. All other aspects of the valuation methodology
remained unchanged from the September 3, 2008 valuation.
|
|
|
|
January 17, 2009 Fair Value
Determination. On January 17, 2009, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our common
stock was $13.02 per share. The decrease in our value per share
was primarily due to a decrease in our estimated enterprise
value under the market approach. We continued to apply a 50%
weighting to the estimated enterprise value determined under
both the market approach and the income approach, and then to
increase the result by the amount of our cash on hand and the
anticipated cash and tax benefits from option and warrant
exercises. The value determined by the market approach on
January 17, 2009 was lower than the value determined on
October 3, 2008, because we decreased the net services
revenue multiple from 3.40 to 2.79 to reflect further declines
in market prices of the comparable companies and our revenues
decreased slightly in the third quarter of 2008 as compared to
the second quarter of 2008. For the income approach, we used the
same discount rate and methodology as in the October 3,
2008 valuation, except that we discounted the projected cash
flows and terminal value for three fewer months. The percentage
allocation of our estimated enterprise value to senior
securities and common stock was unchanged from the prior
valuation.
|
|
|
|
May 18, 2009 Fair Value
Determination. On May 18, 2009, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our
non-voting common stock was $12.98 per share. For the income
approach, we developed new forecasts of our cash flows over a
twelve-year period rather than a five-year period. We based our
projections for the first five years of this period based on our
actual operating results for 2008 and our expected operating
results for the years 2009 through 2013, and we assumed for the
next seven years of this period that we would make an orderly
transition from a high-growth company to a mature growth
company. To reflect that we were entering into a different stage
of development, we decreased the discount rate applied to future
expected cash flows from 25% to 18%. To estimate the terminal
value we assumed a 5% long-term growth rate and used the Gordon
growth model, which is a mathematical simplification of an
earnings stream that is expected to grow at a constant rate. For
the market approach, we used a similar group of six companies.
In order to reduce the influence of outliers, however, the net
services revenue multiple for the companies with the highest and
lowest figures were weighted 10% each and the net services
revenue multiple for the other four companies were weighted 20%
each. In addition, the estimated enterprise value calculated
under the income approach was weighted 67% and the estimated
enterprise value calculated under the market approach was
weighted 33%. This change to place greater emphasis on the
income approach also reflected our board of directors
conclusion that we were transitioning from a company with little
or no profit toward a company with increasing profit and that
greater weight should be placed on the income approach using a
discounted cash flow calculation, since it is based on
profitability, and lesser weight should be placed on the market
approach, since it is based on a net services revenue multiple.
The result was then increased by the present value of the cash
that we expected would be realized if all options and warrants
were exercised plus the present value of the associated tax
savings we would achieve. We continued to allocated the adjusted
enterprise value to our securities with rights
|
46
|
|
|
|
|
and preferences that are superior to our common stock, as in
prior valuations, and continued to discount the remaining value
by 10% to reflect the fact that our stockholders could not
freely trade our common stock in the public markets. We also
applied an additional discount of 2% to the fair value of the
voting common stock in order to determine the fair value of the
non-voting common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 18, 2009 Fair Value
Determination. On July 18, 2009, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our
non-voting common stock was $13.30 per share. For the
income approach, we updated the twelve year forecasts of
our cash flows. The projection for the first five years of this
period was updated for our actual operating results for 2009 and
our expected operating results for the remainder of the year
2009 and through the year 2013. We continued to assume for the
next seven years of this period that we would make an orderly
transition from a high-growth company to a mature growth
company. We continued to estimate the terminal value assuming a
5% long-term growth and the Gordon growth model. For the market
approach, we continued to use the same group of six comparable
companies as in the May 18, 2009 valuation. We also
continued to use the same relative weighting methodology to
estimate the aggregate enterprise value. The result was then
increased by the present value of the cash that we expected
would be realized if all options and warrants were exercised
plus the present value of the associated tax savings we would
achieve. The total adjusted enterprise value increased from
$1,432 million to $1,492 million. We continued to
allocate the adjusted enterprise value to our securities with
rights and preferences that are superior to our common stock.
This allocation accounted for the fact that we were actively
considering an initial public offering. We continued to discount
the remaining value by 10% to reflect the fact that our
stockholders could not freely trade our common stock in the
public markets. We also applied an additional discount of 2% to
the fair value of the voting common stock in order to determine
the fair value of the non-voting common stock.
|
|
|
|
November 17, 2009 Fair Value
Determination. On November 17, 2009, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our
non-voting common stock was $14.59 per share. For the
income approach, we used an updated twelve-year forecasts of our
cash flows. We applied an 18% discount rate to future expected
cash flows. We also continued to estimate the terminal value by
assuming a 5% long-term growth rate and using the Gordon growth
model. For the market approach, we added a company that provides
healthcare information technology services (and had recently
completed an initial public offering) to our group of comparable
companies. We also expanded the market approach to consider each
comparable companys operating earnings before income
taxes, depreciation and amortization, along with each comparable
companys net services revenues. The aggregate market
multiple for each factor was determined using the same relative
weighting between comparable companies as in the July 18,
2009 valuation. The two aggregate market multiples were then
given an equal weighting in deriving an overall market multiple.
As in the July 18, 2009 valuation, the aggregate enterprise
value was calculated with the income approach receiving a 67%
weighting and the market approach receiving a 33% weighting. The
aggregate enterprise value was then increased by the present
value of the cash that we expected would be realized if all
options and warrants were exercised plus the present value of
the associated tax savings we would achieve. We continued to
allocate the adjusted enterprise value to our securities with
rights and preferences that are superior to our common stock
with the allocation taking into account the fact that we are
actively in the process of preparing for an initial public
offering. We continued to discount the remaining value by 10% to
reflect the fact that our stockholders could not freely trade
our common stock in the public markets. We also applied an
additional discount of 2% to the fair value of the voting common
stock in order to determine the fair value of the non-voting
common stock.
|
|
|
|
February 3, 2010 and April 21, 2010 Fair Value
Determinations. On February 3, 2010, our
board of directors determined that the fair value of our
non-voting common stock was $14.71 per share. Our board of
directors determined that the fair market value of our non-
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
voting common stock continued to be $14.71 per share at
April 21, 2010. For the income approach, we updated our
12-year forecast of our future expected cash flows but continued
to apply an 18% discount rate to these cash flows. We also
continued to estimate the terminal value by assuming a 5%
long-term growth rate and the Gordon growth model. For the
market approach, we used the same group of comparable companies
that was used in the November 17, 2009 determination and
continued to consider each comparable companys operating
earnings before income taxes, depreciation and amortization,
along with each comparable companys net services revenues.
The aggregate market multiple for each factor was determined
using the same relative weighting between comparable companies
as in the July 18, 2009 and November 17, 2009 valuations.
The two aggregate market multiples were then given an equal
weighting in deriving an overall market multiple. As in the
July 18, 2009 and November 17, 2009 valuations, the
aggregate enterprise value was calculated with the income
approach receiving a 67% weighting and the market approach
receiving a 33% weighting. The aggregate enterprise value was
then increased by the present value of the cash that we expected
would be realized if all options and warrants were exercised
plus the present value of the associated tax savings we would
achieve. We continued to allocate the adjusted enterprise value
to our securities with rights and preferences that are superior
to our common stock with the allocation taking into account the
fact that we are actively in the process of preparing for an
initial public offering. We continued to discount the remaining
value by 10% to reflect the fact that our stockholders could not
freely trade our common stock in the public markets. We also
applied an additional discount of 2% to the fair value of the
voting common stock in order to determine the fair value of the
non-voting common stock.
|
The aggregate intrinsic value of our vested outstanding stock
options as of December 31, 2010 was $78.4 million and
the aggregate intrinsic value of our unvested outstanding stock
options as of December 31, 2010 was $28.8 million.
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.
48
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. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
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;
|
|
|
|
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 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
50
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.
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
51
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.
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.
|
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.
52
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.
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.
53
Selected
Quarterly Financial Data
The following table sets forth selected unaudited consolidated
quarterly operating data for each of the eight quarters during
the period from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010.
In our managements opinion, the data have been prepared on
the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements
included in this prospectus and reflect all necessary
adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments,
necessary for a fair presentation of these data. You should read
this information together with our consolidated financial
statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this
prospectus. Operating results for any fiscal quarter are not
necessarily indicative of results for the full year. Historical
results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be
expected in future periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months 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 per share data)
|
|
|
Net services revenue
|
|
$
|
112,467
|
|
|
$
|
125,682
|
|
|
$
|
134,512
|
|
|
$
|
137,531
|
|
|
$
|
125,937
|
|
|
$
|
151,905
|
|
|
$
|
158,424
|
|
|
$
|
170,029
|
|
Costs of services
|
|
|
92,703
|
|
|
|
102,964
|
|
|
|
105,885
|
|
|
|
109,159
|
|
|
|
102,289
|
|
|
|
118,014
|
|
|
|
126,272
|
|
|
|
131,702
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
19,764
|
|
|
|
22,718
|
|
|
|
28,627
|
|
|
|
28,372
|
|
|
|
23,648
|
|
|
|
33,891
|
|
|
|
32,152
|
|
|
|
38,327
|
|
Infused management and technology expenses
|
|
|
11,175
|
|
|
|
13,307
|
|
|
|
13,572
|
|
|
|
13,709
|
|
|
|
14,909
|
|
|
|
16,148
|
|
|
|
15,760
|
|
|
|
17,212
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
8,817
|
|
|
|
6,492
|
|
|
|
8,071
|
|
|
|
6,774
|
|
|
|
7,567
|
|
|
|
10,309
|
|
|
|
11,911
|
|
|
|
11,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(228
|
)
|
|
|
2,919
|
|
|
|
6,984
|
|
|
|
7,889
|
|
|
|
1,172
|
|
|
|
7,434
|
|
|
|
4,481
|
|
|
|
9,232
|
|
Interest income (expense)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
(95
|
)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) before provision for (benefit from) income
taxes
|
|
|
(184
|
)
|
|
|
2,958
|
|
|
|
6,889
|
|
|
|
7,892
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
7,436
|
|
|
|
4,495
|
|
|
|
9,237
|
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
454
|
|
|
|
(2,893
|
)
|
|
|
2,619
|
|
|
|
2,786
|
|
|
|
866
|
|
|
|
3,517
|
|
|
|
1,637
|
|
|
|
3,709
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(638
|
)
|
|
$
|
5,851
|
|
|
$
|
4,270
|
|
|
$
|
5,106
|
|
|
$
|
314
|
|
|
$
|
3,919
|
|
|
$
|
2,858
|
|
|
$
|
5,528
|
|
Dividends on preferred shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,044
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in calculating net income per
common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
36,522,491
|
|
|
|
36,685,057
|
|
|
|
36,822,226
|
|
|
|
36,866,166
|
|
|
|
36,943,691
|
|
|
|
61,660,729
|
|
|
|
91,062,356
|
|
|
|
91,759,138
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
36,522,491
|
|
|
|
44,141,368
|
|
|
|
36,822,226
|
|
|
|
44,210,434
|
|
|
|
44,371,648
|
|
|
|
92,734,255
|
|
|
|
97,464,457
|
|
|
|
97,681,402
|
|
|
|
|
(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.
|
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,
however. For instance, we did not add any new customers in the
quarter ended December 31, 2009 and as a result our net
services revenue was essentially unchanged from the prior
quarter. We experience fluctuations in incentive payments as a
result of variations in the number of days in certain months and
patients ability to accelerate or defer elective
procedures. Generally, incentive payments are lower in the first
quarter of each year and higher in the fourth quarter of each
year.
Our costs of services generally increased each period due to
increases in the number of revenue cycle staff persons under our
management at customer sites. Our operating expenses have
increased as a result of our hiring of additional employees to
provide
on-site
management of our customers revenue cycle operations and
our ongoing efforts to develop and enhance the technology that
allows us to improve our customers net revenue. Operating
margins are slightly depressed in
54
quarters in which we add new customers that have not yet fully
implemented our operating model and achieved expected cost
efficiencies. The tax benefit in the quarter ended June 30,
2009 reflects the release of reserves for deferred tax assets of
$3.5 million.
Selling, general and administrative expenses in the quarter
ended March 31, 2009 included $2.8 million in
share-based compensation expense associated with stock warrants
granted for assistance in obtaining new hospital customers.
Primarily as a result of this expense, we incurred net losses in
the quarter ended March 31, 2009.
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.
55
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.
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.
56
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 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
57
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.
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.
58
BUSINESS
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 integrated 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 provide our quality and total cost of care service
offering 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 service 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, our revenue cycle
customers 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 services rendered, leading to
significant bad debt write-offs, uncompensated care, payment
59
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. 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 service 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 consist 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
60
services revenue of $606.3 million, representing growth of
19% over 2009 and a compound annual growth rate of 39% since
January 1, 2006. In addition, we were profitable for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, and our
profitability increased in each of these years.
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 market opportunity for our
domestic 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 20% of physician organizations (based on
CMSs estimate of total physician and clinic revenues in
2009), which we believe represents approximately
$115 billion.
|
According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services of
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
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 surveys indicate that approximately 43% of
hospitals had a negative operating margin during the first
quarter of 2009 and approximately 77% of hospitals had reduced
capital spending. 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
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
billing and collections cycle often is not timely and
error-free, further lengthening the time before payment is
actually received by the healthcare provider.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 Solution
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.
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
62
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 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
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
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 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 solution.
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
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 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
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
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 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 solution. 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.
|
66
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 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 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
67
customers who choose to participate 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
68
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.
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.
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
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.
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, process 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.
70
This data allows providers to focus greater efforts on managing
these patients within and across the delivery system, as well as
at home. Our solutions ability 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
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
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.
71
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
72
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.
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
core 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
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
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 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.
|
74
See Related Person Transactions Transactions
with Ascension Health Customer Relationship
for more information regarding our master services agreement
with Ascension Health.
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 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.
75
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.
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 solution. 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-
76
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.
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
77
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 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.
78
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.
|
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
79
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 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
80
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 anything of value, directly or indirectly, for the
referral of patients covered by Medicare, Medicaid and
81
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.
82
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.
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.
83
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 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
84
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 form 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.
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 8,164 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.
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 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.
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.
85
MANAGEMENT
Executive
Officers and Directors
Our executive officers and directors, their current positions
and their ages as of February 28, 2011 are set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position(s)
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Founder, President and Chief Executive Officer, Director
|
John T. Staton
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Executive Vice President
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
J. Michael Cline(1)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Founder and Chairman of the Board
|
Edgar M. Bronfman, Jr.(1)(3)
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Director
|
Steven N. Kaplan(2)(3)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Director
|
Denis J. Nayden(1)
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Director
|
George P. Shultz(3)
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
Director
|
Arthur H. Spiegel, III(1)
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
Director
|
Mark A. Wolfson(2)
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Member of compensation committee. |
|
(2) |
|
Member of audit committee. |
|
(3) |
|
Member of nominating and corporate governance committee. |
Mary A. Tolan, a founder of Accretive Health, has
served as our president and chief executive officer and a
director since November 2003. Prior to joining our company,
Ms. Tolan spent 21 years at Accenture Ltd, a leading
global management consulting, technology services and
outsourcing company. At Accenture, Ms. Tolan served in
several leadership roles, including group chief executive for
the resources operating group that had approximately
$2 billion in annual revenue, and as a member of
Accentures executive committee and management committee.
She serves on the board of trustees of the University of
Chicago, Loyola University and the Lyric Opera of Chicago. We
believe Ms. Tolan is qualified to serve as a director
because of her leadership experience, skill and depth of
understanding of our business and market gained from serving as
our chief executive officer and by founding our company.
Further, Ms. Tolans experience as a director of both
public and private companies provides her with sharp business
acumen, financial expertise and deep experience providing
strategic guidance to complex organizations.
John T. Staton has served as our chief financial
officer and treasurer since September 2005. Mr. Staton was
with Accenture for 16 years before joining our company.
From 2004 to 2005, Mr. Staton led the business consulting
practice within Accentures North American products
practice. Prior to this role, he was a partner in
Accentures global retail practice. Before joining
Accenture, Mr. Staton held positions in General
Electrics manufacturing management program and
Hewlett-Packards sales and channel marketing organizations.
Etienne H. Deffarges has served as our executive
vice president since April 2004. From 1999 until joining our
company, Mr. Deffarges was a partner at Accenture, most
recently serving as managing partner for its global utilities
industry group, and as a member of its executive committee.
Prior to joining Accenture, Mr. Deffarges spent
14 years at Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., a strategy and
technology consulting firm, including serving as a senior
partner and global practice leader of the energy, chemicals and
pharmaceuticals practice from 1994 to 1999 and as a member of
its executive committee.
Gregory N. Kazarian has served as our senior vice
president since January 2004, and until November 2009 was also
our general counsel and secretary. Prior to joining our company,
86
Mr. Kazarian was with the law firm Pedersen &
Houpt, P.C. for 16 years, where he handled employment,
intellectual property, creditors rights, dispute
resolution and outsourcing matters.
J. Michael Cline, a founder of Accretive
Health, has been a member of our board of directors since August
2003 and has served as chairman of the board since July 2009.
Mr. Cline has served as the founding managing partner of
Accretive, LLC, a private equity firm, since founding that firm
in December 1999. From 1989 to 1999, Mr. Cline served as a
general partner of General Atlantic Partners, LLC, a private
equity firm. Mr. Cline serves on the boards of several
privately-held companies. He also serves on the advisory board
of the Harvard Business School Rock Center for Entrepreneurship,
on the board of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and as
a trustee of Panthera, an organization devoted to the
preservation of the worlds wild cat species where he also
chairs Pantheras Tigers Forever initiative. We believe
Mr. Clines career in private equity investing, his
experience as a director of public and private companies, and
his experience as a founder of our company provide him with
sharp business acumen, financial expertise and deep experience
providing strategic guidance to complex organizations.
Edgar M. Bronfman, Jr. has been a member of
our board of directors since October 2006. Mr. Bronfman has
served as chairman and chief executive officer of Warner Music
Group since March 2004. Before joining Warner Music Group,
Mr. Bronfman served as chairman and chief executive officer
of Lexa Partners LLC, a management venture capital group which
he founded in April 2002. Mr. Bronfman was vice chairman of
the board of directors of Vivendi Universal, S.A. from December
2000 until December 2003 and also served as an executive officer
of Vivendi from December 2000 until December 2001. Prior to the
formation of Vivendi, Mr. Bronfman served as president and
chief executive officer of The Seagram Company Ltd. from June
1994 until December 2000 and as president and chief operating
officer of Seagram from 1989 until June 1994. Mr. Bronfman
is a director of IAC/InterActiveCorp, a publicly-held operator
of Internet businesses. Mr. Bronfman is also a member of
the board of trustees of the New York University Medical Center
and the board of governors of the Joseph H. Lauder Institute of
Management and International Studies at the University of
Pennsylvania. He also is a general partner of Accretive, LLC, a
private equity firm. We believe Mr. Bronfmans
experience as chief executive of several large organizations,
his experience in venture capital and private equity investing
and his experience as a director of public and private companies
qualify him to serve on our board.
APPAC, a minority shareholder group of Vivendi Universal,
initiated an inquiry in the Paris Court of Appeal into various
issues relating to Vivendi, including Vivendis financial
disclosures, the appropriateness of executive compensation, and
trading in Vivendi stock by certain individuals previously
associated with Vivendi. The inquiry has encompassed certain
trading by Mr. Bronfman in Vivendi stock. Several
individuals, including Mr. Bronfman and the former CEO, CFO
and COO of Vivendi, had been given the status of mis en
examen in connection with the inquiry. Although there is
no equivalent to mis en examen in the
U.S. system of jurisprudence, it is a preliminary stage of
proceedings that does not entail any filing of charges. In
January 2009, the Paris public prosecutor formally recommended
that no charges be filed and that Mr. Bronfman not be
referred for trial. On October 22, 2009, the investigating
magistrate rejected the prosecutors recommendation and
released an order referring for trial Mr. Bronfman and six
other individuals, including the former CEO, CFO and COO of
Vivendi. While the inquiry encompassed various issues,
Mr. Bronfman was referred for trial solely with respect to
certain trading in Vivendi stock. In June 2010,
Mr. Bronfman was part of a trial in the Trial Court in
Paris at which the public prosecutor and the lead civil claimant
both took the position that Mr. Bronfman should be
acquitted. On January 21, 2011, the court found
Mr. Bronfman guilty of the charge relating to his trading
in Vivendi stock, found him not liable to the civil claimants,
and imposed a fine of 5 million euros and a suspended
sentence of 15 months. Mr. Bronfman has informed us
that he intends to appeal the Trial Court decision to the Paris
Court of Appeal and believes that his trading in Vivendi stock
was proper. Under French law, the penalty is suspended pending
the final outcome of the case.
87
Steven N. Kaplan has been a member of our board of
directors since July 2004. Since 1988, Mr. Kaplan has
served as a professor at the University of Chicago Booth School
of Business, where he currently is the Neubauer Family Professor
of Entrepreneurship and Finance and serves as the faculty
director of the Polsky Center for Entrepreneurship.
Mr. Kaplan also serves as a director of Morningstar, Inc.,
a publicly-held provider of independent investment research, and
on the boards of trustees of the Columbia Acorn Trust and Wanger
Asset Trust. We believe Mr. Kaplans experience as a
public and private company director and thought leader in the
field of entrepreneurship and management qualifies him to serve
on our board.
Denis J. Nayden has been a member of our board of
directors since October 2003 and served as co-chairman of our
board until July 2009. Mr. Nayden has served as a managing
partner of Oak Hill Capital Management, LLC, a private equity
firm, since 2003. From 2000 to 2002, he was chairman and chief
executive officer of GE Capital Corporation, the financing unit
of General Electric Company, and prior to that had a
25-year
tenure at General Electric. Mr. Nayden is a director of
Genpact Limited, a publicly-held global provider of business
process services; RSC Holdings Inc., a publicly-held equipment
rental provider; and several privately-held companies. He also
serves on the board of trustees of the University of
Connecticut. We believe Mr. Naydens experience as
chief executive of several large organizations, his experience
in private equity investing and his experience as a director of
public and private companies qualify him to serve on our board.
George P. Shultz has been a member of our board of
directors since April 2005. Mr. Shultz has had a
distinguished career in government, academia and business. He
has served as the Thomas W. and Susan B. Ford Distinguished
Fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University since
1991. Mr. Shultz served as United States Secretary of State
from 1982 until 1989, chairman of the Presidents Economic
Policy Advisory Board from 1981 until 1982, United States
Secretary of the Treasury and Chairman of the Council on
Economic Policy from 1972 until 1974, Director of the Office of
Management and Budget from 1970 to 1972, and United States
Secretary of Labor from 1969 until 1970. From 1948 to 1957,
Mr. Shultz taught at MIT, taking a years leave of
absence in 1955 to serve as a senior staff economist on the
Presidents Council of Economic Advisors during the
Eisenhower administration. He then taught from 1957 to 1969 at
Stanford University and the University of Chicago Graduate
School of Business, where he also served as Dean for six years.
From 1974 to 1982, Mr. Shultz was president and a director
of Bechtel Group, Inc., a privately-held global leader in
engineering, construction and project management. Among numerous
honors, Mr. Shultz was awarded the Medal of Freedom, the
nations highest civilian honor, in 1989, and holds
honorary degrees from more than a dozen universities. He also
chairs the Governor of Californias Economic Advisory Board
and the J.P. Morgan Chase International Council; serves as
Advisory Council Chair of the Precourt Energy Efficiency Center
at Stanford University; chairs the MIT Energy Initiative
External Advisory Board; and serves on the board of directors of
Fremont Group, L.L.C., a private investment firm. We believe Mr.
Shultzs extensive experience at the highest levels of
government and in the private sector qualifies him to serve on
our board.
Arthur H. Spiegel, III has been a member of
our board of directors since October 2003 and served as
co-chairman of our board until July 2009. Since 2002,
Mr. Spiegel has been a private investor. From 1996 until
2002, Mr. Spiegel was President of CSC Healthcare Group,
which offered consulting, system integration, claims processing
software and business process and IT outsourcing services to the
healthcare industry. Mr. Spiegel founded APM Management
Consultants, a healthcare consulting firm, in 1974 and served as
its CEO until it was acquired by Computer Science Corporation in
1996. He serves on the boards of several privately-held
companies. We believe Mr. Spiegels experience as an
executive and director of public and private companies, together
with his deep knowledge of healthcare IT and consulting
qualify him to serve on our board.
Mark A. Wolfson has been a member of our board of
directors since October 2003. Mr. Wolfson is a senior
advisor of Oak Hill Capital Management, LLC, a private equity
firm, and is a founder and managing partner of Oak Hill
Investment Management, L.P. Mr. Wolfson has been on the
faculty of the Stanford University Graduate School of Business
since 1977, has served as its associate dean,
88
and has held the title of consulting professor since 2001. He
has been a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic
Research since 1988 and serves on the executive committee of the
Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
Mr. Wolfson is a director of eGain Communications
Corporation, a publicly-held provider of multi-channel customer
service and knowledge management software; Financial Engines,
Inc., a publicly-held provider of portfolio management and
retirement services and investment advice; and several
privately-held companies. He is also an advisor to the
investment committee of the William and Flora Hewlett
Foundation. We believe Mr. Wolfsons experience as a public
and private company director and thought leader in the fields of
economics and management qualifies him to serve on our board.
Board
Composition
Our board of directors currently consists of eight members, all
of whom were elected as directors pursuant to a
stockholders agreement that we entered into with holders
of our convertible preferred stock. Upon the closing of our
initial public offering, the board voting arrangements contained
in the stockholders agreement terminated and there are
currently no contractual obligations regarding the election of
our directors. Our directors hold office until their successors
have been elected and qualified or until the earlier of their
resignation or removal. There are no family relationships among
any of our directors or executive officers.
In accordance with the terms of our restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated by-laws, our board of
directors is divided into three classes, each of which consists,
as nearly as possible, of one-third of the total number of
directors constituting our entire board of directors and each of
whose members serve for staggered three-year terms. As a result,
only one class of our board of directors will be elected each
year. Upon the expiration of the term of a class of directors,
directors in that class will be eligible to be elected for a new
three-year term at the annual meeting of stockholders in the
year in which their term expires. The members of the classes are
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the class I directors are Ms. Tolan and Messrs. Cline
and Nayden, and their term expires at the annual meeting of
stockholders to be held in 2011;
|
|
|
|
the class II directors are Messrs. Bronfman, Kaplan and
Shultz, and their term expires at the annual meeting of
stockholders to be held in 2012; and
|
|
|
|
the class III directors are Messrs. Spiegel and Wolfson,
and their term expires at the annual meeting of stockholders to
be held in 2013.
|
Our restated certificate of incorporation and restated by-laws
provide that the authorized number of directors may be changed
only by resolution of the board of directors. Our restated
certificate of incorporation and restated by-laws also provide
that our directors may be removed only for cause by the
affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of the
votes that all our stockholders would be entitled to cast in an
election of directors, and that any vacancy on our board of
directors, including a vacancy resulting from an enlargement of
our board of directors, may be filled only by vote of a majority
of our directors then in office.
Director
Independence
Pursuant to the corporate governance listing standards of the
NYSE, a director employed by us cannot be deemed to be an
independent director, and consequently
Ms. Tolan is not an independent director. In addition, in
accordance with the NYSE corporate governance listing standards,
each other director will qualify as independent only
if our board of directors affirmatively determines that he or
she has no material relationship with us, either directly or as
a partner, stockholder or officer of an organization that has a
relationship with us. Ownership of a significant amount of our
stock, by itself, does not constitute a material relationship.
Our board of directors has affirmatively determined that each of
Messrs. Bronfman, Cline, Kaplan, Nayden, Shultz, Spiegel
and Wolfson is independent in accordance with
Section 303A.02(b)
89
of the NYSE Listed Company Manual. In making this determination,
our board of directors considered the percentage of our common
stock owned by an entity affiliated with Accretive, LLC, of
which Mr. Cline is the founding managing partner and
Mr. Bronfman is a general partner, and the percentage of
our common stock owned by FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare
Investors, L.P., of which Messrs. Nayden and Wolfson are
limited partners. Our board also considered that
Messrs. Nayden and Wolfson are managing partners of Oak
Hill Capital Management, LLC, an entity associated with FW Oak
Hill Accretive Healthcare Investors, L.P., and that
Mr. Wolfson is a managing partner of Oak Hill Investment
Management, L.P., another entity associated with FW Oak Hill
Accretive Healthcare Investors, L.P., and a Vice President and
Assistant Secretary of Group VI 31, LLC, the general partner of
FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare Investors, L.P. See
Principal and Selling Stockholders.
All of the members of the boards three standing committees
described below are independent as defined under the rules of
the NYSE.
Board
Committees
Our board of directors has established an audit committee, a
compensation committee and a nominating and corporate governance
committee. Each committee operates under a charter that has been
approved by our board of directors. Copies of each
committees charter are posted on the Investor Relations
section of our website.
Audit
Committee
The members of our audit committee are Messrs. Kaplan
(chair) and Wolfson. Our board of directors has determined that
each of the members of our audit committee satisfy the
requirements for financial literacy under the current
requirements of the NYSE and rules and regulations. Within
12 months after the closing of our May 2010 initial public
offering, we intend to appoint a third member to our audit
committee, who will replace Mr. Kaplan as chair. Our audit
committee assists our board of directors in its oversight of our
accounting and financial reporting process and the audits of our
financial statements.
The audit committees responsibilities include:
|
|
|
|
|
appointing, evaluating, retaining, terminating the engagement
of, setting the compensation of and assessing the independence
of our independent registered public accounting firm;
|
|
|
|
overseeing the work of our independent registered public
accounting firm, including the receipt and consideration of
reports from the firm and reviewing with the firm audit
problems, internal control issues and other accounting and
financial reporting matters;
|
|
|
|
coordinating the boards oversight of our internal control
over financial reporting, disclosure controls and procedures,
code of business conduct and ethics, and internal audit function;
|
|
|
|
establishing procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment
of accounting related complaints and concerns;
|
|
|
|
reviewing and discussing with management and our independent
registered public accounting firm our annual and quarterly
financial statements and related disclosures;
|
|
|
|
periodically meeting separately with our independent registered
public accounting firm, management and internal auditors;
|
|
|
|
discussing generally the type and presentation of information to
be disclosed in our earnings press releases, as well as
financial information and earnings guidance provided to
analysts, rating agencies and others;
|
|
|
|
reviewing our policies and procedures for approving and
ratifying related person transactions, including our related
person transaction policy;
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
establishing policies regarding the hiring of employees or
former employees of our independent registered public accounting
firm;
|
|
|
|
discussing our policies with respect to risk assessment and risk
management;
|
|
|
|
preparing the audit committee report required by SEC rules;
|
|
|
|
in coordination with the compensation committee, evaluating our
senior financial management; and
|
|
|
|
at least annually, evaluating its own performance.
|
All audit services to be provided to us and all non-audit
services, other than de minimis non-audit services, to be
provided to us by our independent registered public accounting
firm must be approved in advance by our audit committee.
Compensation
Committee
The members of our compensation committee are
Messrs. Nayden (chair), Bronfman, Cline and Spiegel. Our
compensation committee assists our board of directors in the
discharge of its responsibilities relating to the compensation
of our executive officers. The compensation committees
responsibilities include:
|
|
|
|
|
approving corporate goals and objectives relevant to the
compensation of our chief executive officer, evaluating our
chief executive officers performance in light of those
goals and objectives and, either as a committee or together with
the other independent directors (as directed from time to time
by the board of directors), determining and approving our chief
executive officers compensation;
|
|
|
|
reviewing in consultation with our chief executive officer, and
approving or making recommendations to the board of directors
with respect to, compensation of our executive officers (other
than our chief executive officer);
|
|
|
|
overseeing the evaluation of our senior executives, in
consultation with our chief executive officer in the case of all
senior executives other than the chief executive officer and in
conjunction with the audit committee in the case of our senior
financial management;
|
|
|
|
reviewing and making recommendations to the board of directors
with respect to incentive-compensation and equity-based plans
that are subject to board approval;
|
|
|
|
administering our equity incentive plans, including the
authority to delegate to one or more of our executive officers
the power to grant options or other stock awards to employees
who are not directors or executive officers of our company, but
only if consistent with the requirements of the applicable plan
and law;
|
|
|
|
reviewing and making recommendations to the board of directors
with respect to director compensation;
|
|
|
|
reviewing and discussing with management the compensation
discussion and analysis required by SEC rules;
|
|
|
|
preparing the compensation committee report required by SEC
rules; and
|
|
|
|
at least annually, evaluating its own performance.
|
91
Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee
The members of our nominating and corporate governance committee
are Messrs. Shultz (chair), Bronfman and Kaplan. The
nominating and corporate governance committees
responsibilities include:
|
|
|
|
|
recommending to the board of directors the persons to be
nominated for election as directors or to fill vacancies on the
board of directors, and to be appointed to each of the
boards committees;
|
|
|
|
applying the criteria for selecting directors approved by the
board, and annually reviewing with the board the requisite
skills and criteria for new board members as well as the
composition of the board of directors as a whole;
|
|
|
|
developing and recommending to the board corporate governance
guidelines applicable to our company;
|
|
|
|
overseeing an annual evaluation of the board of directors;
|
|
|
|
at the request of the board of directors, reviewing and making
recommendations to the board relating to management succession
planning; and
|
|
|
|
at least annually, evaluating its own performance.
|
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
None of our executive officers serves as a member of the board
of directors or compensation committee, or other committee
serving an equivalent function, of any entity that has one or
more executive officers who serve as members of our board of
directors or our compensation committee. None of the members of
our compensation committee is an officer or employee of our
company, nor have they ever been an officer or employee of our
company.
Corporate
Governance Guidelines
Our board of directors has adopted corporate governance
guidelines to assist the board in the exercise of its duties and
responsibilities and to serve the best interests of our company
and our stockholders. A copy of these guidelines is posted on
the Investor Relations section of our website. These guidelines,
which provide a framework for the conduct of the boards
business, are expected to provide that:
|
|
|
|
|
the boards principal responsibility is to oversee the
management of Accretive Health;
|
|
|
|
directors have an obligation to become and remain informed about
our company and business;
|
|
|
|
directors are responsible for determining that effective systems
are in place for periodic and timely reporting to the board on
important matters concerning our company;
|
|
|
|
directors are responsible for attending board meetings and
meetings of committees on which they serve;
|
|
|
|
a majority of the members of the board of directors shall be
independent directors;
|
|
|
|
each director must limit the number of other public company
boards on which he or she serves so that he or she is able to
devote adequate time to his or her duties to Accretive Health,
including preparing for and attending meetings;
|
|
|
|
the non-management directors meet in executive session at least
semi-annually;
|
|
|
|
directors have full and free access to officers and employees of
our company, and the right to hire and consult with independent
advisors at our expense;
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
new directors participate in an orientation program and all
directors are expected to participate in continuing director
education on an ongoing basis; and
|
|
|
|
at least annually, the board of directors and its committees
will conduct self-evaluations to determine whether they are
functioning effectively.
|
Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics
Our board of directors has adopted a written code of business
conduct and ethics that applies to our directors, officers and
employees, including our principal executive officer, principal
financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller,
or persons performing similar functions. A copy of the code of
business conduct and ethics is posted on the Investor Relations
section of our website.
Risk
Management
Our audit committee is responsible for overseeing our risk
management function. While the audit committee has primary
responsibility for overseeing risk management, our entire board
of directors is actively involved in overseeing our risk
management. For example, the board engages in periodic
discussions with such company officers as the board deems
necessary, including the chief executive officer, chief
financial officer and other executive officers. We believe that
the leadership structure of our board supports effective risk
management oversight.
Director
Compensation
Prior to our initial public offering, we did not pay
compensation to any director for his or her service as a
director. However, non-employee directors were reimbursed for
reasonable travel and other expenses incurred in connection with
attending our board and committee meetings.
In the past, we have granted restricted stock and options to
purchase shares of our common stock to our non-employee
directors who are not affiliated with our 5% stockholders. We
did not grant any restricted stock or options to purchase shares
of our common stock to our non-employee directors during our
fiscal year ended December 31, 2009. Ms. Tolan has
never received any compensation in connection with her service
as a director.
Cash Compensation. Following our
initial public offering, we began paying each non-employee
director a $60,000 annual retainer. The chairs of the board of
directors and the audit committee receive an additional annual
retainer of $20,000, and the chairs of the compensation
committee and the nominating and corporate governance committee
receive an additional annual retainer of $10,000. There are no
additional fees for attending board or board committee meetings.
Cash fees are paid quarterly in arrears to the non-employee
directors who were serving as directors at the end of a quarter.
In lieu of cash fees, non-employee directors may elect to
receive fully-vested options to purchase shares of our common
stock. Elections must be received by the 75th day of a
quarter and apply to all subsequent quarterly cash fees until a
new election is received. Such options are granted on the first
trading day of each quarter with respect to the fees payable for
the preceding quarter, and the exercise price equals the fair
market value of the common stock on the date of grant. The
number of shares subject to such options is calculated by
dividing the dollar amount of the cash fees for the quarter by
the Black-Scholes option value we used for purposes of
determining the share-based compensation expense that we
recognized for financial statement reporting purposes in that
quarter.
Stock Options. On February 3,
2010, each current non-employee director (Messrs. Bronfman,
Cline, Kaplan, Nayden, Shultz, Spiegel and Wolfson) was granted
a stock option to purchase 52,265 shares of common stock at
an exercise price of $14.71 per share (the fair value of our
common stock as of such date, as determined by the board of
directors). These options vest in four equal annual installments
based on continued service as a director, and were immediately
93
exercisable, provided that upon exercise the shares issued are
subject to the same vesting and repurchase provisions that
applied before exercise.
The number of shares of common stock subject to the stock option
granted to each non-employee director on February 3, 2010
was selected by our board of directors based on the
recommendation of the compensation committee and the input of
the independent consulting firm referenced below under the
Competitive Market Data and Use of Compensation
Consultants. These option grants reflect the boards
view, based on its business judgment and collective experience
as well as the input of the independent consulting firm, that
the market value for compensation for service as a non-employee
is $130,000 per year. These grants also reflect the boards
view that a longer term grant provides a better correlation with
the interests of stockholders and, as a result, these grants
vest over four years based on continued service as a director.
The number of shares subject to these options was determined on
February 3, 2010 using the
Black-Scholes
valuation method for a four-year option with a value of $130,000
per year.
Unless a different arrangement is specifically agreed to, any
non-employee director who joins our board in the future will be
granted a stock option on the date of such directors first
board meeting. The option will have a total Black-Scholes value
based on the target value of $130,000 per year, and the exercise
price will equal the fair market value of the common stock on
the date of grant. Each such option will vest in four equal
annual installments, based on continued service as a director.
Expenses. We reimburse each
non-employee director for ordinary and reasonable expenses
incurred in attending board and board committee meetings.
2010 Director Compensation. The
following table sets forth, for each of our independent
directors, information concerning compensation earned or paid
for services in all capacities during the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2010. We began paying cash fees to our
independent directors in 2010 after our initial public offering.
The amounts below represent prorated portions of such cash fees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Paid in
|
|
|
Awards $
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Cash $(1)
|
|
|
(2)(3)
|
|
|
Total $
|
|
Edgar Bronfman, Jr.
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
115,680
|
|
J. Michael Cline
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
125,680
|
|
Steven N. Kaplan
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
125,680
|
|
Denis J. Nayden
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
120,680
|
|
George P. Shultz
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
120,680
|
|
Arthur H. Spiegel, III
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
115,680
|
|
Mark A. Wolfson
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
85,680
|
|
|
|
115,680
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Each of our independent directors elected to receive
fully-vested options to purchase shares of our common stock in
lieu of his cash retainers. |
|
(2) |
|
Valuation of these option awards is based on the dollar amount
of share-based compensation expense that we recognized for
financial statement reporting purposes in 2010 computed in
accordance with ASC 718, excluding the impact of estimated
forfeitures related to service-based vesting conditions. These
amounts do not represent the actual amounts paid to or realized
by the named director during 2010. The assumptions used by us
with respect to the valuation of option awards are the same as
those set forth in Note 9 to our financial statements
included elsewhere in this prospectus. |
|
(3) |
|
The aggregate unexercised option awards (whether or not
exercisable) outstanding at December 31, 2010, are as
follows: |
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate Option Awards
|
|
|
|
Outstanding as of
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2010
|
|
|
Edgar Bronfman, Jr.
|
|
|
57,327
|
|
J. Michael Cline
|
|
|
59,014
|
|
Steven N. Kaplan
|
|
|
59,014
|
|
Denis J. Nayden
|
|
|
58,170
|
|
George P. Shultz
|
|
|
58,170
|
|
Arthur H. Spiegel, III
|
|
|
57,327
|
|
Mark A. Wolfson
|
|
|
57,327
|
|
Executive
Compensation
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
This section discusses the principles underlying our executive
compensation policies and decisions and the most important
factors relevant to an analysis of these policies and decisions.
It provides qualitative information regarding the manner and
context in which compensation is awarded to and earned by our
executives and is intended to place in perspective the data
presented in the tables and narrative that follow.
As part of our preparation to become a public company and
thereafter, in 2010, our compensation committee performed a
thorough review of all elements of our executive compensation
program, including the function and design of our annual cash
incentive and equity incentive programs. The compensation
committee will continue to evaluate the need for revisions to
our executive compensation program to ensure it is competitive
with the companies with which we compete for superior executive
talent.
Overview of
Executive Compensation Process
Roles of Our Board, Compensation Committee and Chief
Executive Officer in Compensation
Decisions. Our compensation committee
oversees our executive compensation program, and has done so
historically. In this role, the compensation committee has
reviewed all compensation decisions relating to our executive
officers and has made recommendations to the board. Our chief
executive officer annually reviews the performance of each of
our other executive officers, and, based on these reviews,
provides recommendations to the committee and the board with
respect to salary adjustments, annual cash incentive bonus
targets and awards and equity incentive awards. Our compensation
committee meets with our chief executive officer annually to
discuss and review her recommendations regarding executive
compensation for our executive officers, excluding herself.
These recommendations are forwarded to the board, which
typically meets in executive session to discuss those
recommendations and to consider the compensation of the chief
executive officer. Our chief executive officer is not present
for board or committee discussions regarding her compensation.
Our chief executive officer may grant options to executive
officers other than herself and determine the number of shares
covered by, and the timing of, option grants. The board has, and
it exercises, the ability to materially increase or decrease
amounts of compensation payable to our executive officers
pursuant to recommendations made by our chief executive officer.
Competitive Market Data and Use of Compensation
Consultants. Historically, our compensation
committee did not formally benchmark our executive compensation
against compensation data, but rather relied on its
members business judgment and collective experience,
including in the healthcare and consulting industries. As part
of our preparation to become a public company, in August 2009
our compensation committee engaged an independent compensation
consulting firm to provide advice regarding our executive
compensation program and general information regarding executive
compensation practices in our industry. Although the
compensation committee and board consider the compensation
consulting firms advice in considering our executive
compensation program, the compensation committee and board
ultimately make their own decisions about these matters.
95
At the compensation committees request, the independent
compensation consulting firm has conducted a number of
compensation analyses to provide information regarding
competitive pay and practices for executives of technology,
business process outsourcing and healthcare services companies
comparable to us in terms of revenue and growth rate,
and/or which
are anticipated to be comparable to us in terms of market
capitalization. In 2009 and 2010, this peer group, which will be
periodically reviewed and updated by the compensation committee,
consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
Akamai Technologies
|
|
Genpact
|
|
Metavante
|
Athenahealth
|
|
Global Payments
|
|
Nuance Communications
|
Blackboard
|
|
HLTH Corp
|
|
Quality Systems
|
Cerner
|
|
Huron Consulting
|
|
salesforce.com
|
Cognizant Tech Solutions
|
|
MAXIMUS
|
|
SXC Health Solutions
|
Eclipsys
|
|
MedAssets
|
|
WNS Holdings
|
Although the board and compensation committee considers peer
group data in determining the competitiveness of executive
compensation, to date, they have not benchmarked total executive
compensation or most compensation elements against this peer
group, and they do not aim to set total compensation, or any
compensation element, at a specified level as compared to the
companies in our peer group.
Objectives and
Philosophy of Our Executive Compensation Program
Our primary objective with respect to executive compensation is
to attract, retain and motivate highly talented individuals who
have the breadth and experience to successfully execute our
business strategy. Our executive compensation program is
designed to:
|
|
|
|
|
reward the achievement of our annual and long-term operating and
strategic goals;
|
|
|
|
recognize individual contributions; and
|
|
|
|
align the interests of our executives with those of our
stockholders by rewarding performance that meets or exceeds
established goals, with the ultimate objective of increasing
stockholder value.
|
To achieve these objectives, our executive compensation program
ties a portion of each executives overall compensation to
key corporate financial goals, primarily adjusted EBITDA
targets, as well as to individual performance. We also provide a
portion of our executive compensation in the form of equity
incentive awards that vest over time, which we believe helps to
retain our executive officers and aligns their interests with
those of our stockholders by allowing them to participate in our
long-term performance as reflected in the trading price of
shares of our common stock.
Risk
Considerations in our Compensation Program
We believe that risks arising from our compensation policies and
practices for our employees are not reasonably likely to have a
material adverse effect on our business. In addition, the
compensation committee believes that the mix and design of the
components of executive compensation do not encourage management
to assume excessive risks.
Elements of
Our Executive Compensation Program
The primary elements of our executive compensation program are:
|
|
|
|
|
base salaries;
|
|
|
|
annual cash incentive bonuses;
|
|
|
|
equity incentive awards; and
|
|
|
|
other employee benefits.
|
Our compensation committee has not adopted any formal or
informal policies or guidelines for allocating compensation
between these elements.
96
Base Salaries. We use competitive base
salary to attract and retain qualified candidates to help us
achieve our growth and performance goals. Base salaries are
intended to recognize an executive officers immediate
contribution to our organization, as well as his or her
experience, knowledge and responsibilities.
From time to time, in its discretion, our compensation committee
and board evaluate and adjust executive officer base salary
levels based on factors determined to be relevant, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the executive officers skills and experience;
|
|
|
|
the particular importance of the executive officers
position to us;
|
|
|
|
the executive officers individual performance;
|
|
|
|
the executive officers growth in his or her position;
|
|
|
|
market level increases;
|
|
|
|
base salaries for comparable positions within our
company; and
|
|
|
|
inflation rates.
|
Our compensation committee and board historically have
considered annual base salary adjustments in the first quarter
of the year. From 2004 through 2007, we did not increase the
base salary of any of our executive officers, other than a
nominal increase in 2007 to reflect the rate of inflation. In
the first quarter of 2008, our board increased the base salaries
for our executive officers (other than our chief financial
officer, who joined us in September 2005) by 25% over their
original base salaries because these executive officers had not
received base salary increases commensurate with their
significant contributions to the development of our business
during our first three years of operation. These contributions
included, in the case of Ms. Tolan, her overall strategic
leadership in building our business, in the case of
Mr. Deffarges, his role in expanding our customer base, and
in the case of Mr. Kazarian, his contributions in various
legal and operational matters. While it has been our philosophy
to keep base salaries for senior executives below market levels
and place greater emphasis on performance-based compensation,
based on the significant growth of the business from 2003 to
2008, and the fact that these senior executives had joined us
between November 2003 and April 2004 and had not received any
increase in base salary in 2004, 2005, or 2006 and only a
nominal increase in 2007, the board deemed it appropriate to
provide these adjustments to base salary for these executives.
In light of general economic conditions in the first quarter of
2009, and despite our strong performance in 2008, we did not
increase any executive officers base salary for 2009.
In determining base salaries for our executive officers for
2010, our compensation committee considered the results of a
market analysis of the compensation for executives at comparable
companies performed by the independent compensation consulting
firm retained by the compensation committee. Based on this
analysis, the compensation committee determined that a market
adjustment was warranted in the compensation of our chief
executive officer, and set her 2010 base salary at $700,000 and
her 2010 bonus target at $950,000. The compensation committee
also elected to increase the 2010 base salaries for
Messrs. Deffarges, Staton and Kazarian by 2.7% each,
reflecting the rate of inflation, to $449,313, $330,000 and
$288,850, respectively.
In determining base salaries for our executive officers for
2011, our compensation committee elected to increase the 2011
base salaries for Messrs. Tolan, Deffarges, Staton and
Kazarian by 1.5% each, reflecting the rate of inflation, to
$710,500, $456,053, $334,950 and $293,183, respectively.
Annual Cash Incentive Bonuses. We
maintain an annual cash incentive bonus program in which each of
our executive officers participates. These annual cash incentive
bonuses are intended to compensate our executive officers for
our achievement of corporate financial goals, primarily adjusted
EBITDA targets, as well as individual performance in the areas
of:
|
|
|
|
|
economic and financial contributions;
|
|
|
|
operations;
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
customer satisfaction;
|
|
|
|
business development; and
|
|
|
|
organizational and leadership development.
|
Our annual cash incentive bonuses have varied from year to year,
and we expect that they will continue to vary, depending on
actual corporate and individual performance results.
Historically, our board has set our corporate financial goals
and our executive officers individual cash incentive bonus
targets each year in advance and it has worked with our chief
executive officer to develop aggressive goals to be achieved by
the company and our executive officers. The goals established by
the board have been based on our historical operating results
and growth rates, as well as our expected future results, and
are designed to require significant effort and operational
success on the part of our executive officers and the company.
However, during the course of the year, the board and our
compensation committee, based on recommendations of our chief
executive officer (with respect to our other executive
officers), may adjust such goals as they deem appropriate.
Each executive officers initial target annual bonus is set
upon commencement of employment as part of the
executives overall compensation package. The target annual
bonus amount is then reviewed and adjusted in each subsequent
year, generally so that it is equal to the higher of the
executives prior year actual bonus and his or her prior
year target bonus. The updated targets reflect strong growth and
performance assumptions which correlate to our annual plans.
When these growth and performance expectations are exceeded,
bonuses above target can be awarded. These higher
performance-based awards, and our continued strong growth and
performance expectations, are considered when setting target
bonuses for subsequent years. We believe this helps to calibrate
incentive compensation with our growth and performance. The
board believes that this approach supports our
pay-for-performance
philosophy and encourages the achievement of growth and
performance goals. The board approves actual annual cash
incentive bonuses, based on the recommendations of our
compensation committee, with input from our chief executive
officer in the case of executive officers other than herself.
There are no minimum or maximum payout levels, and our board has
broad discretion to make adjustments to the awards.
For each of the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and
2010, our corporate financial goals were based on adjusted
EBITDA. The corporate financial goals were developed prior to
the beginning of the year by management in consultation with the
compensation committee, and then reviewed, refined and approved
by our board of directors. Our compensation committee believes
that adjusted EBITDA is an appropriate measure of our business
performance because it emphasizes the addition of new customers
and expansion of services with existing customers, as well as
improvements in our operating efficiency, and it is reflective
of stockholder value creation. In 2008, we exceeded our adjusted
EBITDA target by $1.5 million, and our actual adjusted
EBITDA was $12.2 million. In 2009, we met our adjusted
EBITDA target of $32.8 million. In 2010, our actual
adjusted EBITDA of $45.0 million exceeded our target by
$2.5 million.
For the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, each
executive officers target bonus awards were set as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Target Annual Cash
|
|
|
Incentive Bonus
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
Executive Officer
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
$
|
450,000
|
|
|
$
|
600,000
|
|
|
$
|
950,000
|
|
John T. Staton
|
|
$
|
183,000
|
|
|
$
|
258,000
|
|
|
$
|
258,000
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
$
|
346,750
|
|
|
$
|
446,750
|
|
|
$
|
446,750
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
$
|
127,250
|
|
|
$
|
202,250
|
|
|
$
|
202,250
|
|
As discussed above, the 2011 bonus targets for our executive
officers are equal to their 2010 bonus targets.
98
Because our adjusted EBITDA for the year ended December 31,
2008 exceeded our goal, our board exercised its discretion to
increase our executive officers annual cash incentive
bonuses above the targets. The allocation of bonuses for 2008
among our executive officers was based on the compensation
committees subjective assessments of individual
contributions by our executive officers in their respective
areas of primary responsibility. In making these assessments,
the compensation committee considered the following: in the case
of Ms. Tolan, her success in growing our business, securing
talented personnel to support the business growth and
enhancing our operating model, and the fact that our financial
performance substantially exceeded plan; in the case of
Mr. Deffarges, his role in connection with our successful
efforts to secure new customers; in the case of Mr. Staton,
his contributions to our ability to exceed our financial plan
and his role in successfully strengthening our financial
operations; and in the case of Mr. Kazarian, his role in
our ability to attract talented employees to support our growth
and his success in taking on operating responsibilities
important to our growth. For our executive officers other than
Ms. Tolan, the compensation committee also considered
Ms. Tolans recommendations regarding incentive
compensation and her assessment of each executive officers
contributions to our performance during 2008. For the actual
2008 amounts that we paid to each executive officer under our
annual cash incentive bonus program, see the Summary
Compensation Table below.
Although our adjusted EBITDA for the year ended
December 31, 2009 exceeded the plan established by our
board, it fell short of more aggressive goals established by Ms.
Tolan. Therefore, Ms. Tolans recommendation to the
compensation committee and board, which was accepted, was to
reduce the bonus pool for 2010 pay-outs. The allocation of
bonuses for 2009 among our executive officers was based on the
compensation committees subjective assessments of
individual contributions by our executive officers in their
respective areas of primary responsibility. In making its
assessments regarding incentive compensation, the compensation
committee considered the following: in the case of
Ms. Tolan, her success in driving our growth, increasing
our operating margins, recruiting key talent for the
organization and identifying new business opportunities; in the
case of Mr. Deffarges, his oversight of several of our
operating sites and his contributions in the area of
organizational build-out and development; in the case of
Mr. Staton, his contributions to our financial performance,
the development of our financial systems and controls and the
recruitment and development of our finance team; and in the case
of Mr. Kazarian, his oversight of several of our operating
sites and his contributions in the area of organizational
build-out and development. For our executive officers other than
Ms. Tolan, the compensation committee also considered
Ms. Tolans recommendations regarding incentive
compensation and her assessment of each executive officers
contributions to our performance during 2009. For the actual
2009 amounts that we paid to each executive officer under our
annual cash incentive bonus program, see the Summary
Compensation Table below.
Although our adjusted EBITDA for the year ended
December 31, 2010 exceeded the plan established by our
board, it fell short of internal goals established for the
executive officers. The allocation of bonuses for 2010 among our
executive officers was based on the compensation
committees subjective assessments of individual
contributions by our executive officers in their respective
areas of primary responsibility. In making its assessments
regarding incentive compensation, the compensation committee
considered the following: in the case of Ms. Tolan, her
success in driving our growth, increasing our operating margins,
recruiting key talent for the organization and identifying new
business opportunities; in the case of Mr. Deffarges, his
contributions in the area of organizational build-out and
development; in the case of Mr. Staton, his contributions
to our financial performance, the development of our financial
systems and controls and the recruitment and development of our
finance team; and in the case of Mr. Kazarian, his
oversight of several of our operating sites and his
contributions in the area of organizational build-out and
development. For our executive officers other than
Ms. Tolan, the compensation committee also considered
Ms. Tolans recommendations regarding incentive
compensation and her assessment of each executive officers
contributions to our performance during 2010. For the actual
2010 amounts that we paid to each executive officer under our
annual cash incentive bonus program, see the Summary
Compensation Table below.
99
Our board uses our unaudited financial results to make financial
target performance determinations under our annual cash
incentive bonus program, and those results may be adjusted in
connection with the preparation of our audited consolidated
financial statements. You should read our consolidated financial
statements, the related notes to these financial statements and
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations included elsewhere in
this prospectus. As described above, the purpose of these
targets was to establish a method for determining the payment of
cash incentive bonuses. You are cautioned not to rely on these
performance goals as a prediction of our future performance.
From time to time, we may make special cash bonus awards to our
employees, including our executive officers. In July 2008 and
August 2009, we determined to award special cash bonuses of
approximately $81,000 and $143,000, respectively, to
Mr. Staton contemporaneously with the cash dividend we
declared on all outstanding capital stock in each of those
years. Mr. Staton was not entitled to participate in those
cash dividends with respect to his vested but unexercised stock
options. However, because Mr. Staton is primarily
responsible for our financial management and is deeply involved
in helping to achieve our strategic goals, and in light of the
connection between Mr. Statons contributions and our
ability to pay these cash dividends, the board determined to
award him special cash bonuses in amounts that represented the
payments he would have received as cash dividends if he had
owned such number of shares equal to the vested portion of his
option on the record date for the applicable dividend. As
stockholders, our other executive officers participated directly
in these cash dividends and therefore did not receive any
special bonus in either year relating to this aspect of our
financial performance.
Equity Incentive Awards. Our equity
incentive award program is the primary vehicle for offering
long-term incentives to our executive officers. To date, equity
incentive awards to our executive officers have been made in the
form of restricted stock awards and stock options, and our
compensation committee currently intends to continue this
practice. Although we do not have any equity ownership
guidelines or requirements for our executive officers, we
believe that equity incentive awards:
|
|
|
|
|
provide our executive officers with a strong link to our
long-term performance, including by enhancing their
accountability for long-term decision making;
|
|
|
|
help balance the short-term orientation of our annual cash
incentive bonus program;
|
|
|
|
create an ownership culture by aligning the interests of our
executive officers with the creation of value for our
stockholders; and
|
|
|
|
further our goal of executive retention.
|
Employees who are considered essential to our long-term success
are eligible to receive equity incentive awards, which typically
vest over four years. In determining the size of equity
incentive awards to executive officers, our compensation
committee generally considers the executives experience,
skills, level and scope of responsibilities and internal
comparisons to other comparable positions in our company. As of
December 31, 2009, all equity incentive awards granted to
our executive officers had fully vested. Accordingly, in
connection with its evaluation of the need for revisions to our
executive compensation program, on February 3, 2010 our
board of directors, on the recommendation of the compensation
committee, granted stock options to purchase 1,176,000, 450,800,
509,600 and 282,240 shares of our common stock, respectively, to
Ms. Tolan and Messrs. Staton, Deffarges and Kazarian. These
options have an exercise price equal to $14.71 per share (the
fair value of our common stock as of such date, as determined by
the board of directors). These options vest in four equal annual
installments based on continued employment, and were immediately
exercisable, provided that upon exercise the shares issued are
subject to the same vesting and repurchase provisions that
applied before exercise.
Other Employee Benefits. We maintain
broad-based benefits that are provided to all employees,
including our 401(k) retirement plan, flexible spending
accounts, a medical care plan, vacation and standard company
holidays. Our executive officers are eligible to participate in
each of these programs on the same terms as non-executive
employees; however, we do not provide a
100
matching 401(k) contribution for any of our executive officers.
See 401(k) Retirement Plan for more
information regarding our 401(k) retirement plan.
We also provide for each of our chief executive officer, chief
financial officer and executive vice president supplemental
disability income protection that provides income replacement in
the event of a qualifying disability.
Severance and Change of Control
Arrangements. We have an employment agreement
with our chief executive officer that provides a combination of
single trigger and double trigger
benefits in connection with a change of control of our company
and/or
termination of her employment. We believe a combination of
single trigger and double trigger
vesting along with severance payments maximizes stockholder
value because it limits any unintended windfalls to executives
in the event of a friendly change of control, while still
providing executives appropriate incentives to cooperate in
negotiating any change of control, including a change of control
in which they believe they may lose their jobs. We also have an
employment agreement with our chief financial officer and an
offer letter with our senior vice president, each of which
provides for specified salary continuation, and in the case of
our chief financial officer, benefits continuation, in the event
of specified employment terminations.
See Potential Payments upon Termination or
Change in Control and Employment Agreements
for a more detailed description of these arrangements.
Deductibility
of Executive Compensation
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code generally
disallows a tax deduction for compensation in excess of
$1.0 million paid to our chief executive officer and our
four other most highly paid executive officers, except our chief
financial officer. Qualifying performance-based compensation is
not subject to the deduction limitation if specified
requirements are met. We periodically review the potential
consequences of Section 162(m) and we generally intend to
structure the performance-based portion of our executive
compensation, where feasible, to comply with exemptions in
Section 162(m) so that the compensation remains tax
deductible to us. However, our board or compensation committee
may, in their judgment, authorize compensation payments that are
not exempt under Section 162(m) when they believe that such
payments are appropriate to attract and retain executive talent.
Summary
Compensation Table
The following table sets forth information regarding
compensation earned by our chief executive officer, our chief
financial officer and our two other executive officers during
our fiscal years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010. We
refer to these individuals as our named executive officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
Name and
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
Bonus
|
|
Awards
|
|
Option
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Total
|
Principal Position
|
|
Year
|
|
($)
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
Awards ($)(2)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
($)
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
700,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,928,015
|
|
|
|
760,000
|
|
|
|
4,883
|
|
|
|
3,392,898
|
|
Founder, President
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
515,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
5,219
|
|
|
|
1,120,219
|
|
and Chief Executive Officer(4)
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
515,000
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
450,000
|
|
|
|
5,608
|
|
|
|
1,120,608
|
|
John T. Staton
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
330,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
739,073
|
|
|
|
206,400
|
|
|
|
3,404
|
|
|
|
1,278,877
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
321,360
|
|
|
|
143,492
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,221
|
|
|
|
258,000
|
|
|
|
3,640
|
|
|
|
826,713
|
|
and Treasurer
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
321,360
|
|
|
|
156,099
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
133,632
|
|
|
|
183,000
|
|
|
|
3,917
|
|
|
|
798,008
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
449,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
835,473
|
|
|
|
225,000
|
|
|
|
10,605
|
|
|
|
1,520,391
|
|
Executive Vice
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
437,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350,000
|
|
|
|
10,704
|
|
|
|
798,204
|
|
President
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
437,500
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
1,244
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
346,750
|
|
|
|
10,999
|
|
|
|
896,493
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
288,850
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
462,724
|
|
|
|
160,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
911,574
|
|
Senior Vice
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
281,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
202,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
483,500
|
|
President(5)
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
281,250
|
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
127,250
|
|
|
|
35,000(6
|
)
|
|
|
518,500
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Represents the amount of the
discretionary cash bonus paid to each executive officer. In the
case of Mr. Staton, the 2008 and 2009 amounts also include
the special cash bonuses intended to approximate his
participation in our 2008 and 2009 cash dividends.
|
101
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Valuation of these option awards is
based on the dollar amount of share-based compensation expense
that we recognized for financial statement reporting purposes in
2008, 2009 and 2010 computed in accordance with ASC 718,
excluding the impact of estimated forfeitures related to
service-based vesting conditions. These amounts do not represent
the actual amounts paid to or realized by the named executive
officer during 2008, 2009 and 2010. The assumptions used by us
with respect to the valuation of option awards are the same as
those set forth in Note 9 to our financial statements
included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
(3)
|
|
For Ms. Tolan, Mr. Staton
and Mr. Deffarges, these amounts represent long-term
disability insurance premiums paid by us on behalf of each such
named executive officer.
|
|
(4)
|
|
Ms. Tolan is also a member of
our board of directors but does not receive any additional
compensation in her capacity as a director.
|
|
(5)
|
|
Mr. Kazarian was also our
general counsel and secretary until November 2009.
|
|
(6)
|
|
Consists of the $22,000 cost of
travel provided to Mr. Kazarian under a program designed to
recognize exemplary performance by senior employees, and a
$13,000 reimbursement to Mr. Kazarian for the associated
U.S. federal and state income taxes.
|
Grants of
Plan-Based Awards in 2008, 2009 and 2010
The following table sets forth information for 2008, 2009 and
2010 regarding grants of compensation in the form of plan-based
awards made during 2008, 2009 and 2010 to our named executive
officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payouts
|
|
|
Under Non-Equity
|
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
|
Awards Target
|
|
|
($)(1)(2)
|
Name
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
$
|
450,000
|
|
|
$
|
600,000
|
|
|
$
|
760,000
|
|
John T. Staton
|
|
$
|
183,000
|
|
|
$
|
258,000
|
|
|
$
|
206,400
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
$
|
346,750
|
|
|
$
|
350,000
|
|
|
$
|
225,000
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
$
|
127,250
|
|
|
$
|
202,250
|
|
|
$
|
160,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Annual cash incentive bonuses paid
under the annual cash incentive bonus program for 2008, 2009 and
2010 are also disclosed in the Summary Compensation
Table.
|
|
(2)
|
|
There are no minimum or maximum
payout levels, and our board has broad discretion to make
adjustments to the awards.
|
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Year End
The following table sets forth information regarding outstanding
stock options held by our named executive officers as of
December 31, 2010. None of our executive officers exercised
any stock options and no restricted stock awards held by our
named executive officers became vested during 2008, 2009 or 2010
other than 190,555 shares of restricted common stock held
by Mr. Deffarges, which vested in full in 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
Options
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Option
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
Price
|
|
Expiration
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
($)
|
|
Date
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
|
1,176,000
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.71
|
|
|
|
2/3/2020
|
|
John T. Staton
|
|
|
781,236
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
9/1/2015
|
|
|
|
|
450,800
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.71
|
|
|
|
2/3/2020
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
|
509,600
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.71
|
|
|
|
2/3/2020
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
|
282,240
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.71
|
|
|
|
2/3/2020
|
|
102
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
These options vest in four equal
annual installments based on continued employment, and were
immediately exercisable, provided that upon exercise the shares
issued are subject to the same vesting and repurchase provisions
that applied before exercise.
|
|
(2)
|
|
This stock option was immediately
exercisable upon grant, and as of September 1, 2009, was
fully vested.
|
Potential
Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control
The table below summarizes the potential payments to each of our
named executive officers if he or she were to be terminated on
December 31, 2010 under the circumstances described in the
footnotes below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
Medical/Welfare
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Payments(1)
|
|
Benefits(2)
|
|
Total Benefits
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
$
|
700,000
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
700,000
|
|
John T. Staton
|
|
$
|
599,994
|
(4)
|
|
$
|
18,252
|
(4)
|
|
$
|
618,246
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
$
|
288,850
|
(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
288,850
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts subject to a reduction for compensation earned by the
named executive officer from any new employment during the
severance period. |
|
(2) |
|
Calculated based on the estimated cost to us of providing these
benefits. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents amounts payable for termination due to death or
disability or termination without cause
or for good reason pursuant to the employment
agreement described below. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents amounts payable for termination without
cause or for good reason pursuant to the
employment agreement described below. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents amounts payable for termination without
cause pursuant to the offer letter described below. |
Employment
Agreements
Mary A. Tolan. We entered into an
at-will employment agreement with Mary A. Tolan, our president
and chief executive officer, effective January 2004. Pursuant to
the agreement, Ms. Tolan is entitled to an annual base
salary of at least $400,000, subject to adjustment by our board
of directors. Ms. Tolans annual base salary is
currently $710,500. Pursuant to the agreement, Ms. Tolan
earned a one-time cash performance bonus of $200,000 based on
customer procurement during 2004 consistent with our business
plan. Pursuant to the agreement, in March 2004, our board of
directors granted Ms. Tolan 11,760,000 shares of
restricted stock, which vested in equal monthly installments
over four years ending November 2007.
If Ms. Tolans employment is terminated due to her
death or disability, if we terminate
Ms. Tolans employment without cause or if
Ms. Tolan terminates her employment for good
reason, as those terms are defined in her employment
agreement, (1) Ms. Tolan will be entitled to receive
her base salary paid in accordance with our payroll practices
during the 12 months following such termination, subject to
a reduction for any compensation she earns from any new
employment during the severance period, and
(2) Ms. Tolans outstanding stock-based awards
will continue to vest until the earlier of 12 months
following her termination or the end of the applicable
awards vesting period. In the event of a change in
control, as such term is defined in her employment
agreement, 50% of all unvested shares of Ms. Tolans
stock-based awards will accelerate and vest in full as of the
effective date of the change in control. If
Ms. Tolans employment is terminated without
cause or if Ms. Tolan terminates her employment
for good reason within 12 months after a
change in control, the remaining 50% of all unvested
shares of Ms. Tolans stock-based awards will
accelerate and vest in full. If Ms. Tolan is terminated for
cause, she has agreed to execute a limited stock
power transferring all rights to vote the 11,760,000 shares
of restricted stock granted to her pursuant to the employment
agreement to a person we designate in our sole discretion.
Ms. Tolans employment
103
agreement restricts her from engaging in activities competitive
with us, soliciting our employees and consultants, and diverting
business from us for a period of 12 months following her
termination.
John T. Staton. We entered into an
at-will employment agreement with John T. Staton, our chief
financial officer and treasurer, effective June 2005. Pursuant
to the agreement, Mr. Staton is entitled to an annual base
salary of at least $300,000, subject to adjustment by our board
of directors and our chief executive officer.
Mr. Statons annual base salary is currently $334,950.
Mr. Staton is eligible to earn an annual performance bonus
of up to $100,000 per year, with the full $100,000 guaranteed
for each of his first two years of employment. Pursuant to the
agreement, in September 2005, our board of directors granted
Mr. Staton an option to purchase 1,173,236 shares of
our common stock at an exercise price of $0.77 per share,
vesting in equal monthly installments over four years ending
September 2009.
If we terminate Mr. Statons employment without
cause or if Mr. Staton terminates his
employment for good reason, as those terms are
defined in his employment agreement, Mr. Staton will be
entitled to receive $33,333 per month during the 18 months
following such termination, subject to a reduction for any
compensation he earns from any new employment during the
severance period. If Mr. Statons employment is
terminated without cause or if Mr. Staton
terminates his employment for good reason,
Mr. Staton and his family will be entitled to continue to
participate in our health insurance plan during the
18 months following termination to the extent of his
participation prior to termination, and we will pay the premiums
that we paid prior to termination. Mr. Statons
employment agreement restricts him from engaging in activities
competitive with us, soliciting our employees and consultants,
and diverting business from us for a period of 18 months
following his termination.
Gregory N. Kazarian. We entered into an
offer letter with Gregory N. Kazarian, our senior vice
president, in December 2003. Pursuant to the offer letter,
Mr. Kazarian is entitled to an annual base salary of
$225,000. Mr. Kazarians annual base salary is
currently $293,183. Pursuant to the offer letter,
Mr. Kazarian earned a one-time cash performance bonus of
$75,000 based on customer procurement, and was entitled to
receive an option to purchase shares of our common stock then
representing 1.5% of our common stock. In lieu of the option, in
June 2004, our board of directors awarded Mr. Kazarian
980,000 shares of common stock, then representing 1.5% of
our common stock, which vested in equal monthly installments
over four years ending before January 2008. If we terminate
Mr. Kazarians employment without cause,
Mr. Kazarian will be entitled to receive his current
monthly base salary during the 12 months following such
termination, subject to a reduction for any compensation he
earns from any new employment during the severance period.
Confidentiality
and Non-Disclosure Agreements
As a condition to employment, each named executive officer
entered into a confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement with
us. Under these agreements, each named executive officer has
agreed:
|
|
|
|
|
not to solicit our employees and customers during his or her
employment and for a period of 18 months after the
termination of employment;
|
|
|
|
not to compete with us during his or her employment and for a
period of 12 months after the termination of employment;
|
|
|
|
to protect our confidential and proprietary information; and
|
|
|
|
to assign to us intellectual property developed during the
course of his or her employment.
|
Stock Option and
Other Compensation Plans
Amended and
Restated Stock Option Plan
Our amended and restated stock option plan, which we refer to as
our prior option plan, was adopted by our board of directors in
December 2005. The plan was amended and restated in February
2006 and further amended in May 2007, October 2008, January
2009, November 2009 and April 2010. No further grants will
be made under our prior option plan.
104
As of February 28, 2011, there were options to purchase
15,133,250 shares of common stock outstanding under our
prior option plan, 5,489,082 shares of common stock issued
and outstanding pursuant to the exercise of options granted
under this plan (of which 5,486,932 shares were vested) and
no shares of common stock available for future grants under the
plan.
Our prior option plan provided for the grant of options that are
not intended to qualify as incentive stock options under
Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code, which we refer to
as non-statutory stock options. Our employees, directors and
outside consultants were eligible to receive options under the
plan. The plan is administered by the board of directors, our
compensation committee or another committee designated by the
board of directors.
Unless otherwise prescribed in an option agreement, options
granted pursuant to our prior option plan vest in equal
installments on each of the first four anniversaries of the
grant date. Options under our prior option plan are immediately
exercisable upon grant, provided that unvested shares of common
stock issued upon exercise of an option remain subject to our
right of repurchase upon termination and to restrictions on
transfer. Subject to the repurchase right, upon exercise of an
option, a holder has the rights of a stockholder as to both the
vested and unvested shares. Our prior option plan contains
restrictive covenants relating to confidentiality, ownership of
proprietary information, non-competition and non-solicitation.
In the event an option holders employment or service is
terminated other than for cause, as defined in our prior option
plan, the unvested portion of the unexercised option shall be
forfeited, the vested but unexercised portion of the option may
be exercised within 60 days and unvested shares that were
issued upon prior exercises are subject to our right of
repurchase at a price per share equal to the lesser of the
options exercise price or the fair market value at the
time of termination. In the event an option holders
employment or service is terminated for cause, the vested but
unexercised portion of the option is forfeited, vested shares
that were issued upon prior exercises are subject to our right
of repurchase at a price per share equal to the options
exercise price, and unvested shares that were issued upon prior
exercises are subject to our right of repurchase at a price per
share equal to the lesser of the options exercise price or
the fair market value at the time of termination.
Upon a change of control, as defined in the plan,
all unvested shares issued upon prior exercises of options
granted under our prior option plan will be accelerated in full
unless the acquirer replaces the shares with its shares subject
to the same vesting schedule. If an acquirer of our company does
not accept the assignment of our repurchase rights under the
prior option plan, the repurchase rights will terminate upon the
change of control.
Our prior option plan restricts option recipients from engaging
in activities competitive with us, soliciting our employees and
consultants, and diverting business from us while serving as an
employee, director or consultant and for periods of 18 to
24 months after termination of employment or service.
2010 Stock
Incentive Plan
Our 2010 stock incentive plan was adopted by our board of
directors and approved by our stockholders in April 2010.
The 2010 stock incentive plan provides for the grant of
incentive stock options, non-statutory stock options, restricted
stock awards and other stock-based awards. The number of shares
of our common stock reserved for issuance under the 2010 stock
incentive plan is equal to the sum of 8,108,796 plus the
number of shares of common stock subject to awards granted under
our prior option plan that expire, terminate or are otherwise
surrendered, cancelled, forfeited or repurchased by us pursuant
to a contractual repurchase right, up to a maximum of 24,374,756
shares. As of February 28, 2011, there were options to
purchase 404,714 shares of common stock outstanding under
our 2010 stock incentive plan and 7,952,122 shares of
common stock available for future grants under the plan.
Our employees, officers, directors, consultants and advisors are
eligible to receive awards under our 2010 stock incentive plan.
The exercise price of all stock options granted under the 2010
stock incentive plan cannot be less than 100% of the fair market
value of the common stock on the date of
105
grant. Incentive stock options may be granted only to our
employees; in the case of any participant who owns 10% or more
of the total combined voting power of our capital stock, an
incentive stock option cannot have an exercise price of less
than 110% of the fair market value of the common stock on the
date of grant and the term of the option cannot exceed five
years.
The 2010 stock incentive plan is administered by the board of
directors, our compensation committee or another committee
designated by the board of directors. The board of directors may
delegate authority to an executive officer to grant options
under the plan. Subject to limitations specified in the plan,
the board, applicable committee or executive officer to whom
authority is delegated will select the recipients of awards and
determine:
|
|
|
|
|
the number of shares of common stock covered by options and the
dates upon which the options become exercisable;
|
|
|
|
the exercise price of options;
|
|
|
|
the duration of the options; and
|
|
|
|
the number of shares of common stock subject to any restricted
stock or other stock-based awards and the terms and conditions
of such awards, including conditions for repurchase, issue price
and repurchase price.
|
Our board of directors has delegated authority to our chief
executive officer to grant options under the 2010 stock
incentive plan, except to herself and to other executive
officers and directors, and subject to such guidelines as our
board of directors may establish from time to time.
In general, options granted pursuant to our 2010 stock incentive
plan have a term of up to ten years and will vest in equal
installments on each of the first four anniversaries of the
grant date. Unless otherwise provided in the applicable option
agreement, options will not be exercisable prior to vesting.
Agreements evidencing options under the 2010 stock incentive
plan generally contain restrictive covenants relating to
confidentiality, ownership of proprietary information,
non-competition and non-solicitation. In the event an option
holders employment or service is terminated other than for
cause, as defined in the applicable option agreement, the
unvested portion of the unexercised option will be forfeited and
the vested but unexercised portion of the option may be
exercised within 60 days. In the event an option
holders employment or service is terminated for cause, the
vested but unexercised portion of the option will be forfeited
and vested shares that were issued upon prior exercises will be
subject to our right of repurchase at a price per share equal to
the options exercise price. In addition, if the option
holder has sold the vested shares, we have the right to recover
the proceeds from such sale that are in excess of the
options exercise price.
Upon a merger or other reorganization event, our board of
directors, may, in its sole discretion, take any one or more of
the following actions pursuant to our 2010 stock incentive plan,
as to some or all outstanding awards other than restricted stock
awards:
|
|
|
|
|
provide that all outstanding awards shall be assumed or
substituted by the successor corporation;
|
|
|
|
upon written notice to a participant, provide that the
participants unexercised options or awards will terminate
immediately prior to the consummation of such transaction unless
exercised by the participant;
|
|
|
|
provide that outstanding awards will become exercisable,
realizable or deliverable, or restrictions applicable to an
award will lapse, in whole or in part, prior to or upon the
reorganization event;
|
|
|
|
in the event of a reorganization event pursuant to which holders
of our common stock will receive a cash payment for each share
surrendered in the reorganization event, make or provide for a
cash payment to the participants equal to the excess, if any, of
the acquisition price times the number of shares of our common
stock subject to such outstanding awards (to the extent then
exercisable (after giving effect to any acceleration of vesting)
at prices not in excess of the acquisition price), over the
aggregate exercise price of all such outstanding
|
106
|
|
|
|
|
awards and any applicable tax withholdings, in exchange for the
termination of such awards; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
provide that, in connection with a liquidation or dissolution,
awards convert into the right to receive liquidation proceeds.
|
Upon the occurrence of a reorganization event other than a
liquidation or dissolution, the repurchase and other rights
under each outstanding restricted stock award will continue for
the benefit of the successor company and will, unless the board
of directors may otherwise determine, apply to the cash,
securities or other property into which our common stock is
converted pursuant to the reorganization event. Upon the
occurrence of a reorganization event involving a liquidation or
dissolution, all conditions on each outstanding restricted stock
award will automatically be deemed terminated or satisfied,
unless otherwise provided in the agreement evidencing the
restricted stock award.
No award may be granted under the 2010 stock incentive plan
after April 2020. Our board of directors may amend, suspend or
terminate the 2010 stock incentive plan at any time, subject to
stockholder approval to the extent required by applicable law or
stock market requirements.
Restricted
Stock Plan
Our restricted stock plan was adopted by our board of directors
in March 2004 and amended in June 2004, August 2004 and February
2005. As of February 28, 2011, all shares of common stock
outstanding under our restricted stock plan were vested. No
further shares are available for issuance under our restricted
stock plan.
Our restricted stock plan provided for the grant of restricted
stock awards. Our employees, directors and outside consultants
were eligible to receive awards under the plan. The plan is
administered by the board of directors, our compensation
committee or another committee designated by the board of
directors, provided that a majority of the members of such
committee are directors who are not also our employees.
Shares issued under our restricted stock plan vest on schedules
specified in the applicable award agreement, ranging from
immediate vesting to vesting over a period of 48 months.
Upon termination for cause or without good reason, all unvested
shares shall be forfeited. Upon termination without cause, for
good reason, or for death or disability, unvested shares may
continue to vest for up to 12 months and are subject to
repurchase by us at the original purchase price therefor.
Subject to the repurchase provisions, upon grant of an award, a
holder has the rights of a stockholder as to both the vested and
unvested shares.
Upon a change of control, as defined in the plan,
unvested shares are accelerated only to the extent provided in
the applicable award agreement, employment agreement or other
agreement.
401(k)
Retirement Plan
We maintain 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 of our 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. We currently match up to 50% of the first 3% of
base compensation in 401(k) plan contributions by employees who
are below the director level; as such, our named
executive offices do not receive a match from the company for
amounts, if any, deferred under the 401(k) plan.
Limitation of
Liability and Indemnification
As permitted by Delaware law, our restated certificate of
incorporation contains provisions that limit or eliminate the
personal liability of our directors. Our restated certificate of
incorporation limits the liability of directors to the maximum
extent permitted by Delaware law. Delaware law provides that
107
directors of a corporation will not be personally liable for
monetary damages for breaches of their fiduciary duties as
directors, except liability for:
|
|
|
|
|
any breach of the directors duty of loyalty to us or our
stockholders;
|
|
|
|
any act or omission not in good faith or which involves
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;
|
|
|
|
any unlawful payments related to dividends or unlawful stock
repurchases or redemptions; or
|
|
|
|
any transaction from which the director derived an improper
personal benefit.
|
These limitations do not apply to liabilities arising under
federal securities laws and do not affect the availability of
equitable remedies, including injunctive relief or rescission.
If Delaware law is amended to permit the further elimination or
limiting of the personal liability of directors, then the
liability of our directors will be eliminated or limited to the
fullest extent permitted by Delaware law as so amended.
As permitted by Delaware law, our restated certificate of
incorporation also provides that:
|
|
|
|
|
we will indemnify our directors and officers to the fullest
extent permitted by law;
|
|
|
|
we may indemnify our other employees and other agents to the
same extent that we indemnify our officers and directors, unless
otherwise determined by the board of directors; and
|
|
|
|
we will advance expenses to our directors and officers in
connection with legal proceedings to the fullest extent
permitted by law.
|
The indemnification provisions contained in our restated
certificate of incorporation are not exclusive. In addition, we
have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our
directors and executive officers. Each indemnification agreement
provides that we will indemnify the director or executive
officer to the fullest extent permitted by law for claims
arising in his or her capacity as our director, officer,
employee or agent, provided that he or she acted in good faith
and in a manner that he or she reasonably believed to be in, or
not opposed to, our best interests and, with respect to any
criminal proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe that his
or her conduct was unlawful. In the event that we do not assume
the defense of a claim against a director or executive officer,
we will be required to advance his or her expenses in connection
with his or her defense, provided that he or she undertakes to
repay all amounts advanced if it is ultimately determined that
he or she is not entitled to be indemnified by us. We believe
that these provisions and agreements are necessary to attract
and retain qualified persons as directors and executive officers.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers or
persons controlling our company pursuant to the foregoing
provisions, we understand that in the opinion of the SEC such
indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the
Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable.
In addition, we maintain standard policies of insurance under
which coverage is provided to our directors and officers against
losses rising from claims made by reason of breach of duty or
other wrongful act, and to us with respect to payments which may
be made by us to such directors and officers pursuant to the
above indemnification provisions or otherwise as a matter of law.
Rule 10b5-1
Sales Plans
Our directors and executive officers may adopt written plans,
known as
Rule 10b5-1
plans, in which they will contract with a broker to buy or sell
shares of our common stock on a periodic basis. Under a
Rule 10b5-1
plan, a broker executes trades pursuant to parameters
established by the director or officer when entering into the
plan, without further direction from the director or officer.
The director or officer may amend or terminate the plan in some
circumstances. Our directors and executive officers may also buy
or sell additional shares outside of a
Rule 10b5-1
plan when they are not in possession of material, nonpublic
information concerning our company and when not otherwise
limited by company policies.
108
RELATED PERSON
TRANSACTIONS
Since January 1, 2007, we have engaged in the following
transactions, other than compensation arrangements, with our
directors, executive officers, holders of more than 5% of our
voting securities and selling stockholders, and certain
affiliates of our directors, executive officers, 5% stockholders
and selling stockholders.
Transactions with
Ascension Health
In October 2004, Ascension Health became our founding customer.
Since then, in exchange for its initial
start-up
assistance, operational laboratory services and related
consulting services relative to the services we were developing,
we have issued common stock and granted warrants to Ascension
Health, as a result of which Ascension Health holds more than 5%
of our voting securities. Ascension Health is the nations
largest Catholic and largest non-profit health system. It is
dedicated to its mission of serving all, with special attention
to those who are poor and vulnerable. Our work on behalf of
Ascension Health is done in compliance with its charity care
guidelines and billing and collection policies, which recognize
the human dignity of each individual and our responsibility to
treat all patients with respect. A key element of our work for
Ascension Health is qualifying patients for charity care and
identifying potential payment sources for patients who are
uninsured or underinsured. Since January 1, 2007, we have
engaged in the following transactions with Ascension Health:
Customer Relationship. In October 2004,
we and Ascension Health entered into a master services agreement
with an initial term through November 1, 2007. In December
2007, we and Ascension Health renewed and extended the agreement
through December 31, 2012 pursuant to an amended and
restated master services agreement, which will automatically
renew for successive one-year terms unless terminated by us or
Ascension Health upon 180 days prior written notice.
Pursuant to the amended and restated master services agreement,
we provide our revenue cycle service offering to hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health that execute separate managed
service contracts with us and thereby become our customers. In
rendering our services, we must comply with each hospitals
policies and procedures relating to billing, collections,
charity care, personnel, risk management, good corporate
citizenship and other matters; the ethical and religious
directives for Catholic healthcare services; and all applicable
federal, state and local laws and regulations. Ascension
Healths affiliated hospitals are not obligated to execute
a managed service contract with us or to use our services. Each
managed service contract with a hospital affiliated with
Ascension Health incorporates the provisions of the master
services agreement and provides that the hospital will be bound
by all amendments, modifications and waivers that we and
Ascension Health agree to under the master services agreement.
With certain discrete exceptions, we are the exclusive provider
of revenue cycle services to the hospitals affiliated with
Ascension Health that execute managed service contracts with us.
Our managed service contracts with hospitals affiliated with
Ascension Health require us to consult with such hospitals
before undertaking services for competitors specified by such
hospitals in their contracts 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 hospital
that specified the competitor but are not required to obtain the
consent of such hospital. We do not believe the existence of
this consultation obligation has materially impaired our ability
to obtain new customers.
The term of each managed service contract with a hospital
affiliated with Ascension Health is five years and will
automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless
terminated by us or Ascension Health upon 210 days prior
written notice. By mutual agreement, we and Ascension Health can
terminate the managed service contracts between us and hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health upon 180 days prior
written notice after the second anniversary of the effective
date of the applicable contract. Upon 30 days prior written
notice, Ascension Health can terminate the affected portion of
any applicable managed service contract if we are unable to
provide services to a hospital for 30 days out of any
45-day
period due to any cause beyond our reasonable control. We can
terminate any applicable managed service contract if a hospital
is excluded from participation in the
109
federal Medicare, state Medicaid or other specified federal or
state healthcare programs, and Ascension Health can terminate
the master services agreement if we are excluded from
participation in any such program. A hospital cannot terminate
its managed service contract with us but it can determine not to
renew its contract with us. All managed service contracts
between us and hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health will
terminate automatically when the master services agreement
between us and Ascension Health terminates or expires.
The amended and restated master services agreement provides,
among other things, that:
|
|
|
|
|
we assume full responsibility for the management and cost of the
revenue cycle operations of each hospital that executes a
managed service contract with us, including the payroll and
benefit costs associated with the hospitals employees
conducting revenue cycle activities (and who remain hospital
employees for all purposes), and the agreements and costs
associated with related third-party services;
|
|
|
|
we are required to supply, at our cost, a sufficient number of
our own employees on each hospitals premises and the
technology necessary to implement and manage our services;
|
|
|
|
each hospital must provide us with the facilities, standard
office furnishings and services, pre-existing revenue cycle
assets and authority to provide our services;
|
|
|
|
in general, each hospital pays us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
base fees equal to a specified amount, subject to annual
increases under an inflation and wage increase formula;
|
|
|
|
incentive fees based on achieving
agreed-upon
benchmarks; and
|
|
|
|
management and technology fees;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our fees are subject to adjustment in the event specified
performance milestones are not met, which would result in a
reduction of future fees payable to us;
|
|
|
|
we are required 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;
|
|
|
|
we must implement our services and technology at each hospital
in a manner that does not cause an unplanned material disruption
in the hospitals operations;
|
|
|
|
we are required to work to qualify patients for charity care and
identify potential payment sources for patients who are
uninsured and underinsured;
|
|
|
|
we are required to maintain patient and employee satisfaction
levels as compared to specified baseline performance
measurements;
|
|
|
|
a joint review board consisting of an equal number of senior
executives from us and Ascension Health oversees the obligations
and performance of the parties and hears fee disputes and other
disputes, with any unresolved disputes submitted to binding
arbitration (provided that hospitals cannot withhold base fees
for any reason);
|
|
|
|
the parties provide various representations and indemnities
(subject to a specified cap) to each other;
|
|
|
|
following termination or expiration of the master services
agreement or any managed service contract between us and a
hospital affiliated with Ascension Health, if requested by
Ascension Health, we must:
|
|
|
|
|
|
provide termination assistance, in return for reasonable
compensation, for three months;
|
|
|
|
continue to provide our services for up to one year in return
for compensation equal to a specified percentage of the
then-applicable base fees; and
|
110
|
|
|
|
|
provide reasonable assistance to Ascension Health in seeking
bids from other parties to provide similar services; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
following termination or expiration of the agreement, we must
grant to the applicable hospitals a license to continue using
all software and applications we used to provide our services,
in exchange for payments and fees that vary depending on whether
the agreement is terminated for cause or for any other reason.
|
The amended and restated master services agreement may not be
terminated by hospitals affiliated with Ascension Health. The
agreement may only be terminated by Ascension Health or us in
the following circumstances:
|
|
|
|
|
either party may terminate the agreement if the other party
materially breaches the agreement and fails to cure the breach
in accordance with specified cure provisions; and
|
|
|
|
Ascension Health may terminate the agreement (1) if we undergo a
change in control, (2) if Ascension Health receives an opinion
of qualified legal counsel, after consultation with our
qualified legal counsel, in which it concludes that the
agreement presents a material risk of causing Ascension Health
or any affiliated hospital to violate any applicable laws,
regulations or rules related to its operations, and that risk
cannot be reasonably mitigated by the parties following good
faith consultations and consideration of reasonable amendments
and modifications to the agreement, or (3) if we become
excluded from participation in the federal Medicare, state
Medicaid or other specified federal or state healthcare
programs, or if we fail to promptly remove from providing
services to Ascension Health and its affiliates any of our staff
or related entities that become excluded from participation in
the federal Medicare, state Medicaid or other specified federal
or state healthcare programs.
|
In 2008, 2009 and 2010, net services revenue from hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health represented 70.7%, 60.3% and
50.7% of our total net services revenue in such periods,
respectively. As of December 31, 2010, we had
$22.1 million of accounts receivable from hospitals
affiliated with Ascension Health.
Ascension Health is one of the selling stockholders in this
offering and, following completion of this offering, will
own % of our outstanding common
stock. See Principal and Selling Stockholders.
Initial Stock Issuance and Protection Warrant
Agreement. In October and November 2004, we
issued 3,537,306 shares of our 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 we granted Ascension Health the right to
purchase additional shares of our common stock from time to time
for $0.003 per share when Ascension Healths ownership
interest in our company declines below 5% due to our issuance of
additional stock or rights to purchase stock. The protection
warrant agreement, and all purchase rights granted thereunder,
expired on the closing of our initial public offering. In 2008
and 2009, we granted Ascension Health the right to purchase
91,183 and 136,372 shares of our common stock for $0.003
per share, respectively, pursuant to the protection warrant
agreement. No such rights were earned in 2010. In 2008 and 2009,
Ascension Health purchased 261,275 and 164,396 shares of
our common stock, respectively, from us 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.
Supplemental Warrant
Agreement. 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. In
May 2007, we amended and restated the supplemental warrant
agreement to reduce the number of shares covered by the
agreement to 1,749,064 shares. In September 2007, we
further amended and restated the supplemental warrant agreement
to modify the purchase right milestones. Under the supplemental
warrant agreement, the purchase price is equal to the most
recent common stock-equivalent price per share paid in a capital
raising transaction or, if we
111
have not had a capital raising transaction within the preceding
six months, the exercise price of the employee stock options we
have most recently granted. Based on Ascension Healths
achievement of specified milestones relating to its sales and
marketing assistance, Ascension Health earned the right to
purchase all 1,749,064 shares under the supplemental
warrant agreement. The table below summarizes Ascension
Healths purchase rights under the supplemental warrant
agreement:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date Earned
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
Purchase Price Per
Share
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
874,532
|
|
|
$
|
4.43
|
|
March 2008
|
|
|
437,268
|
|
|
$
|
10.25
|
|
March 2009
|
|
|
437,264
|
|
|
$
|
13.02
|
|
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.
Stock Sale. Concurrently with the
amendment and restatement of the supplemental warrant agreement
described above in May 2007, we sold 2,623,593 shares of
our common stock to Ascension Health for $2.09 per share, which
was equal to the fair market value of the common stock at that
time, for an aggregate purchase price of $5,488,128.
Registration Statement. In mid-2011, we
intend to file a registration statement on
Form S-3
under the Securities Act to register the resale of the shares of
common stock issued to Ascension Health upon exercise of all
warrants acquired by it under the Protection Warrant Agreement
and Supplemental Warrant Agreement and the resale of the shares
acquired by it pursuant to the stock sale described in the
preceding paragraph.
Zimmerman
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 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 $483,334 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. Mr. Zimmerman and the trusts are selling
stockholders in this offering and, following completion of this
offering, will own % of our outstanding
common stock. See Principal and Selling Stockholders.
Share
Exchanges
Effective as of December 31, 2008, certain of our
directors, executive officers, selling stockholders and their
affiliates agreed to exchange 9,401,468 shares of our
non-voting common
112
stock held by them for 9,401,468 shares of our voting
common stock. To implement these exchanges, we entered into
share exchange agreements with these persons in February 2009.
These shares are subject to the terms and conditions set forth
in our restricted stock plan, the restricted stock award
agreements entered into with these persons in connection with
the original issuance of their shares of non-voting common stock
and our stockholders agreement pursuant to which these
persons have certain registration rights. For a more detailed
description of these registration rights, see Description
of Capital Stock Registration Rights.
Effective May 19, 2010, all outstanding shares of
non-voting common stock were converted into voting common stock.
The table below sets forth the number of shares of voting common
stock issued to our directors, executive officers, selling
stockholders and their affiliates in exchange for an equal
number of shares of non-voting common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
|
4,573,334
|
|
Steven N. Kaplan
|
|
|
163,334
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
|
980,000
|
|
The Shultz 1989 Family Trust(1)
|
|
|
352,800
|
|
Spiegel Family LLC(2)
|
|
|
2,940,000
|
|
John T. Staton Declaration of Trust(3)
|
|
|
392,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
George P. Shultz, a member of our board of directors, and his
wife are the beneficiaries of The Shultz 1989 Family Trust. |
|
(2) |
|
Arthur H. Spiegel, III, a member of our board of directors,
and his wife are the managing members of Spiegel Family LLC, the
members of which are members of Mr. Spiegels
immediate family. |
|
(3) |
|
John T. Staton, our chief financial officer and treasurer, is
the trustee of John T. Staton Declaration of Trust, the
beneficiaries of which are members of Mr. Statons
immediate family. |
Management
Investments in Our Company
We have not sold any shares of preferred stock since
January 1, 2007. Between August 2003 and December 2005, we
raised approximately $16.1 million from the sale of
preferred stock to private investors principally consisting of
our 5% stockholders, directors, executive officers and their
affiliates. All outstanding shares of preferred stock
automatically converted into shares of common stock upon the
closing of our initial public offering in May 2010, and the
holders thereof received in addition to such shares of common
stock the liquidation preference payments described below under
Liquidation Preference Payments. Each of our four
executive officers made one or more cash investments in our
company on the same terms as applicable to the other investors
in these preferred stock financings. The cash investments of
Ms. Tolan and Mr. Deffarges together represented more
than 10% of the aggregate proceeds from our preferred stock
financings. Upon the closing our initial public offering in
May 2010, the shares of preferred stock held by our four
executive officers and their affiliates automatically converted
into an aggregate of 3,418,624 shares of common stock.
Liquidation
Preference Payments
Upon the automatic conversion of shares of our preferred stock
as described in the preceding paragraph, we were required to
make liquidation preference payments to the holders of our
outstanding preferred stock in amounts equal to the original
purchase price per share plus any accrued but unpaid dividends.
Each holder was entitled to elect to receive such payment in
cash or in shares of common stock valued at the public offering
price per share in our initial public offering in May 2010.
The following table sets forth the liquidation preference
payments made to our directors, executive officers, selling
stockholders and holders of more than 5% of our voting
securities who held shares of our preferred
113
stock and, based on elections received by such holders, the
allocation of such payments between cash and shares of common
stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
Total Payment
|
|
|
Accretive Investors SBIC, L.P.
|
|
|
603,218
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,238,625
|
|
FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare Investors, L.P.
|
|
|
502,696
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,032,357
|
|
Mary A. Tolan
|
|
|
104,599
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,255,199
|
|
John T. Staton Declaration of Trust
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
78,946
|
|
|
$
|
78,946
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
530,132
|
|
|
$
|
530,132
|
|
Steven N. Kaplan
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
88,212
|
|
|
$
|
88,212
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
69,979
|
|
|
$
|
69,979
|
|
The Shultz 1989 Family Trust
|
|
|
11,052
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
132,633
|
|
Spiegel Family LLC
|
|
|
42,226
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
506,714
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,263,791
|
|
|
$
|
767,269
|
|
|
$
|
15,932,797
|
|
Certain
Employment Arrangements
We employ Kyle Hupach, the
brother-in-law
of Gregory N. Kazarian, our senior vice president, as a director
of revenue cycle operations. Mr. Hupachs current
annual base salary is $123,250, and he also participates in our
standard employee benefits package. In 2009 and 2010,
Mr. Hupachs total compensation, including salary,
bonus and the amount of share-based compensation expense that we
recognized for financial statement reporting purposes for stock
options previously granted to him, was $167,678 and $170,938,
respectively.
Registration
Rights
We are a party to a stockholders agreement with certain of
our stockholders, including the following directors, executive
officers, selling stockholders and holders of more than 5% of
our voting securities and their affiliates: Mary A. Tolan,
Etienne H. Deffarges, Gregory N. Kazarian, Irrevocable
2009 Kazarian Childrens Trust, Irrevocable 2009 Gregory N.
Kazarian Trust, John T. Staton Declaration of Trust,
Steven N. Kaplan, The Shultz 1989 Family Trust,
Kazarian Family, LLC, Spiegel Family LLC, Accretive
Investors SBIC, L.P. and FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare
Investors, L.P. Pursuant to the registration rights provisions
of the stockholders agreement, certain of the foregoing
stockholders are selling a portion of their shares in this
offering. See Principal and Selling Stockholders.
Pursuant to the stockholders agreement, we are required to
pay all registration fees and expenses, including the reasonable
fees and disbursements of one counsel for the participating
stockholders, and indemnify each participating stockholder with
respect to each registration of registrable shares that is
effected, including in connection with this offering. In
addition, after the contractual
lock-up
agreements in connection with this offering expire, the
stockholders who are parties to the stockholders agreement
will have the right to require us to register all or a portion
of their shares under the Securities Act under specific
circumstances and subject to certain limitations. For a more
detailed description of these registration rights, see
Description of Capital Stock Registration
Rights.
Indemnification
Our restated certificate of incorporation provides that we will
indemnify our directors and officers to the fullest extent
permitted by Delaware law. In addition, we have entered into
indemnification agreements with each of our directors and
executive officers that are broader in scope than the specific
indemnification provisions contained in the Delaware General
Corporation Law. For more information regarding these
agreements, see Management Limitation of
Liability and Indemnification and Description of
Capital Stock Limitation of Liability and
Indemnification of Officers and Directors.
114
Policies and
Procedures for Related Person Transactions
Our board of directors has adopted a written related person
transaction policy to set forth policies and procedures for the
review and approval or ratification of related person
transactions. This policy covers any transaction, arrangement or
relationship, or any series of similar transactions,
arrangements or relationships, in which we were or are to be a
participant, the amount involved exceeds $120,000, and a related
person had or will have a direct or indirect material interest,
including, without limitation, purchases of goods or services by
or from the related person or entities in which the related
person has a material interest, indebtedness, guarantees of
indebtedness, and employment by us of a related person. Our
related person transaction policy contains exceptions for any
transaction or interest that is not considered a related person
transaction under SEC rules as in effect from time to time.
Any related person transaction proposed to be entered into by us
must be reported to our general counsel and will be reviewed and
approved by the audit committee in accordance with the terms of
the policy, prior to effectiveness or consummation of the
transaction whenever practicable. If our general counsel
determines that advance approval of a related person transaction
is not practicable under the circumstances, the audit committee
will review and, in its discretion, may ratify the related
person transaction at the next meeting of the audit committee.
Alternatively, our general counsel may present a related person
transaction arising in the time period between meetings of the
audit committee to the chair of the audit committee, who will
review and may approve the related person transaction, subject
to ratification by the audit committee at the next meeting of
the audit committee.
In addition, any related person transaction previously approved
by the audit committee or otherwise already existing that is
ongoing in nature will be reviewed by the audit committee
annually to ensure that such related person transaction has been
conducted in accordance with the previous approval granted by
the audit committee, if any, and that all required disclosures
regarding the related person transaction are made.
Transactions involving compensation of executive officers will
be reviewed and approved by the compensation committee in the
manner specified in the charter of the compensation committee.
A related person transaction reviewed under this policy will be
considered approved or ratified if it is authorized by the audit
committee in accordance with the standards set forth in the
policy after full disclosure of the related persons
interests in the transaction. As appropriate for the
circumstances, the audit committee will review and consider:
|
|
|
|
|
the related persons interest in the related person
transaction;
|
|
|
|
the approximate dollar value of the amount involved in the
related person transaction;
|
|
|
|
the approximate dollar value of the amount of the related
persons interest in the transaction without regard to the
amount of any profit or loss;
|
|
|
|
whether the transaction was undertaken in the ordinary course of
business of our company;
|
|
|
|
whether the transaction with the related person is proposed to
be, or was, entered into on terms no less favorable to us than
the terms that could have been reached with an unrelated third
party;
|
|
|
|
the purpose of, and the potential benefits to us of, the
transaction; and
|
|
|
|
any other information regarding the related person transaction
or the related person in the context of the proposed transaction
that would be material to investors in light of the
circumstances of the particular transaction.
|
The audit committee will review all relevant information
available to it about the related person transaction. The audit
committee may approve or ratify the related person transaction
only if the audit committee determines that, under all of the
circumstances, the transaction is in, or is not inconsistent
with, our best interests. The audit committee may, in its sole
discretion, impose such conditions as it deems appropriate on us
or the related person in connection with approval of the related
person transaction.
115
PRINCIPAL AND
SELLING STOCKHOLDERS
The following table sets forth information regarding the
beneficial ownership of our common stock as of February 28,
2011, by:
|
|
|
|
|
each of our directors;
|
|
|
|
each of our named executive officers;
|
|
|
|
each person, or group of affiliated persons, who is known by us
to beneficially own more than 5% of our common stock;
|
|
|
|
all of our directors and executive officers as a group; and
|
|
|
|
each selling stockholder.
|
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
of the SEC. These rules generally attribute beneficial ownership
of securities to persons who possess sole or shared voting power
or investment power with respect to those securities and include
shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of stock
options or warrants that are immediately exercisable or
exercisable within 60 days after February 28, 2011.
Except as otherwise indicated, all of the shares reflected in
the table are shares of common stock and all persons listed
below have sole voting and investment power with respect to the
shares beneficially owned by them, subject to applicable
community property laws. The information is not necessarily
indicative of beneficial ownership for any other purpose.
Percentage ownership calculations for beneficial ownership prior
to this offering are based on 95,126,464 shares outstanding
as of February 28, 2011. Except as otherwise indicated in
the table below, addresses of named beneficial owners are in
care of Accretive Health, Inc., 401 North Michigan Avenue,
Suite 2700, Chicago, Illinois 60611.
In addition, in computing the number of shares of common stock
beneficially owned by a person and the percentage ownership of
that person, we deemed outstanding shares of common stock
subject to options or warrants held by that person that are
immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
February 28, 2011. We did not deem the shares subject to
these options and warrants to be outstanding, however, for the
purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other
person. Beneficial ownership representing less than 1% is
denoted with an asterisk (*).
116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares to be
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sold if
|
|
Owned After the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriters
|
|
Offering if
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially Owned
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially Owned
|
|
Option is
|
|
Underwriters Option
|
|
|
Prior to Offering
|
|
Number of
|
|
After Offering
|
|
Exercised in
|
|
is Exercised in Full
|
Name of Beneficial Owner
|
|
Number
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Shares Offered
|
|
Number
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Full
|
|
Number
|
|
Percentage
|
|
5% Stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accretive Investors SBIC, L.P.(1)
|
|
|
20,516,866
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare Investors, L.P.(2)
|
|
|
14,850,282
|
|
|
|
15.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ascension Health(3)
|
|
|
7,674,087
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Officers and Directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mary A. Tolan(4)
|
|
|
14,489,988
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John T. Staton(5)
|
|
|
1,627,811
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Etienne H. Deffarges(6)
|
|
|
5,773,478
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory N. Kazarian(7)
|
|
|
1,364,125
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edgar M. Bronfman, Jr.(8)
|
|
|
59,127
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Michael Cline(9)
|
|
|
20,578,280
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven N. Kaplan(10)
|
|
|
450,055
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denis J. Nayden(11)
|
|
|
110,270
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George P. Shultz(12)
|
|
|
748,442
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arthur H. Spiegel, III(13)
|
|
|
3,976,836
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark A. Wolfson(14)
|
|
|
59,127
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All current executive officers and directors as a group
(11 persons)(15)
|
|
|
49,237,539
|
|
|
|
49.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Selling Stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Foundation
|
|
|
177,334
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knight Foundation
|
|
|
1,888,879
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael E. Zimmerman(16)
|
|
|
3,266,667
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Accretive Associates SBIC, LLC is
the general partner of Accretive Investors SBIC, L.P.
Mr. Cline is the managing member of Accretive Associates
SBIC, LLC, and may be deemed to have sole voting and investment
power with respect to the shares held by Accretive Investors
SBIC, L.P. The address of Accretive Investors SBIC, L.P. is
c/o Accretive,
LLC, 51 Madison Avenue, 31st Floor, New York, New York
10010.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Group VI 31, L.L.C. is the general
partner of FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare Investors, L.P. (the
Oak Hill Partnership). The sole member of Group VI
31, L.L.C. is J. Taylor Crandall, who disclaims beneficial
ownership of such shares, except to the extent of his pecuniary
interest therein. J. Taylor Crandall exercises voting and
investment power with respect to such shares.
Messrs. Nayden and Wolfson, who serve on our board of
directors, are limited partners of the Oak Hill Partnership, and
Mr. Wolfson is a Vice President and Assistant Secretary of
Group VI 31, L.L.C. Neither Mr. Nayden nor Mr. Wolfson
is deemed to have voting or investment power with respect to any
shares held by the Oak Hill Partnership by virtue of their roles
as limited partners of the Oak Hill Partnership or, in the case
of Mr. Wolfson, by virtue of his position with Group VI 31,
L.L.C. The address of the Oak Hill Partnership is 201 Main
Street, Suite 3100, Fort Worth, Texas 76102.
|
|
(3)
|
|
Ascension Health is a Missouri
not-for-profit corporation. Anthony J. Speranzo, Ascension
Healths senior vice president and chief financial officer,
and Matthew I. Herman, Ascension Healths vice president,
have shared voting and investment power with respect to the
shares held by Ascension Health. Messrs. Speranzo and
Herman disclaim beneficial ownership of such shares. The address
of Ascension Health is 4600 Edmundson Road, St. Louis,
Missouri 63134.
|
|
(4)
|
|
Includes 2,587,200 shares held
by Tolan Family Trust U/A/D
6/29/03,
John G. Tolan and Margaret A. Coughlin as Trustees, and
646,800 shares held by Tolan Gamma Trust U/A/D
12/31/06,
Angie Selden and John G. Tolan, as Co-Trustees. The
beneficiaries of these trusts are members of
Ms. Tolans immediate family. Members of
Ms. Tolans immediate family share voting and
investment power with respect to the shares held by these
trusts. Also includes 1,176,000 shares subject to options
exercisable within 60 days of February 28, 2011 (of
which 294,000 shares would be vested if purchased upon
exercise of these options as of February 28, 2011).
|
117
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
Consists of 82,175 shares held
by John T. Staton Declaration of Trust, 169,046 shares held
by John T. Staton 2009 Grantor Retained Annuity Trust,
144,554 shares held by John T. Staton 2010 Grantor
Retained Annuity Trust and 1,232,036 shares subject to
options exercisable within 60 days of February 28,
2011 (of which 893,936 shares would be vested if purchased
upon exercise of these options as of February 28, 2011).
The beneficiaries of John T. Staton Declaration of Trust,
John T. Staton 2009 Grantor Retained Annuity Trust and
John T. Staton 2010 Grantor Retained Annuity Trust are
members of Mr. Statons immediate family.
Mr. Staton is the trustee of such trusts and exercises sole
voting and investment power with respect to the shares held by
the trusts.
|
|
(6)
|
|
Consists of 509,600 shares
subject to options exercisable within 60 days of
February 28, 2011 (of which 127,400 shares would be
vested if purchased upon exercise of these options as of
February 28, 2011). The beneficiaries of The
Deffarges-Brass Family Trust are members of
Mr. Deffarges immediate family. Mr. Deffarges
and his wife are the trustees of the trust and share voting and
investment power with respect to the shares held by the trust.
|
|
(7)
|
|
Includes 545,468 shares held
by the Irrevocable 2009 Gregory N. Kazarian Trust,
353,717 shares held by the Irrevocable 2009 Kazarian
Childrens Trust, 115,218 shares held by Kazarian
Family LLC and 282,240 shares subject to options
exercisable within 60 days of February 28, 2011 (of
which 70,560 shares would be vested if purchased upon
exercise of these options as of February 28, 2011). The
beneficiaries of the trusts are members of
Mr. Kazarians immediate family.
Mr. Kazarians wife and sister are the trustees of the
Irrevocable 2009 Gregory N. Kazarian Trust and share voting
and investment power with respect to the shares held by the
trust. Gregory S. Davis is the trustee of the Irrevocable
2009 Kazarian Childrens Trust and exercises sole voting
and investment power with respect to the shares held by the
trust. Mr. Davis disclaims beneficial ownership of such
shares. Mr. Kazarian is the manager member of Kazarian
Family LLC.
|
|
(8)
|
|
Consists of 59,127 shares
subject to options exercisable within 60 days of
February 28, 2011 (of which 19,928 shares would be
vested if purchased upon exercise of these options as of
February 28, 2011). Mr. Bronfman is a member of
Accretive Associates SBIC, LLC, which is the general partner of
Accretive Investors SBIC, L.P., but exercises no voting or
investment power with respect to the shares held by Accretive
Investors SBIC, L.P. Mr. Bronfman disclaims beneficial
ownership of the shares held by Accretive Investors SBIC, L.P.
|
|
(9)
|
|
Consists of the shares described in
note 1 above and 61,414 shares subject to options
exercisable within 60 days of February 28, 2011 (of
which 22,215 shares would be vested if purchased upon
exercise of these options as of February 28, 2011).
Mr. Cline is the managing member of Accretive Associates
SBIC, LLC, which is the general partner of Accretive Investors
SBIC, L.P. and, as such, may be deemed to have sole voting and
investment power with respect to the shares described in
note 1 above.
|
|
(10)
|
|
Includes 61,414 shares subject
to options exercisable within 60 days of February 28,
2011 (of which 22,215 shares would be vested if purchased
upon exercise of these options as of February 28, 2011).
|
|
(11)
|
|
Includes 60,270 shares subject
to options exercisable within 60 days of February 28,
2011 (of which 21,071 shares would be vested if purchased
upon exercise of these options as of February 28, 2011).
Mr. Nayden is not deemed to have voting or investment power
with respect to any shares held by the Oak Hill Partnership as a
limited partner. See note 2 above.
|
|
(12)
|
|
Consists of 688,172 shares
held by The Shultz 1989 Family Trust, of which Mr. Shultz
and his wife are the beneficiaries and 60,270 shares
subject to options exercisable within 60 days of
February 28, 2011 (of which 21,071 shares would be
vested if purchased upon exercise of these options as of
February 28, 2011). George T. Argyris is the trustee for
the trust and exercises sole voting and investment power with
respect to the shares held by the trust. Mr. Argyris
disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares.
|
|
|
|
(13)
|
|
Consists of 3,917,709 shares
held by Spiegel Family LLC, the members of which are members of
Mr. Spiegels immediate family and 59,127 shares
subject to options exercisable within 60 days of February
28, 2011 (of which 19,928 shares would be vested if purchased
upon exercise of these options as of May 3, 2010).
Mr. Spiegel and his wife are the managing members of
Spiegel Family LLC and exercise shared voting and investment
power with respect to such shares.
|
|
(14)
|
|
Consists of 59,127 shares
subject to options exercisable within 60 days of
February 28, 2011 (of which 19,928 shares would be vested
if purchased upon exercise of these options as of
February 28, 2011). Mr. Wolfson is not deemed to have
voting or investment power with respect to any shares held by
the Oak
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
Hill Partnership as a limited
partner or as a Vice President or Assistant Secretary of Group
VI 31, L.L.C. See note 2 above.
|
|
(15)
|
|
Does not include the shares
described in note 2 above. Includes 3,620,625 shares
subject to options exercisable within 60 days of
February 28, 2011 (of which 1,532,254 shares would be
vested if purchased upon exercise of these options as of
February 28, 2011).
|
|
(16)
|
|
Includes 816,667 shares held
by Zimmerman Irrevocable Childrens Trust,
408,333 shares held by Michael E. Zimmerman
Grantor-Retained Annuity Trust and 408,333 shares held by
Michael E. Zimmerman GRAT II u/a/d
10/08/09.
The beneficiaries of the trusts are members of
Mr. Zimmermans immediate family. Mr. Zimmerman
is the trustee of Zimmerman Irrevocable Childrens Trust
and exercises sole voting and investment power with respect to
the shares held by the trust. Mr. Zimmermans wife is
the trustee of Michael E. Zimmerman Grantor-Retained Annuity
Trust and Michael E. Zimmerman GRAT II u/a/d
10/08/09 and
exercises sole voting and investment power with respect to the
shares held by the trusts.
|
119
DESCRIPTION OF
CAPITAL STOCK
General
Our authorized capital stock consists of 500,000,000 shares
of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, and
5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.01 per
share, all of which preferred stock are undesignated.
The following description of our capital stock and provisions of
our certificate of incorporation and bylaws are summaries and
are qualified by reference to our restated certificate of
incorporation and the amended and restated bylaws.
Common
Stock
As of February 28, 2011, there were 95,126,464 shares
of our common stock outstanding, held of record by 79
stockholders.
The holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote for
each share held on all matters submitted to a vote of the
stockholders and do not have any cumulative voting rights.
Holders of our common stock are entitled to receive
proportionally any dividends declared by our board of directors
out of funds legally available therefor, subject to any
preferential dividend or other rights of any then outstanding
preferred stock.
In the event of our liquidation or dissolution, holders of our
common stock are entitled to share ratably in all assets
remaining after payment of all debts and other liabilities,
subject to the prior rights of any then outstanding preferred
stock. Holders of our common stock have no preemptive,
subscription, redemption or conversion rights. All outstanding
shares of our common stock are validly issued, fully paid and
nonassessable. The shares to be issued by us in this offering
will be, when issued and paid for, validly issued, fully paid
and nonassessable.
The rights, preferences and privileges of holders of our common
stock are subject to, and may be adversely affected by, the
rights of holders of shares of any series of preferred stock
that we may designate and issue in the future.
Preferred
Stock
Under the terms of our certificate of incorporation, our board
of directors is authorized to issue shares of preferred stock in
one or more series without stockholder approval. Our board of
directors has the discretion to determine the rights,
preferences, privileges and restrictions, including voting
rights, dividend rights, conversion rights, redemption
privileges and liquidation preferences, of each series of
preferred stock, any or all of which may be greater than or
senior to the rights of the common stock. The issuance of
preferred stock could adversely affect the voting power of
holders of common stock and reduce the likelihood that such
holders will receive dividend payments or payments on
liquidation. In certain circumstances, an issuance of preferred
stock could have the effect of decreasing the market price of
our common stock.
Authorizing our board of directors to issue preferred stock and
determine its rights and preferences has the effect of
eliminating delays associated with a stockholder vote on
specific issuances. The issuance of preferred stock, while
providing flexibility in connection with possible acquisitions,
future financings and other corporate purposes, could have the
effect of making it more difficult for a third party to acquire,
or could discourage a third party from seeking to acquire, a
majority of our outstanding stock. Upon the closing of this
offering, there will be no shares of preferred stock
outstanding, and we have no present plans to issue any shares of
preferred stock.
120
Stock
Options
As of February 28, 2011, 15,189,144 shares of common
stock were issuable upon the exercise of stock options
outstanding and exercisable at a weighted-average exercise price
of $9.56 per share, of which 7,643,688 shares with a
weighted average exercise price of $6.06 per share would be
vested if purchased upon exercise of these options as of
February 28, 2011.
Registration
Rights
We have entered into a stockholders agreement with certain
of our stockholders. After the completion of this offering and
the sale by the selling stockholders of the shares of common
stock offered by them hereby, holders of an aggregate
of shares
of outstanding common stock will have the right to require us to
register these shares under the Securities Act under specified
circumstances. After registration pursuant to these rights,
these shares will become freely tradable without restriction
under the Securities Act. The following description of these
registration rights is intended as a summary only and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to the stockholders
agreement, which is filed as an exhibit to the registration
statement of which this prospectus forms a part.
Demand Registration Rights. The holders
of at least 50% of our shares of common stock having
registration rights under the stockholders agreement,
provided such shares represent at least 25% of our outstanding
common stock on a fully-diluted basis, may demand that we
register all or a portion of their shares under the Securities
Act, subject to certain limitations. In addition, each of the
three parties to the stockholders agreement holding more
than 12% of our common stock on an as-converted basis as of
September 25, 2009 (Mary A. Tolan, Accretive Investors
SBIC, L.P. and FW Oak Hill Accretive Healthcare
Investors, L.P.) may demand on one occasion that we
register all or a portion of its shares under the Securities
Act, provided that the shares to be registered have an aggregate
market value of at least $50 million or represent at least
5% of our then outstanding common stock. We are not required to
file (1) a registration statement less than six months
after the effective date of a registration statement effected
pursuant to this requirement of the stockholders agreement
or (2) more than five registration statements pursuant to
this requirement under the stockholders agreement. In
addition, we may not register any shares of our common stock
held by a stockholder who is not a party to the
stockholders agreement in a registration statement
requested to be filed pursuant to the terms of the
stockholders agreement.
Incidental Registration Rights. If at
any time we propose to register shares of our common stock under
the Securities Act, other than a registration statement on
Form S-4
or
Form S-8,
the holders of registrable shares under the stockholders
agreement are entitled to notice of our intention to file a
registration statement and, subject to certain exceptions, have
the right to require us to use best efforts to register all or a
portion of the registrable shares held by them. In the event
that any registration in which the holders of registrable shares
participate pursuant to the stockholders agreement is an
underwritten public offering, the number of registrable shares
to be included may, in specified circumstances, be limited due
to market conditions.
Pursuant to the stockholders agreement, we are required to
pay all registration fees and expenses, including the reasonable
fees and disbursements of one counsel for the participating
stockholders, and indemnify each participating stockholder with
respect to each registration of registrable shares that is
effected, including in connection with this offering.
In connection with any underwritten offering pursuant to the
registration rights granted under the stockholders
agreement, each holder of registrable shares has agreed, whether
or not such holders registrable shares are included in
such registration, not to effect any public sale or
distribution, including any sale pursuant to Rule 144 under
the Securities Act, of any registrable shares or of any security
convertible into or exchangeable or exercisable for any
registrable shares (other than as part of such underwritten
offering), without the consent of the managing underwriter of
the offering, during a period commencing seven days before and
ending 180 days (or such lesser number as the
121
managing underwriter shall designate) after the effective date
of such registration. In addition, we have agreed, if required
by the managing underwriter of the offering, not to effect any
public sale or distribution of any of our equity or debt
securities, or securities convertible into or exchangeable or
exercisable for any of our equity or debt securities, during a
period commencing seven days before and ending 180 (or such
lesser number as the managing underwriter shall designate) days
after the effective date of such registration, except for shares
sold in such underwritten offering or except in connection with
a stock option plan, stock purchase plan, savings or similar
plan, or an acquisition, merger or exchange offer.
In addition, in mid-2011, we intend to file a registration
statement on
Form S-3
under the Securities Act to register the resale of the shares of
common stock issued to Ascension Health upon exercise of its
warrants (a maximum
of shares)
and to register the resale of up to an
additional shares
of common stock held by Ascension Health.
Anti-Takeover
Effects of Delaware Law and Our Charter and Bylaws
Delaware law, our certificate of incorporation and our bylaws
contain provisions that could have the effect of delaying,
deferring or discouraging another party from acquiring control
of us. These provisions, which are summarized below, are
expected to discourage coercive takeover practices and
inadequate takeover bids. These provisions are also designed to
encourage persons seeking to acquire control of us to first
negotiate with our board of directors.
Classified
Board; Removal of Directors
Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws divide our board of
directors into three classes with staggered three-year terms. In
addition, a director may be removed only for cause and only by
the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of
the votes that all the stockholders would be entitled to cast in
an election of directors or class of directors. Any vacancy on
our board of directors, including a vacancy resulting from an
enlargement of our board of directors, may be filled only by
vote of a majority of our directors then in office, although
less than a quorum. The classification of our board of directors
and the limitations on the removal of directors and filling of
vacancies could make it more difficult for a third party to
acquire, or discourage a third party from seeking to acquire,
control of our company.
Stockholder
Action by Written Consent; Special Meetings
Our certificate of incorporation provides that any action
required or permitted to be taken by our stockholders must be
effected at a duly called annual or special meeting of such
holders and may not be effected by any consent in writing by
such holders. Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws also
provide that, except as otherwise required by law, special
meetings of our stockholders can only be called by our chairman
of the board, our chief executive officer or our board of
directors.
Advance Notice
Requirements for Stockholder Proposals
Our bylaws establish an advance notice procedure for stockholder
proposals to be brought before an annual meeting of
stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for
election to the board of directors. Stockholders at an annual
meeting may only consider proposals or nominations specified in
the notice of meeting or brought before the meeting by or at the
direction of the board of directors or by a stockholder of
record on the record date for the meeting, who is entitled to
vote at the meeting and who has delivered timely written notice
in proper form to our secretary of the stockholders
intention to bring such business before the meeting. This
written notice must contain certain information specified in our
bylaws. These provisions could have the effect of delaying until
the next stockholder meeting stockholder actions that are
favored by the holders of a majority of our outstanding voting
securities.
122
Delaware
Business Combination Statute
We are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law. Subject to certain exceptions, Section 203
prevents a publicly-held Delaware corporation from engaging in a
business combination with any interested
stockholder for three years following the date that the
person became an interested stockholder, unless the interested
stockholder attained such status with the approval of our board
of directors or unless the business combination is approved in a
prescribed manner. A business combination includes,
among other things, a merger or consolidation involving us and
the interested stockholder and the sale of more than
10% of our assets. In general, an interested
stockholder is any entity or person beneficially owning
15% or more of our outstanding voting stock and any entity or
person affiliated with or controlling or controlled by such
entity or person.
Amendment of
Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws
The Delaware General Corporation Law provides generally that the
affirmative vote of a majority of the shares entitled to vote on
any matter is required to amend a corporations certificate
of incorporation or bylaws, unless a corporations
certificate of incorporation or bylaws, as the case may be,
requires a greater percentage. Our bylaws may be amended or
repealed by a majority vote of our board of directors or by the
affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of the
votes which all our stockholders would be entitled to cast in
any election of directors. In addition, the affirmative vote of
the holders of at least two-thirds of the votes which all our
stockholders would be entitled to cast in any election of
directors is required to amend or repeal or to adopt any
provisions inconsistent with any of the provisions of our
certificate of incorporation described above under
Classified Board; Removal of Directors
and Stockholder Action by Written Consent;
Special Meetings.
Limitation of
Liability and Indemnification of Officers and
Directors
Our restated certificate of incorporation limits the personal
liability of directors for breach of fiduciary duty to the
maximum extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation
Law. Our restated certificate of incorporation also provides
that no director will have personal liability to us or to our
stockholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty
as a director. However, these provisions do not eliminate or
limit the liability of any of our directors for:
|
|
|
|
|
any breach of the directors duty of loyalty to us or our
stockholders;
|
|
|
|
any act or omission not in good faith or which involves
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;
|
|
|
|
any unlawful payments related to dividends or unlawful stock
repurchases or redemptions; or
|
|
|
|
any transaction from which the director derived an improper
personal benefit.
|
Any amendment to or repeal of these provisions will not
eliminate or reduce the effect of these provisions in respect of
any act or failure to act, or any cause of action, suit or claim
that would accrue or arise prior to any amendment or repeal or
adoption of an inconsistent provision. If the Delaware General
Corporation Law is amended to permit the further elimination or
limiting of the personal liability of directors, then the
liability of our directors will be eliminated or limited to the
fullest extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law
as so amended.
In addition, our restated certificate of incorporation provides
that we must indemnify our directors and officers and we must
advance expenses, including attorneys fees, to our
directors and officers in connection with legal proceedings,
subject to limited exceptions.
123
Authorized but
Unissued Shares
The authorized but unissued shares of common stock and preferred
stock are available for future issuance without stockholder
approval, subject to any limitations imposed by the listing
standards of the NYSE. These additional shares may be used for a
variety of corporate finance transactions, acquisitions and
employee benefit plans. The existence of authorized but unissued
and unreserved common stock and preferred stock could make it
more difficult or discourage an attempt to obtain control of us
by means of a proxy contest, tender offer, merger or otherwise.
Transfer Agent
and Registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is
American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, LLC.
New York Stock
Exchange
Our common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol
AH.
124
SHARES ELIGIBLE
FOR FUTURE SALE
Future sales of significant amounts of our common stock,
including shares issued upon exercise of outstanding options or
warrants or in the public market after this offering, or the
anticipation of those sales, could adversely affect the public
market prices prevailing from time to time and could impair our
ability to raise capital through sales of our equity securities.
Our common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol
AH.
Upon the closing of this offering, we will have outstanding an
aggregate of 95,126,464 shares of common stock, assuming no
exercise of then outstanding options or warrants. Of these
shares, all shares sold in our May 2010 initial public
offering and in this offering will generally be freely tradable
without restriction or further registration under the Securities
Act, except for any shares that may be acquired by our
affiliates, as that term is defined in Rule 144
under the Securities Act, which will be subject to the
Rule 144.
The remaining 77,126,464 shares of common stock are
restricted securities, as that term is defined in
Rule 144 under the Securities Act. These restricted
securities are eligible for public sale only if they are
registered under the Securities Act or if they qualify for an
exemption from registration under Rules 144 or 701 under
the Securities Act, which are summarized below. Following the
expiration of the
lock-up
period, all such shares will be eligible for resale in
compliance with Rule 144 or Rule 701 under the
Securities Act.
Rule 144
Affiliate
Resales of Restricted Securities
In general, under Rule 144, a person who is an affiliate of
ours, or who was an affiliate at any time during the
90 days before a sale, who has beneficially owned shares of
our common stock for at least six months would be entitled to
sell in brokers transactions or certain
riskless principal transactions or to market makers,
a number of shares within any three-month period that does not
exceed the greater of:
|
|
|
|
|
1% of the number of shares of our common stock then outstanding,
which will equal approximately 951,000 shares immediately
after this offering; or
|
|
|
|
the average weekly trading volume in our common stock on the
NYSE during the four calendar weeks preceding the filing of a
notice on Form 144 with respect to such sale.
|
Affiliate resales under Rule 144 are also subject to the
availability of current public information about us. In
addition, if the number of shares being sold under Rule 144
by an affiliate during any three-month period exceeds
5,000 shares or has an aggregate sale price in excess of
$50,000, the seller must file a notice on Form 144 with the
SEC and the NYSE concurrently with either the placing of a sale
order with the broker or the execution directly with a market
maker.
Non-Affiliate
Resales of Restricted Securities
In general, under Rule 144, a person who is not an
affiliate of ours at the time of sale, and has not been an
affiliate at any time during the three months preceding a sale,
and who has beneficially owned shares of our common stock for at
least six months but less than a year, is entitled to sell such
shares subject only to the availability of current public
information about us. If such person has held our shares for at
least one year, such person can resell under Rule 144(b)(1)
without regard to any Rule 144 restrictions, including the
90-day
public company requirement and the current public information
requirement.
Non-affiliate resales are not subject to the manner of sale,
volume limitation or notice filing provisions of Rule 144.
125
Rule 701
In general, under Rule 701, any of our employees,
directors, officers, consultants or advisors who purchased
shares from us in connection with a compensatory stock or option
plan or other written agreement entered into before the
effective date of this offering is entitled to sell such shares
90 days after this offering in reliance on Rule 144.
Lock-up
Agreements
Our officers and directors and certain other holders of
outstanding shares of our common stock, who collectively
beneficially
own shares
of our common stock (including shares issuable upon exercise of
vested options and the shares of our common stock to be sold by
selling stockholders in this offering), have agreed with the
underwriters, subject to certain exceptions, not to offer, sell,
contract to sell, pledge, grant any option to purchase, make any
short sale or otherwise dispose of any shares of common stock,
options or warrants to purchase shares of common stock or
securities convertible into, exchangeable for or that represent
the right to receive shares of common stock, whether now owned
or hereafter acquired, make any demand for, or exercise any
right with respect to, the registration of any shares of common
stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable or
exchangeable for shares of common stock during the period from
the date of this prospectus continuing through the date
90 days after the date of this prospectus, as modified as
described below, except with the prior written consent of
Goldman, Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse Securities (USA)
LLC and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, on behalf of the
underwriters.
The 90-day
restricted period will be automatically extended under the
following circumstances:
|
|
|
|
|
if, during the last 17 days of the
90-day
restricted period, we issue an earnings release or announce
material news or a material event, the restrictions described in
the preceding paragraph will continue to apply until the
expiration of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
announcement of the material news or material event; or
|
|
|
|
if, prior to the expiration of the
90-day
restricted period, we announce that we will release earnings
results during the
16-day
period beginning on the last day of the
180-day
period, the restrictions described in the preceding paragraph
will continue to apply until the expiration of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release.
|
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the automatic extension of the
90-day restricted period will not apply if, as of the expiration
of the restricted period, shares of our common stock are
actively traded securities as certified by us to the
underwriters representatives.
Goldman, Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse Securities (USA)
LLC and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC currently do not anticipate
shortening or waiving any of the
lock-up
agreements and do not have any pre-established conditions for
such modifications or waivers. Goldman, Sachs & Co.,
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC and J.P. Morgan Securities
LLC may, however, release for sale in the public market all or
any portion of the shares subject to the
lock-up
agreement.
Stock Options and
Warrants
We have registered on registration statements on
Form S-8
under the Securities Act 40,342,011 shares of our common
stock issued or reserved for issuance under our equity incentive
plans plus shares issuable upon exercise of outstanding options.
As of the date of this prospectus, we have granted options to
purchase 15,537,964 shares of our common stock, of which
7,643,688 shares are vested and 15,189,144 are exercisable.
Subject to the expiration of any
lock-up
restrictions described above and following the completion of any
applicable vesting periods, shares of our common stock issuable
upon the exercise of options granted or to be granted under our
equity incentive plans will be freely tradable without
restriction under the Securities Act, unless such shares are
held by any of our affiliates.
126
CERTAIN U.S.
FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES TO
NON-U.S.
HOLDERS
The following is a general discussion of certain
U.S. federal income and estate tax consequences of the
purchase, ownership and disposition of our common stock. This
discussion applies only to a
non-U.S. holder
(as defined below) of our common stock. This discussion is based
upon the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, or the Code, the Treasury regulations promulgated
thereunder and administrative and judicial interpretations
thereof, all as of the date hereof, all of which are subject to
change, possibly with retroactive effect. This discussion is
limited to investors that hold our common stock as capital
assets for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Furthermore,
this discussion does not address all aspects of
U.S. federal income and estate taxation that may be
applicable to investors in light of their particular
circumstances, or to investors subject to special treatment
under U.S. federal income or estate tax law, such as
financial institutions, insurance companies, tax-exempt
organizations, entities that are treated as partnerships for
U.S. federal tax purposes, dealers in securities or
currencies, expatriates, persons deemed to sell our common stock
under the constructive sale provisions of the Code and persons
that hold our common stock as part of a straddle, hedge,
conversion transaction or other integrated investment. In
addition, this discussion does not address any U.S. federal
gift tax consequences or any state, local or foreign tax
consequences. Prospective investors should consult their tax
advisors regarding the U.S. federal, state, local,
alternative minimum and foreign income, estate and other tax
consequences of the purchase, ownership and disposition of our
common stock.
For purposes of this summary, the term
non-U.S. holder
means a beneficial owner of our common stock that is not, for
U.S. federal income and estate tax purposes:
|
|
|
|
|
a citizen or resident of the United States;
|
|
|
|
a corporation or other entity subject to tax as a corporation
for such purposes that is created or organized under the laws of
the United States or any political subdivision thereof;
|
|
|
|
a partnership (including any entity or arrangement treated as a
partnership for such purposes);
|
|
|
|
an estate the income of which is subject to U.S. federal
income taxation regardless of its source; or
|
|
|
|
a trust (1) if a court within the United States is able to
exercise primary supervision over its administration and one or
more U.S. persons have the authority to control all of its
substantial decisions or (2) that has made a valid election
to be treated as a U.S. person for such purposes.
|
If a partnership (including any entity or arrangement treated as
a partnership for such purposes) owns our common stock, the tax
treatment of a partner in the partnership will depend upon the
status of the partner and the activities of the partnership.
Partners in a partnership that owns our common stock should
consult their tax advisors as to the particular
U.S. federal income and estate tax consequences applicable
to them.
Dividends
Dividends paid to a
non-U.S. holder
generally will be subject to withholding of U.S. federal
income tax at a 30% rate or such lower rate as may be specified
by an applicable income tax treaty.
Non-U.S. holders
should consult their tax advisors regarding their entitlement to
benefits under an applicable income tax treaty and the manner of
claiming the benefits of such treaty. A
non-U.S. holder
that is eligible for a reduced rate of withholding tax under an
income tax treaty may obtain a refund or credit of any excess
amounts withheld by filing an appropriate claim for refund with
the Internal Revenue Service.
Dividends that are effectively connected with a
non-U.S. holders
conduct of a trade or business in the United States and, if
certain income tax treaties apply, that are attributable to a
non-U.S. holders
permanent establishment or fixed base in the United States are
not subject to the
127
withholding tax described above but instead are subject to
U.S. federal income tax on a net income basis at applicable
graduated U.S. federal income tax rates. A
non-U.S. holder
must satisfy certain certification requirements for its
effectively connected dividends to be exempt from the
withholding tax described above. Dividends received by a foreign
corporation that are effectively connected with its conduct of a
trade or business in the United States may be subject to an
additional branch profits tax at a 30% rate or such lower rate
as may be specified by an applicable income tax treaty.
Gain on
Disposition of Common Stock
A
non-U.S. holder
generally will not be taxed on gain recognized on a disposition
of our common stock unless:
|
|
|
|
|
the
non-U.S. holder
is an individual who holds our common stock as a capital asset,
is present in the United States for 183 days or more during
the taxable year of the disposition and meets certain other
conditions;
|
|
|
|
the gain is effectively connected with the
non-U.S. holders
conduct of a trade or business in the United States and, if
certain income tax treaties apply, is attributable to a
non-U.S. holders
permanent establishment or fixed base in the United
States; or
|
|
|
|
we are or have been a United States real property holding
corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes at
any time within the shorter of the five-year period ending on
the date of disposition or the period that the
non-U.S. holder
held our common stock.
|
We do not believe that we have been, currently are, or will
become, a United States real property holding corporation. If we
were or were to become a United States real property holding
corporation at any time during the applicable period, however,
any gain recognized on a disposition of our common stock by a
non-U.S. holder
that did not own (directly, indirectly or constructively) more
than 5% of our common stock during the applicable period would
not be subject to U.S. federal income tax, provided that
our common stock is regularly traded on an established
securities market (within the meaning of
Section 897(c)(3) of the Code).
Individual
non-U.S. holders
who are subject to U.S. federal income tax because the
holders were present in the United States for 183 days or
more during the year of disposition are taxed on their gains
(including gains from the sale of our common stock and net of
applicable U.S. losses from sales or exchanges of other
capital assets recognized during the year) at a flat rate of 30%
or such lower rate as may be specified by an applicable income
tax treaty. Other
non-U.S. holders
subject to U.S. federal income tax with respect to gain
recognized on the disposition of our common stock generally will
be taxed on any such gain on a net income basis at applicable
graduated U.S. federal income tax rates and, in the case of
foreign corporations, the branch profits tax discussed above
also may apply.
Federal Estate
Tax
Our common stock that is owned or treated as owned for
U.S. estate tax purposes by an individual who is a
non-U.S. holder
at the time of death will be included in the individuals
gross estate for U.S. federal estate tax purposes.
Therefore, U.S. federal estate tax may be imposed with
respect to the value of such stock, unless an applicable estate
tax or other treaty provides otherwise.
Information
Reporting and Backup Withholding
In general, backup withholding will apply to dividends on our
common stock paid to a
non-U.S. holder,
unless the holder has provided the required certification that
it is a
non-U.S. holder
and the payor does not have actual knowledge (or reason to know)
that the holder is a U.S. person. Generally, information
will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service regarding the
amount of dividends paid, the name and address of the recipient,
and the amount, if any, of tax withheld. These information
reporting requirements apply even if no tax was required to be
withheld. A similar report is
128
sent to the recipient of the dividend and may also be made
available to the tax authorities in the country in which the
non-U.S. holder
resides under the provisions of an applicable income tax treaty.
In general, backup withholding and information reporting will
apply to the payment of proceeds from the disposition of our
common stock by a
non-U.S. holder
through a U.S. office of a broker or through the
non-U.S. office
of a broker that is a U.S. person or has certain enumerated
connections with the United States, unless the holder has
provided the required certification that it is a
non-U.S. holder
and the payor does not have actual knowledge (or reason to know)
that the holder is a U.S. person.
Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Any amounts that
are withheld under the backup withholding rules from a payment
to a
non-U.S. holder
will be refunded or credited against the holders
U.S. federal income tax liability, if any, provided that
certain required information is furnished to the Internal
Revenue Service.
Prospective investors should consult their tax advisors
regarding the application of the information reporting and
backup withholding rules to them.
Additional
Withholding Requirements After 2012
After December 31, 2012, withholding at a rate of 30% will
be required on dividends in respect of, and gross proceeds from
the sale of, our common stock held by or through certain foreign
financial institutions (including investment funds), unless such
institution enters into an agreement with the Secretary of the
Treasury to report, on an annual basis, information with respect
to shares in, and accounts maintained by, the institution to the
extent such shares or accounts are held by certain
U.S. persons or by certain
non-U.S. entities
that are wholly or partially owned by U.S. persons.
Accordingly, the entity through which our common stock is held
will affect the determination of whether such withholding is
required. Similarly, dividends in respect of, and gross proceeds
from the sale of, our common stock held by an investor that is a
non-financial
non-U.S. entity
will be subject to withholding at a rate of 30%, unless such
entity either (i) certifies to us that such entity does not
have any substantial United States owners or
(ii) provides certain information regarding the
entitys substantial United States owners,
which we will in turn provide to the Secretary of the Treasury.
Non-U.S. holders
are encouraged to consult with their tax advisors regarding the
possible implications of these requirements on their investment
in our common stock.
129
UNDERWRITING
Accretive Health, the selling stockholders and the underwriters
named below have entered into an underwriting agreement with
respect to the shares being offered. Subject to certain
conditions, each underwriter has severally agreed to purchase
the number of shares indicated in the following table. Goldman,
Sachs & Co., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC and
J.P. Morgan Securities LLC are the joint book-running managers
and representatives of the underwriters.
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriters
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
|
|
|
|
|
J.P. Morgan Securities LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
6,500,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The underwriters are committed to take and pay for all of the
shares being offered, if any are taken, other than the shares
covered by the option described below unless and until this
option is exercised. The offering of the shares by the
underwriters is subject to receipt and acceptance and subject to
the underwriters right to reject any order in whole or in
part.
If the underwriters sell more shares than the total number set
forth in the table above, the underwriters have an option to
purchase up to 975,000 additional shares from the selling
stockholders to cover such sales. They may exercise that option
for 30 days. If any shares are purchased pursuant to this
option, the underwriters will severally purchase shares in
approximately the same proportion as set forth in the table
above.
The following table shows the per share and total underwriting
discounts and commissions to be paid to the underwriters by the
selling stockholders. Such amounts are shown assuming both no
exercise and full exercise of the underwriters option to
purchase 975,000 additional shares from the selling stockholders.
Paid by the
Selling Stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Exercise
|
|
Full Exercise
|
|
Per Share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Shares sold by the underwriters to the public will initially be
offered at the public offering price set forth on the cover of
this prospectus. Any shares sold by the underwriters to
securities dealers may be sold at a discount of up to
$ per share from the initial
public offering price. If all the shares are not sold at the
public offering price, the representatives may change the
offering price and the other selling terms.
Accretive Health, its officers and directors, and certain
holders of outstanding shares of its common stock, have agreed
with the underwriters, subject to certain exceptions, not to
offer, sell, contract to sell, pledge, grant any option to
purchase, make any short sale or otherwise dispose of any shares
of common stock, options or warrants to purchase shares of
common stock or securities convertible into, exchangeable for or
that represent the right to receive shares of common stock, make
any demand for, or exercise any right with respect to, the
registration of any shares of common stock or any securities
convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for shares of
common stock, whether now owned or hereafter acquired, during
the period from the date of this prospectus continuing through
the date 90 days after the date of this prospectus, except
with the prior written consent of Goldman, Sachs &
Co., Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC and J.P. Morgan
Securities LLC, on behalf of the underwriters. This agreement
does not apply to any existing employee benefit plans. See
Shares Eligible for Future Sale for a discussion of
certain transfer restrictions.
130
The 90-day
restricted period described in the preceding paragraph will be
automatically extended if: (1) during the last 17 days
of the
90-day
restricted period Accretive Health issues an earnings release or
announces material news or a material event; or (2) prior
to the expiration of the
90-day
restricted period, Accretive Health announces that it will
release earnings results during the
16-day
period beginning on the last day of the
90-day
period, in which case the restrictions described in the
preceding paragraph will continue to apply until the expiration
of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
announcement of the material news or material event.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the automatic extension of the
90-day restricted period will not apply if, as of the expiration
of the restricted period, shares of our common stock are
actively traded securities as certified by us to the
underwriters representatives.
Our common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol
AH.
In connection with the offering, the underwriters may purchase
and sell shares of common stock in the open market. These
transactions may include short sales, stabilizing transactions
and purchases to cover positions created by short sales. Short
sales involve the sale by the underwriters of a greater number
of shares than they are required to purchase in the offering.
Covered short sales are sales made in an amount not
greater than the underwriters option to purchase
additional shares from Accretive Health and the selling
stockholders in the offering. The underwriters may close out any
covered short position by either exercising their option to
purchase additional shares or purchasing shares in the open
market. In determining the source of shares to close out the
covered short position, the underwriters will consider, among
other things, the price of shares available for purchase in the
open market as compared to the price at which they may purchase
additional shares pursuant to the option granted to them.
Naked short sales are any sales in excess of such
option. The underwriters must close out any naked short position
by purchasing shares in the open market. A naked short position
is more likely to be created if the underwriters are concerned
that there may be downward pressure on the price of the common
stock in the open market after pricing that could adversely
affect investors who purchase in the offering. Stabilizing
transactions consist of various bids for or purchases of common
stock made by the underwriters in the open market prior to the
completion of the offering.
The underwriters may also impose a penalty bid. This occurs when
a particular underwriter repays to the underwriters a portion of
the underwriting discount received by it because the
representatives have repurchased shares sold by or for the
account of such underwriter in stabilizing or short covering
transactions.
Purchases to cover a short position and stabilizing
transactions, as well as other purchases by the underwriters for
their own accounts, may have the effect of preventing or
retarding a decline in the market price of Accretive
Healths stock, and together with the imposition of the
penalty bid, may stabilize, maintain or otherwise affect the
market price of the common stock. As a result, the price of the
common stock may be higher than the price that otherwise might
exist in the open market. If these activities are commenced,
they may be discontinued at any time. These transactions may be
effected on the NYSE, in the over-the-counter market or
otherwise.
In relation to each Member State of the European Economic Area
which has implemented the Prospectus Directive, each of which is
referred to as a Relevant Member State, each underwriter has
represented and agreed that with effect from and including the
date on which the Prospectus Directive is implemented in that
Relevant Member State, referred to as the Relevant
Implementation Date, it has not made and will not make an offer
of shares to the public in that Relevant Member State prior to
the publication of a prospectus in relation to the shares which
has been approved by the competent authority in that Relevant
Member State or, where appropriate, approved in another Relevant
Member State and notified to the competent authority in that
Relevant Member State, all in accordance with the Prospectus
Directive, except that it may, with effect from and including
the Relevant
131
Implementation Date, make an offer of shares to the public in
that Relevant Member State at any time:
|
|
|
|
|
to legal entities which are authorised or regulated to operate
in the financial markets or, if not so authorized or regulated,
whose corporate purpose is solely to invest in securities;
|
|
|
|
to any legal entity which has two or more of (1) an average
of at least 250 employees during the last financial year;
(2) a total balance sheet of more than 43,000,000;
and (3) an annual net turnover of more than
50,000,000, as shown in its last annual or consolidated
accounts;
|
|
|
|
to fewer than 100 natural or legal persons (other than qualified
investors as defined in the Prospectus Directive) subject to
obtaining the prior consent of the representatives for any such
offer; or
|
|
|
|
in any other circumstances which do not require the publication
by the Issuer of a prospectus pursuant to Article 3 of the
Prospectus Directive.
|
For the purposes of this provision, the expression an
offer of shares to the public in relation to any
shares in any Relevant Member State means the communication in
any form and by any means of sufficient information on the terms
of the offer and the shares to be offered so as to enable an
investor to decide to purchase or subscribe the shares, as the
same may be varied in that Relevant Member State by any measure
implementing the Prospectus Directive in that Relevant Member
State and the expression Prospectus Directive means Directive
2003/71/EC and includes any relevant implementing measure in
each Relevant Member State.
Each underwriter has represented and agreed that:
|
|
|
|
|
it has only communicated or caused to be communicated and will
only communicate or cause to be communicated an invitation or
inducement to engage in investment activity (within the meaning
of Section 21 of the FSMA) received by it in connection
with the issue or sale of the shares in circumstances in which
Section 21(1) of the FSMA does not apply to the
Issuer; and
|
|
|
|
it has complied and will comply with all applicable provisions
of the FSMA with respect to anything done by it in relation to
the shares in, from or otherwise involving the United Kingdom.
|
The shares may not be offered or sold by means of any document
other than (1) in circumstances which do not constitute an
offer to the public within the meaning of the Companies
Ordinance (Cap.32, Laws of Hong Kong), or (2) to
professional investors within the meaning of the
Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap.571, Laws of Hong Kong)
and any rules made thereunder, or (3) in other
circumstances which do not result in the document being a
prospectus within the meaning of the Companies
Ordinance (Cap.32, Laws of Hong Kong), and no advertisement,
invitation or document relating to the shares may be issued or
may be in the possession of any person for the purpose of issue
(in each case whether in Hong Kong or elsewhere), which is
directed at, or the contents of which are likely to be accessed
or read by, the public in Hong Kong (except if permitted to do
so under the laws of Hong Kong) other than with respect to
shares which are or are intended to be disposed of only to
persons outside Hong Kong or only to professional
investors within the meaning of the Securities and Futures
Ordinance (Cap. 571, Laws of Hong Kong) and any rules made
thereunder.
This prospectus has not been registered as a prospectus with the
Monetary Authority of Singapore. Accordingly, this prospectus
and any other document or material in connection with the offer
or sale, or invitation for subscription or purchase, of the
shares may not be circulated or distributed, nor may the shares
be offered or sold, or be made the subject of an invitation for
subscription or purchase, whether directly or indirectly, to
persons in Singapore other than (1) to an institutional
investor under Section 274 of the Securities and Futures
Act, Chapter 289 of Singapore, (2) to a relevant
person, or any person pursuant to Section 275(1A), and in
accordance with the conditions, specified in Section 275 of
the Securities and Futures Act or (3) otherwise pursuant
to,
132
and in accordance with the conditions of, any other applicable
provision of the Securities and Futures Act.
Where the shares are subscribed or purchased under
Section 275 by a relevant person which is: (a) a
corporation (which is not an accredited investor) the sole
business of which is to hold investments and the entire share
capital of which is owned by one or more individuals, each of
whom is an accredited investor; or (b) a trust (where the
trustee is not an accredited investor) whose sole purpose is to
hold investments and each beneficiary is an accredited investor,
shares, debentures and units of shares and debentures of that
corporation or the beneficiaries rights and interest in
that trust shall not be transferable for six months after that
corporation or that trust has acquired the shares under
Section 275 except: (1) to an institutional investor
under Section 274 of the Securities and Futures Act or to a
relevant person, or any person pursuant to Section 275(1A),
and in accordance with the conditions, specified in
Section 275 of the Securities and Futures Act;
(2) where no consideration is given for the transfer; or
(3) by operation of law.
The securities have not been and will not be registered under
the Securities and Exchange Law of Japan (the Securities and
Exchange Law) and each underwriter has agreed that it will not
offer or sell any securities, directly or indirectly, in Japan
or to, or for the benefit of, any resident of Japan (which term
as used herein means any person resident in Japan, including any
corporation or other entity organized under the laws of Japan),
or to others for re-offering or resale, directly or indirectly,
in Japan or to a resident of Japan, except pursuant to an
exemption from the registration requirements of, and otherwise
in compliance with, the Securities and Exchange Law and any
other applicable laws, regulations and ministerial guidelines of
Japan.
The underwriters do not expect sales to discretionary accounts
to exceed five percent of the total number of shares offered.
Accretive Health will pay the expenses of this offering, which
it estimates to be approximately $
million, excluding underwriting discounts and commissions.
Accretive Health and the selling stockholders have agreed to
indemnify the several underwriters against certain liabilities,
including liabilities under the Securities Act of 1933.
The underwriters and their respective affiliates are full
service financial institutions engaged in various activities,
which may include securities trading, commercial and investment
banking, financial advisory, investment management, investment
research, principal investment, hedging, financing and brokerage
activities. Certain of the underwriters and their respective
affiliates may in the future perform various financial advisory
and investment banking services for the company, for which they
received or will receive customary fees and expenses. In the
ordinary course of their various business activities, the
underwriters and their respective affiliates may make or hold a
broad array of investments and actively trade debt and equity
securities (or related derivative securities) and financial
instruments (including bank loans) for their own account and for
the accounts of their customers, and such investment and
securities activities may involve securities and/or instruments
of the issuer. The underwriters and their respective affiliates
may also make investment recommendations and/or publish or
express independent research views in respect of such securities
or instruments and may at any time hold, or recommend to clients
that they acquire, long and/or short positions in such
securities and instruments.
LEGAL
MATTERS
The validity of the common stock being offered will be passed
upon by Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Boston,
Massachusetts. The underwriters are represented by Skadden,
Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, New York,
in connection with this offering.
133
EXPERTS
Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public
accounting firm, has audited our consolidated financial
statements and schedule at December 31, 2009 and 2010, and
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010, as set forth in their reports. We have
included our consolidated financial statements and schedule in
the prospectus and elsewhere in the registration statement in
reliance on Ernst & Young LLPs report, given on their
authority as experts in accounting and auditing.
WHERE YOU CAN
FIND MORE INFORMATION
We have filed with the SEC a registration statement on
Form S-1
under the Securities Act of 1933 with respect to the shares of
common stock to be sold in this offering. This prospectus, which
constitutes part of the registration statement, does not include
all of the information contained in the registration statement
and the exhibits, schedules and amendments to the registration
statement. Some items are omitted in accordance with the rules
and regulations of the SEC. For further information with respect
to us and our common stock, we refer you to the registration
statement and to the exhibits and schedules to the registration
statement filed as part of the registration statement.
Statements contained in this prospectus about the contents of
any contract or any other document filed as an exhibit are not
necessarily complete and, and in each instance, we refer you to
the copy of the contract or other documents filed as an exhibit
to the registration statement. Each of these statements is
qualified in all respects by this reference.
You may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC,
including the registration statement of which this prospectus is
a part, at the SECs public reference room, which is
located at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.
20549. You can request copies of the registration statement by
writing to the SEC and paying a fee for the copying cost. Please
call the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330
for more information about the operation of the SECs
public reference room. In addition, the SEC maintains an
Internet website, located at www.sec.gov, which contains
reports, proxy and information statements and other information
regarding issuers, like us, that file electronically with the
SEC. You may access the registration statement of which this
prospectus is a part at the SECs Internet website.
We are subject to the full informational and periodic reporting
requirements of the Exchange Act. We fulfill our obligations
with respect to such requirements by filing periodic reports and
other information with the SEC. We intend to furnish our
stockholders with annual reports containing consolidated
financial statements certified by an independent registered
public accounting firm. We make available, free-of-charge,
through our website, www.accretivehealth.com, our annual reports
on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and
current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those
reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable
after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it
to, the SEC. Our website is not a part of this prospectus.
134
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders
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. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements 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.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
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
F-8
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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.
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
F-9
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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
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.
|
F-10
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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.
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
F-11
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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.
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
F-12
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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. 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
F-16
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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
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
F-17
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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 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
F-18
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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
|
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.
F-19
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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 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.
F-20
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
|
|
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.
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-21
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Continued)
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-22
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-23
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-24
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-25
6,500,000 Shares
Accretive Health,
Inc.
Common Stock
|
|
|
Goldman,
Sachs & Co. |
Credit Suisse |
J.P.Morgan |
Baird
Part II
Information Not
Required in Prospectus
|
|
Item 13.
|
Other Expenses
of Issuance and Distribution
|
The following table indicates the expenses to be incurred in
connection with the offering described in this Registration
Statement, other than underwriting discounts and commissions,
all of which will be paid by the Registrant. All amounts are
estimated except the Securities and Exchange Commission
registration fee and the FINRA filing fee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Securities and Exchange Commission registration fee
|
|
$
|
17,540
|
|
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority fee
|
|
|
15,607
|
|
Accountants fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
|
Legal fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
|
Printing and engraving expenses
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Expenses
|
|
$
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* To be filed by amendment
|
|
Item 14.
|
Indemnification
of Directors and Officers
|
Section 102 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware permits a corporation to eliminate the personal
liability of directors of a corporation to the corporation or
its stockholders for monetary damages for a breach of fiduciary
duty as a director, except where the director breached his duty
of loyalty, failed to act in good faith, engaged in intentional
misconduct or knowingly violated a law, authorized the payment
of a dividend or approved a stock repurchase in violation of
Delaware corporate law or obtained an improper personal benefit.
Our restated certificate of incorporation that will become
effective upon the closing of this offering provides that no
director of the Registrant shall be personally liable to it or
its stockholders for monetary damages for any breach of
fiduciary duty as director, notwithstanding any provision of law
imposing such liability, except to the extent that the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware prohibits the
elimination or limitation of liability of directors for breaches
of fiduciary duty.
Section 145 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware provides that a corporation has the power to indemnify
a director, officer, employee, or agent of the corporation and
certain other persons serving at the request of the corporation
in related capacities against expenses (including
attorneys fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in
settlements actually and reasonably incurred by the person in
connection with an action, suit or proceeding to which he is or
is threatened to be made a party by reason of such position, if
such person acted in good faith and in a manner he reasonably
believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the
corporation and, in any criminal action or proceeding, had no
reasonable cause to believe his conduct was unlawful, except
that, in the case of actions brought by or in the right of the
corporation, no indemnification shall be made with respect to
any claim, issue or matter as to which such person shall have
been adjudged to be liable to the corporation unless and only to
the extent that the Court of Chancery or other adjudicating
court determines that, despite the adjudication of liability but
in view of all of the circumstances of the case, such person is
fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for such expenses
which the Court of Chancery or such other court shall deem
proper.
Our restated certificate of incorporation provides that we will
indemnify each person who was or is a party or threatened to be
made a party to any threatened, pending or completed action,
suit or proceeding (other than an action by or in the right of
Accretive Health) by reason of the fact that he or she is or
was, or has agreed to become, a director or officer of Accretive
Health, or is or was serving, or has agreed to serve, at our
request as a director, officer, partner, employee or trustee of,
or in a similar capacity with, another corporation, partnership,
joint venture, trust or other enterprise (all such persons being
referred to as an Indemnitee), or by reason of any
action alleged to have been taken
II-1
or omitted in such capacity, against all expenses (including
attorneys fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in
settlement actually and reasonably incurred in connection with
such action, suit or proceeding and any appeal therefrom, if
such Indemnitee acted in good faith and in a manner he or she
reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed to, our best
interests, and, with respect to any criminal action or
proceeding, he or she had no reasonable cause to believe his or
her conduct was unlawful. Our restated certificate of
incorporation provides that we will indemnify any Indemnitee who
was or is a party to an action or suit by or in the right of
Accretive Health to procure a judgment in our favor by reason of
the fact that the Indemnitee is or was, or has agreed to become,
a director or officer of Accretive Health, or is or was serving,
or has agreed to serve, at our request as a director, officer,
partner, employee or trustee or, or in a similar capacity with,
another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other
enterprise, or by reason of any action alleged to have been
taken or omitted in such capacity, against all expenses
(including attorneys fees) and, to the extent permitted by
law, amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred
in connection with such action, suit or proceeding, and any
appeal therefrom, if the Indemnitee acted in good faith and in a
manner he or she reasonably believed to be in, or not opposed
to, the best interests of Accretive Health, except that no
indemnification shall be made with respect to any claim, issue
or matter as to which such person shall have been adjudged to be
liable to us, unless a court determines that, despite such
adjudication but in view of all of the circumstances, he or she
is entitled to indemnification of such expenses. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, to the extent that any Indemnitee has been
successful, on the merits or otherwise, he or she will be
indemnified by us against all expenses (including
attorneys fees) actually and reasonably incurred in
connection therewith. Expenses must be advanced to an Indemnitee
under certain circumstances.
We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our
directors and our executive officers. These indemnification
agreements may require us, among other things, to indemnify our
directors and executive officers for some expenses, including
attorneys fees, judgments, fines and settlement amounts
incurred by a director or executive officer in any action or
proceeding arising out of his service as one of our directors or
executive officers, or any of our subsidiaries or any other
company or enterprise to which the person provides services at
our request.
We maintain a general liability insurance policy that covers
certain liabilities of directors and officers of our corporation
arising out of claims based on acts or omissions in their
capacities as directors or officers.
In any underwriting agreement we enter into in connection with
the sale of common stock being registered hereby, the
underwriters will agree to indemnify, under certain conditions,
us, our directors, our officers and persons who control us with
the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, against
certain liabilities.
|
|
Item
15.
|
Recent Sales
of Unregistered 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, 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.
II-2
(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.
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
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.
II-3
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 the Registrants
initial public offering in May 2010, the Registrant 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.
|
|
Item 16.
|
Exhibits and
Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) Exhibits
The exhibits to the registration statement are listed in the
Exhibit Index to this registration statement and are
incorporated by reference herein.
(b) Financial Statement Schedules
II-4
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Accretive Health, Inc.
We have audited the consolidated financial statements of
Accretive Health, Inc. as of December 31, 2009 and 2010,
and for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010, and have issued our report thereon dated
March 9, 2011 (included elsewhere in this Registration
Statement). Our audits also included the financial statement
schedule listed in Item 16(b) of Form
S-1 of this
Registration Statement. This schedule is the responsibility of
the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express
an opinion based on our audits.
In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to
above, 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
II-5
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
Accretive Health, Inc.
December 31, 2010
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Col. A
|
|
Col. B
|
|
Col. C
|
|
Col. D
|
|
Col. E
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of
|
|
Costs and
|
|
Charged to Other
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
Description
|
|
Period
|
|
Expenses
|
|
Accounts
|
|
Deductions
|
|
End of Period
|
|
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
|
|
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act of 1933 may be permitted to directors,
officers and controlling persons of the registrant pursuant to
the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the registrant has been
advised that, in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, such indemnification is against public policy as
expressed in the Securities Act and is, therefore,
unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification
against such liabilities (other than the payment by the
registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer
or controlling person of the registrant in the successful
defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such
director, officer or controlling person in connection with the
securities being registered, the registrant will, unless in the
opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by
controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate
jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is
against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and
will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.
The undersigned registrant hereby undertakes that:
(1) For purposes of determining any liability under the
Securities Act, the information omitted from the form of
prospectus filed as part of this registration statement in
reliance upon Rule 430A and contained in the form of
prospectus filed by the registrant pursuant to
Rule 424(b)(1) or (4) or 497(h) under the Securities
Act shall be deemed to be part of the registration statement as
of the time it was declared effective.
(2) For the purpose of determining any liability under the
Securities Act, each post-effective amendment that contains a
form of prospectus shall be deemed to be a new registration
statement relating to the securities offered therein, and the
offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be
the initial bona fide offering thereof.
II-6
(3) For the purpose of determining liability under the
Securities Act to any purchaser, each prospectus filed pursuant
to Rule 424(b) as part of a registration statement relating
to an offering, other than registration statements relying on
Rule 430B or other than prospectuses filed in reliance on
Rule 430A, shall be deemed to be part of and included in
the registration statement as of the date it is first used after
effectiveness. Provided, however, that no statement made in a
registration statement or prospectus that is part of the
registration statement or made in a document incorporated or
deemed incorporated by reference into the registration statement
or prospectus that is part of the registration statement will,
as to a purchaser with a time of contract of sale prior to such
first use, supersede or modify any statement that was made in
the registration statement or prospectus that was part of the
registration statement or made in any such document immediately
prior to such date of first use.
II-7
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act, the
Registrant has duly caused this Registration Statement to be
signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized, in the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, on the
9th day of March, 2011.
ACCRETIVE HEALTH, INC.
Mary A. Tolan
Founder, President and Chief Executive Officer
POWER OF
ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints Mary A. Tolan,
John T. Staton, Gregory N. Kazarian and David A.
Westenberg, and each of them, his/her true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution
and resubstitution for him/her and in his/her name, place and
stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments
(including post-effective amendments) to this Registration
Statement, and any subsequent registration statements pursuant
to Rule 462 of the Securities Act and to file the same,
with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting
unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full
power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he/she might
or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that
each of said attorney-in-fact or his/her substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act, this
Registration Statement has been signed by the following persons
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 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John
T. Staton
John
T. Staton
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial
Officer)
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ James
M. Bolotin
James
M. Bolotin
|
|
Corporate Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ J.
Michael Cline
J.
Michael Cline
|
|
Founder and Chairman of the Board
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Edgar
M. Bronfman, Jr.
Edgar
M. Bronfman, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
II-8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Steven
N. Kaplan
Steven
N. Kaplan
|
|
Director
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Denis
J. Nayden
Denis
J. Nayden
|
|
Director
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ George
P. Shultz
George
P. Shultz
|
|
Director
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Arthur
H. Spiegel, III
Arthur
H. Spiegel, III
|
|
Director
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Mark
A. Wolfson
Mark
A. Wolfson
|
|
Director
|
|
March 9, 2011
|
II-9
EXHIBIT INDEX
Some of the agreements included as exhibits to this registration
statement contain representations and warranties by the parties
to the applicable agreement. These representations and
warranties were made solely for the benefit of the other parties
to the applicable agreement and (1) were not intended to be
treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way
of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements
prove to be inaccurate; (2) may have been qualified in such
agreement by disclosures that were made to the other party in
connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement;
(3) may apply contract standards of materiality
that are different from materiality under the
applicable securities laws; and (4) were made only as of
the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates
as may be specified in the agreement.
The Company acknowledges that, notwithstanding the inclusion of
the foregoing cautionary statements, it is responsible for
considering whether additional specific disclosures of material
information regarding contractual provisions are required to
make the statements in this registration statement not
misleading.
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
1
|
.1*
|
|
Form of Underwriting Agreement
|
|
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)
|
|
5
|
.1*
|
|
Opinion of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
|
|
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
|
|
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)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
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
|
.9
|
|
Restricted Stock Agreement, dated as of November 7, 2004,
between the Registrant and Ascension Health (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Protection Warrant Agreement between the Registrant and
Ascension Health (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.10 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Supplemental Warrant Agreement between the Registrant and
Ascension Health (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.11 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Amended and Restated Supplemental Warrant Agreement, effective
as of May 31, 2007, between the Registrant and Ascension Health
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Supplemental Warrant Agreement,
effective as of September 30, 2007, between the Registrant and
Ascension Health (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.13 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Subscription Agreement, dated as of May 15, 2007, between the
Registrant and Ascension Health (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.14 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Term Sheet, dated February 17, 2004, between the Registrant and
Michael Zimmerman (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.15 to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Warrant and License Agreement, dated as of January 2005, among
the Registrant, Michael Zimmerman and Zimmerman and Associates,
as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to
the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed on September 29, 2009)
|
|
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
|
|
23
|
.2*
|
|
Consent of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (included
in Exhibit 5.1)
|
|
24
|
.1**
|
|
Powers of Attorney (included on signature page)
|
|
|
|
* |
|
To be filed by amendment. |
|
** |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
+ |
|
Confidential treatment requested as to certain portions, which
portions have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |