Universal Health Services 10-K 2019-12-31
Filed 2020-02-26. 22 sections, 673K characters. Original on sec.gov · Markdown · JSON
Cover and table of contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(MARK ONE)
| ☒ | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|---|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019
OR
| ☐ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|---|
For the transition period from to
Commission File No. 1-10765
UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| Delaware | 23-2077891 | |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) | |
| UNIVERSAL CORPORATE CENTER | ||
| 367 South Gulph Road P.O. Box 61558 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania | 19406-0958 | |
| (Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (610) 768-3300
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
| Title of each class | Trading Symbol(s) | Name of each exchange on which registered |
| Class B Common Stock, $0.01 par value | UHS | New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Class D Common Stock, $.01 par value
(Title of each Class)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ☐ No ☒
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
| Large accelerated filer | ☒ | Accelerated filer | ☐ | |||
| Non-accelerated filer | ☐ | Smaller reporting company | ☐ | |||
| Emerging growth company | ☐ |
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒
The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates at June 30, 2019 was $10.3 billion. (For the purpose of this calculation, it was assumed that Class A, Class C, and Class D Common Stock, which are not traded but are convertible share-for-share into Class B Common Stock, have the same market value as Class B Common Stock. Also, for purposes of this calculation only, all directors are deemed to be affiliates.)
The number of shares of the registrant’s Class A Common Stock, $.01 par value, Class B Common Stock, $.01 par value, Class C Common Stock, $.01 par value, and Class D Common Stock, $.01 par value, outstanding as of January 31, 2020, were 6,577,100; 79,473,042; 661,688 and 18,411, respectively.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:
Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for our 2020 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2019 (incorporated by reference under Part III).
UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
2019 FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K is for the year ended December 31, 2019. This Annual Report modifies and supersedes documents filed prior to this Annual Report. Information that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in the future will automatically update and supersede information contained in this Annual Report.
In this Annual Report, “we,” “us,” “our” “UHS” and the “Company” refer to Universal Health Services, Inc. and its subsidiaries. UHS is a registered trademark of UHS of Delaware, Inc., the management company for, and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Universal Health Services, Inc. Universal Health Services, Inc. is a holding company and operates through its subsidiaries including its management company, UHS of Delaware, Inc. All healthcare and management operations are conducted by subsidiaries of Universal Health Services, Inc. To the extent any reference to “UHS” or “UHS facilities” in this report including letters, narratives or other forms contained herein relates to our healthcare or management operations it is referring to Universal Health Services, Inc.’s subsidiaries including UHS of Delaware, Inc. Further, the terms “we,” “us,” “our” or the “Company” in such context similarly refer to the operations of Universal Health Services Inc.’s subsidiaries including UHS of Delaware, Inc. Any reference to employees or employment contained herein refers to employment with or employees of the subsidiaries of Universal Health Services, Inc. including UHS of Delaware, Inc.
PART I
Item 1. Business
| --- | --- |
Our principal business is owning and operating, through our subsidiaries, acute care hospitals and outpatient facilities and behavioral health care facilities.
As of February 26, 2020, we owned and/or operated 354 inpatient facilities and 42 outpatient and other facilities including the following located in 37 states, Washington, D.C., the United Kingdom and Puerto Rico:
Acute care facilities located in the U.S.:
| • | 26 inpatient acute care hospitals; |
|---|
| • | 14 free-standing emergency departments, and; |
|---|
| • | 6 outpatient centers & 1 surgical hospital. |
|---|
Behavioral health care facilities (328 inpatient facilities and 21 outpatient facilities):
Located in the U.S.:
| • | 185 inpatient behavioral health care facilities, and; |
|---|
| • | 19 outpatient behavioral health care facilities. |
|---|
Located in the U.K.:
| • | 140 inpatient behavioral health care facilities, and; |
|---|
| • | 2 outpatient behavioral health care facilities. |
|---|
Located in Puerto Rico:
| • | 3 inpatient behavioral health care facilities. |
|---|
As a percentage of our consolidated net revenues, net revenues from our acute care hospitals, outpatient facilities and commercial health insurer accounted for 54% during 2019 and 53% during each of 2018 and 2017. Net revenues from our behavioral health care facilities and commercial health insurer accounted for 46% of our consolidated net revenues during 2019 and 47% during each of 2018 and 2017.
Our behavioral health care facilities located in the U.K. generated net revenues of approximately $554 million in 2019, $505 million in 2018 and $429 million in 2017. Total assets at our U.K. behavioral health care facilities were approximately $1.270 billion as of December 31, 2019, $1.224 billion as of December 31, 2018 and $1.098 billion as of December 31, 2017.
Services provided by our hospitals include general and specialty surgery, internal medicine, obstetrics, emergency room care, radiology, oncology, diagnostic care, coronary care, pediatric services, pharmacy services and/or behavioral health services. We provide capital resources as well as a variety of management services to our facilities, including central purchasing, information services, finance and control systems, facilities planning, physician recruitment services, administrative personnel management, marketing and public relations.
Available Information
We are a Delaware corporation that was organized in 1979. Our principal executive offices are located at Universal Corporate Center, 367 South Gulph Road, P.O. Box 61558, King of Prussia, PA 19406. Our telephone number is (610) 768-3300.
Our website is located at http://www.uhsinc.com. Copies of our annual, quarterly and current reports that we file with the SEC, and any amendments to those reports, are available free of charge on our website. Our filings are also available to the public at the website maintained by the SEC, www.sec.gov. The information posted on our website is not incorporated into this Annual Report. Our Board of Directors’ committee charters (Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating & Governance Committee), Code of Business Conduct and Corporate Standards applicable to all employees, Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers, Corporate Governance Guidelines and our Code of Conduct, Corporate Compliance Manual and Compliance Policies and Procedures are available free of charge on our website. Copies of such reports and charters are available in print to any stockholder who makes a request. Such requests should be made to our Secretary at our King of Prussia, PA corporate headquarters. We intend to satisfy the disclosure requirement under Item 5.05 of Form 8-K relating to amendments to or waivers of any provision of our Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers by promptly posting this information on our website.
In accordance with Section 303A.12(a) of the New York Stock Exchange Listed Company Manual, we submitted our CEO’s certification to the New York Stock Exchange in 2019. Additionally, contained in Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, are our CEO’s and CFO’s certifications regarding the quality of our public disclosures under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Our Mission
Our company mission is:
To provide superior quality healthcare services that
PATIENTS recommend to families and friends,
PHYSICIANS prefer for their patients,
PURCHASERS select for their clients,
EMPLOYEES are proud of, and
INVESTORS seek for long-term returns.
To achieve this, we have a commitment to:
| • | service excellence |
|---|
| • | continuous improvement in measurable ways |
|---|
| • | employee development |
|---|
| • | ethical and fair treatment of all |
|---|
| • | teamwork |
|---|
| • | compassion |
|---|
| • | innovation in service delivery |
|---|
Business Strategy
We believe community-based hospitals will remain the focal point of the healthcare delivery network and we are committed to a philosophy of self-determination for both the company and our hospitals.
Acquisition of Additional Hospitals. We selectively seek opportunities to expand our base of operations by acquiring, constructing or leasing additional hospital facilities. We are committed to a program of rational growth around our core businesses, while retaining the missions of the hospitals we manage and the communities we serve. Such expansion may provide us with access to new markets and new healthcare delivery capabilities. We also continue to examine our facilities and consider divestiture of those facilities that we believe do not have the potential to contribute to our growth or operating strategy. In recent years our behavioral health services segment has been focused on efforts to partner with non-UHS acute care hospitals to help operate their behavioral health services. These arrangements include hospital purchases, leased beds and joint venture operating agreements.
Improvement of Operations of Existing Hospitals and Services. We also seek to increase the operating revenues and profitability of owned hospitals by the introduction of new services, improvement of existing services, physician recruitment and the application of financial and operational controls.
We are involved in continual development activities for the benefit of our existing facilities. From time to time applications are filed with state health planning agencies to add new services in existing hospitals in states which require certificates of need, or CONs. Although we expect that some of these applications will result in the addition of new facilities or services to our operations, no assurances can be made for ultimate success by us in these efforts.
Quality and Efficiency of Services. Pressures to contain healthcare costs and technological developments allowing more procedures to be performed on an outpatient basis have led payers to demand a shift to ambulatory or outpatient care wherever possible. We are responding to this trend by emphasizing the expansion of outpatient services. In addition, in response to cost containment pressures, we continue to implement programs at our facilities designed to improve financial performance and efficiency while continuing to provide quality care, including more efficient use of professional and paraprofessional staff, monitoring and adjusting staffing levels and equipment usage, improving patient management and reporting procedures and implementing more
efficient billing and collection procedures. In addition, we will continue to emphasize innovation in our response to the rapid changes in regulatory trends and market conditions while fulfilling ou
Showing the first 8K of 65K characters. Open the full section
Item 1A. Risk Factors
| --- | --- |
We are subject to numerous known and unknown risks, many of which are described below and elsewhere in this Annual Report. Any of the events described below could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are not aware of, or that we currently deem to be immaterial, could also impact our business and results of operations.
A significant portion of our revenue is produced by facilities located in Texas, Nevada and California.
Texas: We own 7 inpatient acute care hospitals and 22 inpatient behavioral healthcare facilities as listed in Item 2. Properties. On a combined basis, these facilities contributed 16% of our consolidated net revenues during each of 2019 and 2018 and 15% in 2017. On a combined basis, after deducting an allocation for corporate overhead expense, these facilities generated 14% in 2019, 12% in 2018 and 11% in 2017, of our income from operations after net income attributable to noncontrolling interest.
Nevada: We own 8 inpatient acute care hospitals and 4 inpatient behavioral healthcare facilities as listed in Item 2. Properties. On a combined basis, these facilities contributed 18% of our consolidated net revenues during 2019 and 17% during each of 2018 and 2017. On a combined basis, after deducting an allocation for corporate overhead expense, these facilities generated 23% in 2019, 24% in 2018 and 20% in 2017, of our income from operations after net income attributable to noncontrolling interest.
California: We own 5 inpatient acute care hospitals and 8 inpatient behavioral healthcare facilities as listed in Item 2. Properties. On a combined basis, these facilities contributed 11% of our consolidated net revenues during each of 2019, 2018 and 2017. On a combined basis, after deducting an allocation for corporate overhead expense, these facilities generated 17% in 2019, 16% in 2018 and 13% in 2017 of our income from operations after net income attributable to noncontrolling interest.
The significant portion of our revenues and earnings derived from these facilities makes us particularly sensitive to legislative, regulatory, economic, environmental and competition changes in Texas, Nevada and California. Any material change in the current payment programs or regulatory, economic, environmental or competitive conditions in these states could have a disproportionate effect on our overall business results.
Our revenues and results of operations are significantly affected by payments received from the government and other third party payers.
We derive a significant portion of our revenue from third-party payers, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Changes in these government programs in recent years have resulted in limitations on reimbursement and, in some cases, reduced levels of reimbursement for healthcare services. Payments from federal and state government programs are subject to statutory and regulatory changes, administrative rulings, interpretations and determinations, requirements for utilization review, and federal and state funding restrictions, all of which could materially increase or decrease program payments, as well as affect the cost of providing service to patients and the timing of payments to facilities. We are unable to predict the effect of recent and future policy changes on
our operations. In addition, the uncertainty and fiscal pressures placed upon federal and state governments as a result of, among other things, deterioration in general economic conditions and the funding requirements from the federal healthcare reform legislation, may affect the availability of taxpayer funds for Medicare and Medicaid programs. In addition, the vast majority of the net revenues generated at our behavioral health facilities located in the United Kingdom are derived from governmental payers. If the rates paid or the scope of services covered by governmental payers in the United States or United Kingdom are reduced, there could be a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.
We receive Medicaid revenues in excess of $100 million annually from each of California, Texas, Nevada, Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania and Illinois, making us particularly sensitive to reductions in Medicaid and other state based revenue programs as well as regulatory, economic, environmental and competitive changes in those states.
In addition to changes in government reimbursement programs, our ability to negotiate favorable contracts with private payers, including managed care organizations, significantly affects the revenues and operating results of our hospitals. Private payers, including managed care organizations, increasingly are demanding that we accept lower rates of payment.
We expect continued third-party efforts to aggressively manage reimbursement levels and cost controls. Reductions in reimbursement amounts received from third-party payers could have a material adverse effect on our financial position and our results of operations.
Reductions or changes in Medicare and Medicaid funding could have a material adverse effect on our future results of operations.
The Budget Control Act of 2011 (the “Budget Control Act”) mandated significant reductions in federal spending for fiscal years 2012-2021, including a reduction of 2% on all Medicare payments during this period. Subsequent legislation enacted by Congress extended these reductions through 2029. There is a substantial risk that Congress could act to extend or increase these across-the-board reductions. The proposed 2020 federal budget calls for an $845 billion reduction in Medicare spending and a $1.5 trillion reduction in Medicaid spending over the next decade. It is impossible to predict what portion, if any, of these proposed federal health care spending reductions will be included in a Congressionally approved budget. Please see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Sources of Revenue-Medicare, for additional disclosure.
Beginning in 2020 and continuing through 2025, the Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (“DSH”) allotment to the states from federal funds will be reduced. Such reductions have been delayed several times, most recently under the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, which further delays the DSH through May 23, 2020. Commencing in 2020 and continuing through 2025, a state’s Medicaid DSH allotment from federal funds will be reduced. Initially, DSH payments will be reduced by $4 billion in 2020, and then $8 billion per year between 2021 and 2025. Reductions are imposed on states based on percentage of uninsured individuals, Medicaid utilization, and uncompensated care.
We are subject to uncertainties regarding health care reform.
On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Legislation”). Two primary goals of the Legislation are to provide for increased access to coverage for healthcare and to reduce healthcare-related expenses.
Although it was expected that as a result of the Legislation there would be a reduction in uninsured patients, which would reduce our expense from uncollectible accounts receivable, the Legislation makes a number of other changes to Medicare and Medicaid which we believe may have an adverse impact on us. It has been projected that the Legislation will result in a net reduction in Medicare and Medicaid payments to hospitals totaling $155 billion over 10 years. The Legislation revises reimbursement under the Medicare and Medicaid programs to emphasize the efficient delivery of high quality care and contains a number of incentives and penalties under these programs to achieve these goals. The Legislation implements a value-based purchasing program, which will reward the delivery of efficient care. Conversely, certain facilities will rec
Showing the first 8K of 74K characters. Open the full section
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
| --- | --- |
None.
Item 2. Properties
| --- | --- |
Executive and Administrative Offices and Commercial Health Insurer
We own various office buildings in King of Prussia and Wayne, Pennsylvania, Brentwood, Tennessee, Denton, Texas and Reno, Nevada.
Facilities
The following tables set forth the name, location, type of facility and, for acute care hospitals and behavioral health care facilities, the number of licensed beds:
Acute Care Hospitals
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Aiken Regional Medical Centers | Aiken, South Carolina | 211 | Owned |
| Aurora Pavilion | Aiken, South Carolina | 62 | Owned |
| Centennial Hills Hospital Medical Center | Las Vegas, Nevada | 262 | Owned |
| Corona Regional Medical Center | Corona, California | 238 | Owned |
| Desert Springs Hospital | Las Vegas, Nevada | 293 | Owned |
| Desert View Hospital | Pahrump, Nevada | 25 | Owned |
| Doctors’ Hospital of Laredo (7) | Laredo, Texas | 183 | Owned |
| Doctor’s Hospital ER South | Laredo, Texas | — | Leased |
| Doctor’s Hospital Emergency Room Saunders | Laredo, Texas | — | Owned |
| Fort Duncan Regional Medical Center | Eagle Pass, Texas | 101 | Owned |
| The George Washington University Hospital (1) | Washington, D.C. | 395 | Leased |
| Henderson Hospital | Henderson, Nevada | 170 | Owned |
| ER at Green Valley Ranch | Henderson, Nevada | — | Owned |
| Lakewood Ranch Medical Center | Bradenton, Florida | 120 | Owned |
| Manatee Memorial Hospital | Bradenton, Florida | 295 | Owned |
| Northern Nevada Medical Center | Sparks, Nevada | 124 | Owned |
| Northwest Texas Healthcare System | Amarillo, Texas | 405 | Owned |
| The Pavilion at Northwest Texas Healthcare System | Amarillo, Texas | 90 | Owned |
| NWTH FED | Amarillo, Texas | — | Owned |
| NWTX Georgia FED | Amarillo, Texas | — | Owned |
| Palmdale Regional Medical Center | Palmdale, California | 184 | Owned |
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| South Texas Health System (3) | |||
| Edinburg Regional Medical Center/Children’s Hospital | Edinburg, Texas | 235 | Owned |
| McAllen Medical Center (2) | McAllen, Texas | 441 | Leased |
| McAllen Heart Hospital | McAllen, Texas | 60 | Owned |
| South Texas Behavioral Health Center | McAllen, Texas | 134 | Owned |
| STHS ER at Alamo | Alamo, Texas | — | Owned |
| STHS ER at McColl | Edinburg, Texas | — | Owned |
| STHS ER at Mission (2) | Mission, Texas | — | Leased |
| STHS ER at Monte Cristo | Edinburg, Texas | — | Owned |
| STHS ER at Ware Road | McAllen, Texas | — | Owned |
| STHS ER at Weslaco (2) | Weslaco, Texas | — | Leased |
| Southwest Healthcare System | |||
| Inland Valley Campus (2) | Wildomar, California | 130 | Leased |
| Rancho Springs Campus | Murrieta, California | 120 | Owned |
| Spring Valley Hospital Medical Center | Las Vegas, Nevada | 364 | Owned |
| Spring Valley FED | Las Vegas, Nevada | — | Owned |
| St. Mary’s Regional Medical Center | Enid, Oklahoma | 229 | Owned |
| Summerlin Hospital Medical Center | Las Vegas, Nevada | 485 | Owned |
| Temecula Valley Hospital | Temecula, California | 140 | Owned |
| Texoma Medical Center | Denison, Texas | 354 | Owned |
| TMC Behavioral Health Center | Denison, Texas | 60 | Owned |
| Texoma Sherman ER | Sherman, Texas | — | Owned |
| Valley Hospital Medical Center | Las Vegas, Nevada | 306 | Owned |
| Wellington Regional Medical Center (2) | West Palm Beach, Florida | 235 | Leased |
| Westlake FED | West Palm Beach, Florida | — | Leased |
Inpatient Behavioral Health Care Facilities
| United States: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Alabama Clinical Schools | Birmingham, Alabama | 80 | Owned |
| Alhambra Hospital | Rosemead, California | 115 | Owned |
| Alliance Health Center | Meridian, Mississippi | 214 | Owned |
| The Arbour Hospital | Boston, Massachusetts | 136 | Owned |
| Arbour-Fuller Hospital | South Attleboro, Massachusetts | 102 | Owned |
| Arbour-HRI Hospital | Brookline, Massachusetts | 62 | Owned |
| Arrowhead Behavioral Health | Maumee, Ohio | 48 | Owned |
| Austin Lakes Hospital | Austin, Texas | 58 | Leased |
| Austin Oaks Hospitals | Austin, Texas | 80 | Owned |
| Behavioral Hospital of Bellaire | Houston, Texas | 124 | Leased |
| Belmont Pines Hospital | Youngstown, Ohio | 102 | Owned |
| Benchmark Behavioral Health System | Woods Cross, Utah | 94 | Owned |
| Black Bear Treatment Center | Sautee, Georgia | 115 | Owned |
| Bloomington Meadows Hospital | Bloomington, Indiana | 78 | Owned |
| Boulder Creek Academy | Bonners Ferry, Idaho | 105 | Owned |
| Brentwood Behavioral Health of Mississippi | Flowood, Mississippi | 121 | Owned |
| Brentwood Hospital | Shreveport, Louisiana | 260 | Owned |
| The Bridgeway | North Little Rock, Arkansas | 127 | Owned |
| Brook Hospital—Dupont | Louisville, Kentucky | 88 | Owned |
| Brook Hospital—KMI | Louisville, Kentucky | 110 | Owned |
| United States: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Brooke Glen Behavioral Hospital | Fort Washington, Pennsylvania | 146 | Owned |
| Brynn Marr Hospital | Jacksonville, North Carolina | 102 | Owned |
| Calvary Addiction Recovery Center | Phoenix, Arizona | 68 | Owned |
| Canyon Ridge Hospital | Chino, California | 106 | Owned |
| The Carolina Center for Behavioral Health | Greer, South Carolina | 138 | Owned |
| Cedar Creek | St. Johns, Michigan | 54 | Owned |
| Cedar Grove Residential Treatment Center | Murfreesboro, Tennessee | 40 | Owned |
| Cedar Hills Hospital (8) | Beaverton, Oregon | 98 | Owned |
| Cedar Ridge | Oklahoma City, Oklahoma | 60 | Owned |
| Cedar Ridge Residential Treatment Center | Oklahoma City, Oklahoma | 56 | Owned |
| Cedar Ridge Bethany | Bethany, Oklahoma | 56 | Owned |
| Cedar Springs Behavioral Health | Colorado Springs, Colorado | 110 | Owned |
| Centennial Peaks | Louisville, Colorado | 104 | Owned |
| Center for Change | Orem, Utah | 58 | Owned |
| Central Florida Behavioral Hospital | Orlando, Florida | 174 | Owned |
| Chicago Children’s Center for Behavioral Health | Chicago, Illinois | 40 | Leased |
| Chris Kyle Patriots Hospital | Anchorage, Alaska | 36 | Owned |
| Clarion Psychiatric Center | Clarion, Pennsylvania | 112 | Owned |
| Coastal Behavioral Health | Savannah, Georgia | 50 | Owned |
| Coastal Harbor Treatment Center | Savannah, Georgia | 141 | Owned |
| Columbus Behavioral Center for Children and Adolescents | Columbus, Indiana | 57 | Owned |
| Compass Intervention Center | Memphis, Tennessee | 108 | Owned |
| Copper Hills Youth Center | West Jordan, Utah | 197 | Owned |
| Coral Shores | Stuart, Florida | 80 | Owned |
| Cumberland Hall | Hopkinsville, Kentucky | 97 | Owned |
| Cumberland Hospital | New Kent, Virginia | 110 | Owned |
| Cypress Creek Hospital | Houston, Texas | 128 | Owned |
| Del Amo Hospital | Torrance, California | 166 | Owned |
| Diamond Grove Center | Louisville, Mississippi | 55 | Owned |
| Dover Behavioral Health | Dover, Delaware | 104 | Owned |
| El Paso Behavioral Health System | El Paso, Texas | 166 | Owned |
| Emerald Coast Behavioral Hospital | Panama City, Florida | 86 | Owned |
| Fairmount Behavioral Health System | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | 239 | Owned |
| Fairfax | |||
| Fairfax Hospital | Kirkland, Washington | 157 | Owned |
| Fairfax Hospital—Everett | Everett, Washington | 30 | Leased |
| Fairfax Hospital—Monroe | Monroe, Washington | 34 | Leased |
| Forest View Hospital | Grand Rapids, Michigan | 108 | Owned |
| Fort Lauderdale Hospital | Fort Lauderdale, Florida | 182 | Owned |
| Foundations Behavioral Health | Doylestown, Pennsylvania | 108 | Leased |
| Foundations for Living | Mansfield, Ohio | 84 | Owned |
| Fox Run Hospital | St. Clairsville, Ohio | 100 | Owned |
| Fremont Hospital | Fremont, California | 148 | Owned |
| Friends Hospital | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | 219 | Owned |
| Garfield Park Hospital | Chicago, Illinois | 88 | Owned |
| Garland Behavioral Health | Garland, Texas | 72 | Leased |
| Glen Oaks Hospital | Greenville, Texas | 54 | Owned |
| Gulf Coast Youth Services | Fort Walton Beach, Florida | 28 | Owned |
| Gulfport Behavioral Health System | Gulfport, Mississippi | 109 | Owned |
| Hampton Behavioral Health Center | Westhampton, New Jersey | 120 | Owned |
| Harbour Point (Pines) | Portsmouth, Virginia | 186 | Owned |
| United States: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Hartgrove Hospital | Chicago, Illinois | 160 | Owned |
| Havenwyck Hospital | Auburn Hills, Michigan | 243 | Owned |
| Heartland Behavioral Health Services | Nevada, Missouri | 151 | Owned |
| Hermitage Hall | Nashville, Tennessee | 111 | Owned |
| Heritage Oaks Hospital | Sacramento, California | 125 | Owned |
| Hickory Trail Hospital | DeSoto, Texas | 86 | Owned |
| Highlands Behavioral Health System | Highlands Ranch, Colorado | 86 | Owned |
| Hill Crest Behavioral Health Services | Birmingham, Alabama | 219 | Owned |
| Holly Hill Hospital | Raleigh, North Carolina | 285 | Owned |
| The Horsham Clinic | Ambler, Pennsylvania | 206 | Owned |
| Hughes Center | Danville, Virginia | 64 | Owned |
| Inland Northwest Behavioral Health (10) | Spokane, Washington | 100 | Owned |
| Intermountain Hospital | Boise, Idaho | 155 | Owned |
| Kempsville Center of Behavioral Health | Norfolk, Virginia | 82 | Owned |
| KeyStone Center | Wallingford, Pennsylvania | 153 | Owned |
| Kingwood Pines Hospital | Kingwood, Texas | 116 | Owned |
| La Amistad Behavioral Health Services | Maitland, Florida | 85 | Owned |
| Lakeside Behavioral Health System | Memphis, Tennessee | 345 | Owned |
| Lancaster Behavioral Health Hospital (9) | Lancaster, Pennsylvania | 126 | Owned |
| Laurel Heights Hospital | Atlanta, Georgia | 124 | Owned |
| Laurel Oaks Behavioral Health Center | Dothan, Alabama | 124 | Owned |
| Laurel Ridge Treatment Center | San Antonio, Texas | 250 | Owned |
| Liberty Point Behavioral Health | Stauton, Virginia | 56 | Owned |
| Lighthouse Care Center of Augusta | Augusta, Georgia | 68 | Owned |
| Lighthouse Care Center of Conway | Conway, South Carolina | 105 | Owned |
| Lincoln Prairie Behavioral Health Center | Springfield, Illinois | 97 | Owned |
| Lincoln Trail Behavioral Health System | Radcliff, Kentucky | 140 | Owned |
| Mayhill Hospital | Denton, Texas | 59 | Leased |
| McDowell Center for Children | Dyersburg, Tennessee | 32 | Owned |
| The Meadows Psychiatric Center | Centre Hall, Pennsylvania | 117 | Owned |
| Meridell Achievement Center | Austin, Texas | 134 | Owned |
| Mesilla Valley Hospital | Las Cruces, New Mexico | 119 | Owned |
| Michael’s House | Palm Springs, California | 120 | Owned |
| Michiana Behavioral Health Center | Plymouth, Indiana | 80 | Owned |
| Midwest Center for Youth and Families | Kouts, Indiana | 74 | Owned |
| Millwood Hospital | Arlington, Texas | 134 | Leased |
| Mountain Youth Academy | Mountain City, Tennessee | 90 | Owned |
| Natchez Trace Youth Academy | Waverly, Tennessee | 115 | Owned |
| Newport News Behavioral Health Center | Newport News, Virginia | 132 | Owned |
| North Spring Behavioral Healthcare | Leesburg, Virginia | 103 | Leased |
| North Star Hospital | Anchorage, Alaska | 74 | Owned |
| North Star Bragaw | Anchorage, Alaska | 30 | Owned |
| North Star DeBarr Residential Treatment Center | Anchorage, Alaska | 30 | Owned |
| North Star Palmer Residential Treatment Center | Palmer, Alaska | 30 | Owned |
| Oak Plains Academy | Ashland City, Tennessee | 98 | Owned |
| The Oaks Treatment Center | Memphis, Tennessee | 71 | Owned |
| Okaloosa Youth Academy | Crestview, Florida | 75 | Leased |
| Old Vineyard Behavioral Health | Winston-Salem, North Carolina | 164 | Owned |
| Palmetto Lowcountry Behavioral Health | North Charleston, South Carolina | 108 | Owned |
| Palmetto Summerville | Summerville, South Carolina | 64 | Leased |
| Palm Point Behavioral | Titusville, FL | 74 | Owned |
| United States: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Palm Shores Behavioral Health Center | Bradenton, Florida | 64 | Owned |
| Palo Verde Behavioral Health | Tucson, Arizona | 84 | Leased |
| Parkwood Behavioral Health System | Olive Branch, Mississippi | 148 | Owned |
| The Pavilion | Champaign, Illinois | 106 | Owned |
| Peachford Behavioral Health System of Atlanta | Atlanta, Georgia | 246 | Owned |
| Pembroke Hospital | Pembroke, Massachusetts | 120 | Owned |
| Pinnacle Pointe Hospital | Little Rock, Arkansas | 127 | Owned |
| Poplar Springs Hospital | Petersburg, Virginia | 208 | Owned |
| Prairie St John’s | Fargo, North Dakota | 158 | Owned |
| Pride Institute | Eden Prairie, Minnesota | 42 | Owned |
| Provo Canyon School | Provo, Utah | 274 | Owned |
| Provo Canyon Behavioral Hospital | Orem, Utah | 80 | Owned |
| Psychiatric Institute of Washington | Washington, D.C. | 130 | Owned |
| Quail Run Behavioral Health | Phoenix, Arizona | 102 | Owned |
| The Recovery Center | Wichita Falls, Texas | 34 | Leased |
| The Ridge Behavioral Health System | Lexington, Kentucky | 110 | Owned |
| Rivendell Behavioral Health Services of Arkansas | Benton, Arkansas | 80 | Owned |
| Rivendell Behavioral Health Services of Kentucky | Bowling Green, Kentucky | 125 | Owned |
| River Crest Hospital | San Angelo, Texas | 80 | Owned |
| Riveredge Hospital | Forest Park, Illinois | 210 | Owned |
| River Oaks Hospital | New Orleans, Louisiana | 126 | Owned |
| River Park Hospital | Huntington, West Virginia | 187 | Owned |
| River Point Behavioral Health | Jacksonville, Florida | 84 | Owned |
| Rockford Center | Newark, Delaware | 138 | Owned |
| Rolling Hills Hospital | Franklin, Tennessee | 130 | Owned |
| Roxbury | Shippensburg, Pennsylvania | 112 | Owned |
| Salt Lake Behavioral Health | Salt Lake City, Utah | 118 | Leased |
| San Marcos Treatment Center | San Marcos, Texas | 265 | Owned |
| Sandy Pines Hospital | Tequesta, Florida | 149 | Owned |
| Schick Shadel Hospital | Burien, Washington | 60 | Owned |
| Sierra Vista Hospital | Sacramento, California | 171 | Owned |
| Southern Crescent Behavioral Health | |||
| Anchor Hospital | Atlanta, Georgia | 122 | Owned |
| St. Simons by the Sea | St. Simons, Georgia | 101 | Owned |
| Skywood Recovery | Augusta, Michigan | 100 | Owned |
| Spring Mountain Sahara | Las Vegas, Nevada | 30 | Owned |
| Spring Mountain Treatment Center | Las Vegas, Nevada | 110 | Owned |
| Springwoods | Fayetteville, Arkansas | 80 | Owned |
| Stonington Institute | North Stonington, Connecticut | 64 | Owned |
| Streamwood Behavioral Health | Streamwood, Illinois | 178 | Owned |
| Summit Oaks Hospital | Summit, New Jersey | 126 | Owned |
| SummitRidge | Lawrenceville, Georgia | 96 | Owned |
| Suncoast Behavioral Health Center | Bradenton, Florida | 60 | Owned |
| Texas NeuroRehab Center | Austin, Texas | 151 | Owned |
| Three Rivers Behavioral Health | West Columbia, South Carolina | 122 | Owned |
| Three Rivers Residential Treatment-Midlands Campus | West Columbia, South Carolina | 64 | Owned |
| Turning Point Hospital | Moultrie, Georgia | 69 | Owned |
| University Behavioral Center | Orlando, Florida | 112 | Owned |
| University Behavioral Health of Denton | Denton, Texas | 104 | Owned |
| Valle Vista Hospital | Greenwood, Indiana | 132 | Owned |
| Valley Hospital | Phoenix, Arizona | 122 | Owned |
| United States: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| The Vines Hospital | Ocala, Florida | 98 | Owned |
| Virginia Beach Psychiatric Center | Virginia Beach, Virginia | 100 | Owned |
| Wekiva Springs | Jacksonville, Florida | 120 | Owned |
| Wellstone Regional Hospital | Jeffersonville, Indiana | 100 | Owned |
| West Hills Hospital | Reno, Nevada | 95 | Owned |
| West Oaks Hospital | Houston, Texas | 176 | Owned |
| Willow Springs Center | Reno, Nevada | 116 | Owned |
| Windmoor Healthcare | Clearwater, Florida | 144 | Owned |
| Windsor—Laurelwood Center | Willoughby, Ohio | 160 | Leased |
| Wyoming Behavioral Institute | Casper, Wyoming | 129 | Owned |
| United Kingdom: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Acer Clinic | Chestherfield, UK | 14 | Owned |
| Acer Clinic 2 | Chestherfield, UK | 14 | Owned |
| Albert Ward | Darlington, UK | 25 | Owned |
| Amberwood Lodge | Dorset, UK | 9 | Owned |
| Ashfield House | Huddersfield, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Aspen House | South Yorkshire, UK | 20 | Owned |
| Aspen Lodge | Rotherham, UK | 16 | Owned |
| Beacon Lower | Bradford, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Beacon Upper | Bradford, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Beckly House | Halifax, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Bostall House | London, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Bury Hospital | Bury, UK | 167 | Owned |
| Broughton House | Lincolnshire, UK | 34 | Owned |
| Broughton Lodge | Cheshire, UK | 20 | Owned |
| Cambian Alders | Gloucester, UK | 20 | Owned |
| Cambian Ansel Clinic | Nottingham, UK | 24 | Owned |
| Cambian Appletree | Durham, UK | 26 | Owned |
| Cambian Beeches | Nottinghamshire, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Cambian Birches | Notts, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Cambian Cedars | Birmingham, UK | 24 | Owned |
| Cambian Churchill | London, UK | 57 | Owned |
| Cambian Conifers | Derby, UK | 7 | Owned |
| Cambian Elms | Birmingham, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Cambian Grange | Nottinghamshire, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Cambian Heathers | West Bromwich, UK | 20 | Owned |
| Cambian Lodge | Nottinghamshire, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Cambian Manor | Central Drive, UK | 20 | Owned |
| Cambian Nightingale | Dorset, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Cambian Oaks | Barnsley, UK | 36 | Owned |
| Cambian Pines | Woodhouse, UK | 7 | Owned |
| Cambian Views | Matlock, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Cambian Woodside | Bradford, UK | 9 | Owned |
| CAS Brunel | Henbury, UK | 32 | Owned |
| Cedar Vale | Nottinghamshire, UK | 14 | Owned |
| Chaseways | Sawbridgeworth, UK | 6 | Owned |
| United Kingdom: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Chesterholme | Northumberland, UK | 16 | Owned |
| Coulby Lodge | North Yorkshire, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Coventry | Coventry, UK | 56 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Beckton | Beckton, UK | 62 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Bierley | Bierley, UK | 63 | Owned |
| Cygnet Wing—Blackheath | Blackheath, UK | 32 | Leased |
| Cygnet Lodge—Brighouse | Brighouse, UK | 25 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Derby | Derby, UK | 50 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Ealing | Ealing, UK | 26 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Godden Green | Godden Green, UK | 39 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Harrogate | Harrogate, UK | 36 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Harrow | Harrow, UK | 61 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Kewstoke | Kewstoke, UK | 72 | Owned |
| Cygnet Lodge—Lewisham | Lewisham, UK | 17 | Owned |
| Cygnet Lodge – Salford | Manchester, UK | 24 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Stevenage | Stevenage, UK | 88 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Taunton | Taunton, UK | 55 | Owned |
| Cygnet Lodge – Kenton | Westlands, UK | 15 | Owned |
| Cygnet Hospital—Wyke | Wyke, UK | 52 | Owned |
| Cygnet Lodge – Woking | Knaphill, UK | 31 | Owned |
| Delfryn House | Flintshire, UK | 28 | Owned |
| Delfryn Lodge | Flintshire, UK | 24 | Owned |
| Dene Brook | Dalton Parva, UK | 13 | Owned |
| Devon Lodge | Southampton, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Dove Valley | Wombwell, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Ducks Halt | Essex, UK | 5 | Owned |
| Eleni House | Essex, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Ellen Mhor | Dundee, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Elston House | Nottinghamshire, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Fairways | Suffolk, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Farm Lodge | Rainham, UK | 5 | Owned |
| The Fields | Sheffield, UK | 54 | Owned |
| Highwoods | Colchester, UK | 20 | Owned |
| The Fountains | Blackburn, UK | 32 | Owned |
| The Gables | Essex, UK | 7 | Owned |
| Gledcliffe Road | Huddersfield, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Gledholt | Huddersfield, UK | 9 | Owned |
| Hawkstone | Utley, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Hollyhurst | County Durham, UK | 19 | Owned |
| Hope House | County Durham, UK | 11 | Owned |
| Kirkside House | Leeds, UK | 7 | Owned |
| Kirkside Lodge | Leeds, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Langdale House | Huddersfield, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Langdale Coach House | Huddersfield, UK | 3 | Owned |
| Larch Court | Essex, UK | 4 | Owned |
| Limes Houses | Nottinghamshire, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Lindsay House | Dundee, UK | 2 | Owned |
| Longfield House | Bradford, UK | 9 | Owned |
| Lowry House | Hyde, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Maidstone | Maidstone, UK | 65 | Owned |
| Marion House | Derby, UK | 5 | Owned |
| United Kingdom: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Meadows Mews | Tipton, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Morgan House | Stoke on Trent, UK | 5 | Owned |
| Newbus Grange | County Durham, UK | 17 | Owned |
| Norcott House | Liversedge, UK | 11 | Owned |
| Norcott Lodge | Liversedge, UK | 9 | Owned |
| Oak Court | Essex, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Oakhurst Lodge | Hampshire, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Oaklands | Northumberland, UK | 19 | Owned |
| Oakwood Gardens (SL) | Wolverhampton, UK | 9 | Leased |
| Old Leigh House | Essex, UK | 7 | Leased |
| The Orchards | Essex, UK | 5 | Owned |
| The Outwood | Leeds, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Oxley Lodge | Huddersfield, UK | 4 | Owned |
| Oxley Woodhouse | Huddersfield, UK | 13 | Owned |
| Portland Road 45 | Edgbaston, UK | 4 | Leased |
| Raglan House | West Midlands, UK | 25 | Owned |
| Ramsey | Colchester, UK | 21 | Owned |
| Ranaich House | Stirling, UK | 14 | Owned |
| Redlands | County Durham, UK | 5 | Owned |
| Rhyd Alyn | Flintshire, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Rufford Lodge | Mansfield, UK | 2 | Owned |
| Sedgley House | Wolverhampton, UK | 20 | Owned |
| Sedgley Lodge | Wolverhampton, UK | 14 | Owned |
| Shear Meadow | Hemel Hempstead, UK | 4 | Owned |
| Sheffield Hospital | Sheffield, UK | 57 | Owned |
| Sherwood House | Mansfield, UK | 30 | Owned |
| Sherwood Lodge | Mansfield, UK | 17 | Owned |
| Sherwood Lodge Step Down | Mansfield, UK | 9 | Owned |
| The Squirrels | Hampshire, UK | 9 | Owned |
| St. Augustine's | Stoke on Trent, UK | 32 | Owned |
| St. Teilo House | Gwent, UK | 23 | Owned |
| St. Williams | Darlington, UK | 12 | Owned |
| Storthfields | Derby, UK | 22 | Owned |
| The Sycamores | Derbyshire, UK | 6 | Owned |
| The Sycamores No 4 & 5 | Derbyshire, UK | 4 | Owned |
| Tabley Nursing Home—Tabley | Tabley, UK | 51 | Leased |
| Thistle Care Home | Dundee, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Thornfield Grange | County Durham, UK | 9 | Owned |
| Thornfield House | Bradford, UK | 7 | Owned |
| Thors Park | Essex, UK | 14 | Owned |
| Toller Road | Leicestershire, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Trinity House | Galloway, UK | 13 | Owned |
| Tupwood Gate Nursing Home | Caterham, UK | 33 | Owned |
| River View | County Durham, UK | 6 | Owned |
| Vincent Court | Lancashire, UK | 5 | Owned |
| Walkern Lodge | Stevenage, UK | 4 | Owned |
| Wallace Hospital | Dundee, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Wast Hills | West Midlands, UK | 26 | Owned |
| Whorlton Hall | County Durham, UK | 17 | Owned |
| Willow House | West Midlands, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Woking Hospital | Woking, UK | 60 | Owned |
| United Kingdom: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Woodcross Street | Wolverhampton, UK | 8 | Owned |
| Woodrow House | Stockport, UK | 9 | Owned |
| Yew Trees | Essex, UK | 10 | Owned |
| Puerto Rico: | |||
| Name of Facility | Location | Number of Beds | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| First Hospital Panamericano—Cidra | Cidra, Puerto Rico | 165 | Owned |
| First Hospital Panamericano—San Juan | San Juan, Puerto Rico | 45 | Owned |
| First Hospital Panamericano—Ponce | Ponce, Puerto Rico | 30 | Owned |
Outpatient Behavioral Health Care Facilities
| United States: | ||
| Name of Facility | Location | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Arbour Counseling Services | Rockland, Massachusetts | Owned |
| Arbour Senior Care | Rockland, Massachusetts | Owned |
| Behavioral Educational Services | Riverdale, Florida | Leased |
| The Canyon at Santa Monica | Santa Monica, California | Leased |
| First Home Care (VA) | Portsmouth, Virginia | Leased |
| Foundations Atlanta | Atlanta, Georgia | Leased |
| Foundations Chicago | Chicago, Illinois | Leased |
| Foundations Detroit | Bingham Farms, Michigan | Leased |
| Foundations Los Angeles | Los Angeles, California | Leased |
| Foundations Memphis | Memphis, Tennessee | Leased |
| Foundations Nashville | Nashville, Tennessee | Leased |
| Foundations Roswell | Roswell, Georgia | Leased |
| Foundations San Diego | San Diego, California | Leased |
| Foundations San Francisco | San Francisco, California | Leased |
| Good Samaritan Counseling Center | Anchorage, Alaska | Owned |
| Michael’s House Outpatient | Palm Springs, California | Leased |
| The Pointe | Little Rock, Arkansas | Leased |
| St. Louis Behavioral Medicine Institute | St. Louis, Missouri | Owned |
| Talbott Recovery | Atlanta, Georgia | Owned |
| United Kingdom: | ||
| Name of Facility | Location | Real Property Ownership Interest |
| Long Eaton Day Services | Nottingham, UK | Owned |
| Sheffield Day Services | Sheffield, UK | Owned |
| Outpatient Centers and Surgical Hospital |
| Name of Facility | Location | Real Property Ownership Interest |
|---|---|---|
| Aiken Surgery Center | Aiken, South Carolina | Owned |
| Cancer Care Institute of Carolina | Aiken, South Carolina | Owned |
| Cornerstone Regional Hospital (4) | Edinburg, Texas | Leased |
| Manatee Diagnostic Center | Bradenton, Florida | Leased |
| Palms Westside Clinic ASC (6) | Royal Palm Beach, Florida | Leased |
| Quail Surgical and Pain Management Center (11) | Reno, Nevada | Leased |
| Temecula Valley Day Surgery and Pain Therapy Center (5) | Murrieta, California | Leased |
| (1) | We hold an 80% ownership interest in this facility through a general partnership interest in a limited partnership. The remaining 20% ownership interest is held by an unaffiliated third party which leases the property to the partnership for nominal rent. The term of the partnership is scheduled to expire in July, 2047, and we have five, five-year extension options. The term of the lease is coterminous with the partnership term with a fair market value rental of the property during the extension term. |
|---|
| (2) | Real property leased from Universal Health Realty Income Trust. |
|---|
| (3) | Edinburg Regional Medical Center/Children’s Hospital, McAllen Medical Center, McAllen Heart Hospital, South Texas Behavioral Health Center, STHS ER at Mission and STHS ER at Weslaco are consolidated under one license operating as the South Texas Health System. |
|---|
| (4) | We manage and own a noncontrolling interest of approximately 50% in the entity that operates this facility. |
|---|
| (5) | We manage and own a minority interest in an LLC that owns and operates this center. |
|---|
| (6) | We own a noncontrolling ownership interest of approximately 50% in the entity that operates this facility that is managed by a third-party. |
|---|
| (7) | We hold an 89% ownership interest in this facility through both general and limited partnership interests. The remaining 11% ownership interest is held by unaffiliated third parties. |
|---|
| (8) | Land of this facility is leased. |
|---|
| (9) | We manage and own a noncontrolling interest of 50% in this facility. The remaining 50% ownership interest is held by an unaffiliated third party. Land of this facility is leased from the unaffiliated third party member. |
|---|
| (10) | We manage and hold an 80% ownership interest in this facility. The remaining 20% ownership interest is held by an unaffiliated third party. |
|---|
| (11) | We hold a 51% ownership interest in this facility. The remaining 49% ownership interest is held by unaffiliated third parties. |
|---|
We own or lease medical office buildings adjoining some of our hospitals. We believe that the leases on the facilities, medical office buildings and other real estate leased or owned by us do not impose any material limitation on our operations. The aggregate lease payments on facilities leased by us were $82 million in 2019, $81 million in 2018 and $80 million in 2017.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
| --- | --- |
We operate in a highly regulated and litigious industry which subjects us to various claims and lawsuits in the ordinary course of business as well as regulatory proceedings and government investigations. These claims or suits include claims for damages for personal injuries, medical malpractice, commercial/contractual disputes, wrongful restriction of, or interference with, physicians’ staff privileges, and employment related claims. In addition, health care companies are subject to investigations and/or actions by various state and federal governmental agencies or those bringing claims on their behalf. Government action has increased with respect to investigations and/or allegations against healthcare providers concerning possible violations of fraud and abuse and false claims statutes as well as compliance with clinical and operational regulations. Currently, and from time to time, we and some of our facilities are subjected to inquiries in the form of subpoenas, Civil Investigative Demands, audits and other document requests from various federal and state agencies. These inquiries can lead to notices and/or actions including repayment obligations from state and federal government agencies associated with potential non-compliance with laws and regulations. Further, the federal False Claims Act allows private individuals to bring lawsuits (qui tam actions) against healthcare providers that submit claims for payments to the government. Various states have also adopted similar statutes. When such a claim is filed, the government will investigate the matter and decide if they are going to intervene in the pending case. These qui tam lawsuits are placed under seal by the court to comply with the False Claims Act’s requirements. If the government chooses not to intervene, the private individual(s) can proceed independently on behalf of the government. Health care providers that are found to violate the False Claims Act may be subject to substantial monetary fines/penalties as well as face potential exclusion from participating in government health care programs or be required to comply with Corporate Integrity Agreements as a condition of a settlement of a False Claims Act matter. In September 2014, the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that all qui tam cases will be shared with their Division to determine if a parallel criminal investigation should be opened. The DOJ has also announced an intention to pursue civil and criminal actions against individuals within a company as well as the corporate entity or entities. In addition, health care facilities are subject to monitoring by state and federal surveyors to ensure compliance with program Conditions of Participation. In the event a facility is found to be out of
compliance with a Condition of Participation and unable to remedy the alleged deficiency(s), the facility faces termination from the Medicare and Medicaid programs or compliance with a System Improvement Agreement to remedy deficiencies and ensure compliance.
The laws and regulations governing the healthcare industry are complex covering, among other things, government healthcare participation requirements, licensure, certification and accreditation, privacy of patient information, reimbursement for patient services as well as fraud and abuse compliance. These laws and regulations are constantly evolving and expanding. Further, the Legislation has added additional obligations on healthcare providers to report and refund overpayments by government healthcare programs and authorizes the suspension of Medicare and Medicaid payments “pending an investigation of a credible allegation of fraud.” We monitor our business and have developed an ethics and compliance program with respect to these complex laws, rules and regulations. Although we believe our policies, procedures and practices comply with government regulations, there is no assurance that we will not be faced with the sanctions referenced above which include fines, penalties and/or substantial damages, repayment obligations, payment suspensions, licensure revocation, and expulsion from government healthcare programs. Even if we were to ultimately prevail in any action brought against us or our facilities or in responding to any inquiry, such action or inquiry could have a material adverse effect on us.
Certain legal matters are described below:
Government Investigations:
UHS Behavioral Health
In February, 2013, the Office of Inspector General for the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“OIG”) served a subpoena requesting various documents from January, 2008 to the date of the subpoena directed at Universal Health Services, Inc. (“UHS”) concerning it and UHS of Delaware, Inc., and certain UHS owned behavioral health facilities including: Keys of Carolina, Old Vineyard Behavioral Health, The Meadows Psychiatric Center, Streamwood Behavioral Health, Hartgrove Hospital, Rock River Academy and Residential Treatment Center, Roxbury Treatment Center, Harbor Point Behavioral Health Center, f/k/a The Pines Residential Treatment Center, including the Crawford, Brighton and Kempsville campuses, Wekiva Springs Center and River Point Behavioral Health. Prior to receipt of this subpoena, some of these facilities had received independent subpoenas from state or federal agencies. Subsequent to the February 2013 subpoenas, some of the facilities above have received additional, specific subpoenas or other document and information requests. In addition to the OIG, the DOJ and various U.S. Attorneys’ and state Attorneys’ General Offices are also involved in this matter. Since February 2013, additional facilities have also received subpoenas and/or document and information requests or we have been notified are included in the omnibus investigation. Those facilities include: National Deaf Academy, Arbour-HRI Hospital, Behavioral Hospital of Bellaire, St. Simons By the Sea, Turning Point Care Center, Salt Lake Behavioral Health, Central Florida Behavioral Hospital, University Behavioral Center, Arbour Hospital, Arbour-Fuller Hospital, Pembroke Hospital, Westwood Lodge, Coastal Harbor Health System, Shadow Mountain Behavioral Health, Cedar Hills Hospital, Mayhill Hospital, Southern Crescent Behavioral Health (Anchor Hospital and Crescent Pines campuses), Valley Hospital (AZ), Peachford Behavioral Health System of Atlanta, University Behavioral Health of Denton, El Paso Behavioral Health System, Newport News Behavioral Health Center, The Hughes Center, Forest View Hospital and Havenwyck Hospital.
In October, 2013, we were advised that the DOJ’s Criminal Frauds Section had opened an investigation of River Point Behavioral Health and Wekiva Springs Center. We were subsequently notified that the Criminal Frauds section had opened investigations of National Deaf Academy, Hartgrove Hospital and UHS as a corporate entity. In April 2017, the DOJ’s Criminal Division issued a subpoena requesting documentation from Shadow Mountain Behavioral Health. In August 2017, Kempsville Center of Behavioral Health (a part of Harbor Point Behavioral Health previously identified above) received a subpoena requesting documentation. We have recently been advised that the investigations being conducted by the DOJ’s Criminal Frauds Section and corresponding U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, of UHS and the above referenced facilities, have been closed.
In April, 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) instituted a Medicare payment suspension at River Point Behavioral Health in accordance with federal regulations regarding suspension of payments during certain investigations. The Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA”) subsequently issued a Medicaid payment suspension for the facility. River Point Behavioral Health submitted a rebuttal statement disputing the basis of the suspension and requesting revocation of the suspension. Notwithstanding, CMS continued the payment suspension. River Point Behavioral Health provided additional information to CMS in an effort to obtain relief from the payment suspension but the Medicare suspension remains in effect. In June 2017, AHCA advised that while they were maintaining the suspension for dual eligible and cross-over Medicare beneficiaries, the Medicaid payment suspension was lifted effective June 27, 2017. From inception through December 31, 2019, the aggregate funds withheld from us in connection with the River Point Behavioral Health payment suspension amounted to approximately $8.6 million. We anticipate a resolution of the payment suspension will be part of the overall settlement agreement(s) to be drafted and finalized. Although the operating results of River Point Behavioral Health did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations during 2019, 2018 or 2017, the payment suspension has had a material adverse effect on the facility’s results of operations and financial condition.
The DOJ has advised us that the civil aspect of the coordinated investigation referenced above is a False Claims Act investigation focused on billings submitted to government payers in relation to services provided at those facilities. While there have
been various matters raised by DOJ during the pendency of this investigation, DOJ Civil has advised that the focus of their investigation is on medical necessity issues and billing for services not eligible for payment due to non-compliance with regulatory requirements relating to, among other things, admission eligibility, discharge decisions, length of stay and patient care issues. It is our understanding that the DOJ Criminal Fraud Section was investigating similar issues prior to the closure of their investigation. UHS denies any fraudulent billings were submitted to government payers.
In July 2019, we reached an agreement in principle with the DOJ’s Civil Division, and on behalf of various states’ attorneys general offices, to resolve the civil aspects of the government’s investigation of our behavioral health care facilities for $127 million subject to requisite approvals and preparation and execution of definitive settlement and related agreements. We are also negotiating a corporate integrity agreement with the Office of Inspector General for the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“OIG”) which we expect will be part of the overall settlement of this matter.
In connection with this agreement in principle, during 2019, we recorded a pre-tax increase of approximately $11 million to the reserve established in connection with the civil aspects of these matters (“DOJ Reserve”), which includes related fees and costs due to or on behalf of third-parties. The aggregate pre-tax DOJ Reserve amounted to $134 million as of December 31, 2019 and $123 million as of December 31, 2018 (including $102 million recorded during 2018).
In late August, 2019, we received the initial draft of the settlement agreement from the DOJ’s Civil Division. Negotiations regarding the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement continue. Based upon the terms and provisions included in the draft settlement agreement, and related subsequent discussions, our 2019 financial statements include an unfavorable provision for income taxes of approximately $6 million resulting from the net estimated federal and state income taxes due on the portion of the pre-tax DOJ Reserve that is estimated to be non-deductible for income tax purposes.
Since the agreement in principle with the DOJ’s Civil Division is subject to certain required approvals and negotiation and execution of definitive settlement agreements, as well as negotiation and execution of a corporate integrity agreement with the OIG, we can provide no assurance that definitive agreements will ultimately be finalized. We therefore can provide no assurance that final amounts paid in settlement or otherwise, or associated costs, or the income tax deductibility of such payments, will not differ materially from our established reserve and assumptions related to income tax deductibility.
DOJ investigation of Turning Point Hospital.
During the fourth quarter of 2018, we were notified that the DOJ Civil Division in conjunction with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia and the Georgia Attorney General’s Office opened an investigation of Turning Point Hospital in Moultrie, GA. The DOJ Civil Division has advised us that they are primarily investigating transportation and housing financial assistance provided to patients receiving treatment at the facility. The DOJ issued a civil investigative demand to the facility requesting various documents and other information. In September, 2019, we reached a settlement in principle of this matter pending negotiation, finalization and execution of definitive settlement agreements. As of December 31, 2019, our financial statements include an estimated reserve in connection with the potential settlement of this matter, which did not have material impact on our results of operations and financial condition.
Litigation:
U.S. ex rel Escobar v. Universal Health Services, Inc. et.al.
This is a False Claims Act case filed against Universal Health Services, Inc., UHS of Delaware, Inc. and HRI Clinics, Inc. d/b/a Arbour Counseling Services in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. This qui tam action primarily alleges that Arbour Counseling Services failed to appropriately supervise certain clinical providers in contravention of regulatory requirements and the submission of claims to Medicaid were subsequently improper. Relators make other claims of improper billing to Medicaid associated with alleged failures of Arbour Counseling to comply with state regulations. The U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office initially declined to intervene. UHS filed a motion to dismiss and the trial court originally granted the motion dismissing the case. The First Circuit Court of Appeals (“First Circuit”) reversed the trial court’s dismissal of the case. The United States Supreme Court subsequently vacated the First Circuit’s opinion and remanded the case for further consideration under the new legal standards established by the Supreme Court for False Claims Act cases. During the 4th quarter of 2016, the First Circuit issued a revised opinion upholding their reversal of the trial court’s dismissal. The case was then remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. In January 2017, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office advised of the potential for intervention in the case. The Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office subsequently filed its motion to intervene which was granted and, in April 2017, filed their Complaint in Intervention. We have defended this case vigorously. This matter is included in the above-mentioned agreement in principle reached with the DOJ’s Civil Division, and on behalf of various states’ attorneys general offices, to resolve the civil aspects of the government’s investigation of our behavioral health care facilities, subject to requisite approvals and preparation and execution of definitive settlement and related agreements.
Shareholder Class Action
In December 2016 a purported shareholder class action lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against UHS and certain UHS officers alleging violations of the federal securities laws. The case was originally filed as
Heed v. Universal Health Services, Inc. et. al. (Case No. 2:16-CV-09499-PSG-JC). The court subsequently appointed Teamsters Local 456 Pension Fund and Teamsters Local 456 Annuity Fund to serve as lead plaintiffs. The case has been transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the style of the case has been changed to Teamsters Local 456 Pension Fund, et. al. v. Universal Health Services, Inc. et. al. (Case No. 2:17-CV-02817-LS). In September, 2017, Teamsters Local 456 Pension Fund filed an amended complaint. The amended class action complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws relating to disclosures made in public filings associated with alleged practices and operations at our behavioral health facilities. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages for shareholders during the defined class period as a result of the decrease in share price following various public disclosures or reports. In December, 2017, we filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. In August, 2019, the court granted our motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs have filed a motion with the court seeking leave to file a second amended complaint. Should the court deny plaintiffs’ motion, we anticipate an appeal of the dismissal of the case. We deny liability and intend to defend ourselves vigorously. At this time, we are uncertain as to potential liability or financial exposure, if any, which may be associated with this matter.
Shareholder Derivative Cases
In March 2017, a shareholder derivative suit was filed by plaintiff David Heed in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County. A notice of removal to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania was filed (Case No. 2:17-cv-01476-LS). Plaintiff filed a motion to remand. In December 2017, the Court denied plaintiff’s motion to remand and has retained the case in federal court. In May, June and July 2017, additional shareholder derivative suits were filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs in those cases are: Central Laborers’ Pension Fund (Case No. 17-cv-02187-LS); Firemen’s Retirement System of St. Louis (Case No. 17—cv-02317-LS); Waterford Township Police & Fire Retirement System (Case No. 17-cv-02595-LS); and Amalgamated Bank Longview Funds (Case No. 17-cv-03404-LS). The Fireman’s Retirement System case has since been voluntarily dismissed. The federal court has consolidated all of the cases pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and has appointed co-lead plaintiffs and co-lead counsel. Lead Plaintiffs have filed a consolidated, amended complaint. We have filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. In addition, a shareholder derivative case was filed in Chancery Court in Delaware by the Delaware County Employees’ Retirement Fund (Case No. 2017-0475-JTL). In December 2017, the Chancery Court stayed this case pending resolution of other contemporaneous matters. Each of these cases have named certain current and former members of the Board of Directors individually and certain officers of Universal Health Services, Inc. as defendants. UHS has also been named as a nominal defendant in these cases. The derivative cases make substantially similar allegations and claims as the shareholder class action relating to practices at our behavioral health facilities and board and corporate oversight of these facilities as well as claims relating to the stock trading by the individual defendants and company repurchase of shares during the relevant time period. The cases make claims of breaches of fiduciary duties by the named board members and officers; alleged violations of federal securities laws; and common law causes of action against the individual defendants including unjust enrichment, corporate waste, abuse of control, constructive fraud and gross mismanagement. The cases seek monetary damages allegedly incurred by the company; restitution and disgorgement of profits, benefits and other compensation from the individual defendants and various forms of equitable relief relating to corporate governance matters. In August, 2019, the court granted our motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs have filed a motion with the court seeking leave to file a second amended complaint. Should the court deny plaintiffs’ motion, we anticipate an appeal of the dismissal of the case. The defendants deny liability and intend to defend these cases vigorously. At this time, we are uncertain as to potential liability or financial exposure, if any, which may be associated with these matters.
The George Washington University v. Universal Health Services, Inc., et. al.
In December 2019, The George Washington University (“University”) filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia against Universal Health Services, Inc. as well as certain subsidiaries and individuals associated with the ownership and management of The George Washington University Hospital (“GW Hospital”) in Washington, D.C. (case No. 2019 CA 008019 B). The lawsuit claims that UHS failed to provide sufficient financial compensation to the University under the terms of various agreements entered into in 1997 between the University and UHS for the joint venture ownership of GW Hospital. The lawsuit includes claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment. We deny liability and intend to defend this matter vigorously. At this time, we are uncertain as to potential liability or financial exposure, if any, which may be associated with this matter.
Disproportionate Share Hospital Payment Matter:
In late September, 2015, many hospitals in Pennsylvania, including certain of our behavioral health care hospitals located in the state, received letters from the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services (the “Department”) demanding repayment of allegedly excess Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital payments (“DSH”), primarily consisting of managed care payments characterized as DSH payments, for the federal fiscal year (“FFY”) 2011 amounting to approximately $4 million in the aggregate. Since that time, certain of our behavioral health care hospitals in Pennsylvania have received similar requests for repayment for alleged DSH overpayments for FFYs 2012 through 2015. For FFY 2012, the claimed overpayment amounts to approximately $4 million. For FFY 2013, the claimed overpayments were initially approximately $7 million but have since been reduced to approximately $2 million due to a change in the Department’s calculations of the hospital specific DSH upper payment limit. For FFY 2014, the claimed overpayments were approximately $7 million and for FFY 2015, the claimed overpayments were approximately $5 million. We filed administrative appeals for all of our facilities contesting the recoupment efforts for FFYs 2011 through 2015 as we believe the Department’s calculation methodology is inaccurate and conflicts with applicable federal and state laws and regulations. The
Department has agreed to postpone the recoupment of the state’s share of the DSH payments until all hospital appeals are resolved but started recoupment of the federal share. We understand that starting in FFY 2016, the first full fiscal year after the January 1, 2015 effective date of Medicaid expansion in Pennsylvania, the Department will no longer characterize managed care payments received by the hospitals as DSH payments. We can provide no assurance that we will ultimately be successful in our legal and administrative appeals related to the Department’s repayment demands. If our legal and administrative appeals are unsuccessful, our future consolidated results of operations and financial condition could be adversely impacted by these repayments.
Other Matters:
Various other suits, claims and investigations, including government subpoenas, arising against, or issued to, us are pending and additional such matters may arise in the future. Management will consider additional disclosure from time to time to the extent it believes such matters may be or become material. The outcome of any current or future litigation or governmental or internal investigations, including the matters described above, cannot be accurately predicted, nor can we predict any resulting penalties, fines or other sanctions that may be imposed at the discretion of federal or state regulatory authorities. We record accruals for such contingencies to the extent that we conclude it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. No estimate of the possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued, if any, can be made at this time regarding the matters described above or that are otherwise pending because the inherently unpredictable nature of legal proceedings may be exacerbated by various factors, including, but not limited to: (i) the damages sought in the proceedings are unsubstantiated or indeterminate; (ii) discovery is not complete; (iii) the matter is in its early stages; (iv) the matters present legal uncertainties; (v) there are significant facts in dispute; (vi) there are a large number of parties, or; (vii) there is a wide range of potential outcomes. It is possible that the outcome of these matters could have a material adverse impact on our future results of operations, financial position, cash flows and, potentially, our reputation.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
| --- | --- |
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
| --- | --- |
Our Class B Common Stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol UHS. Shares of our Class A, Class C and Class D Common Stock are not traded in any public market, but are each convertible into shares of our Class B Common Stock on a share-for-share basis.
The number of stockholders of record as of January 31, 2020, were as follows:
| Class A Common | 17 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class B Common | 818 | |||
| Class C Common | 1 | |||
| Class D Common | 95 |
Stock Repurchase Programs
In July, 2019, our Board of Directors authorized a $1.0 billion increase to our stock repurchase program, which increased the aggregate authorization to $2.7 billion from the previous $1.7 billion authorization approved in various increments since 2014. Pursuant to this program, which had an aggregate available repurchase authorization of $756.1 million as of December 31, 2019, shares of our Class B Common Stock may be repurchased, from time to time as conditions allow, on the open market or in negotiated private transactions. There is no expiration date for our stock repurchase programs.
As reflected below, during the three-month period ended December 31, 2019, we have repurchased approximately 1.3 million shares at an aggregate cost of approximately $181.2 million (approximately $141 per share) pursuant to the terms of our stock repurchase program. In addition, 9,377 shares were repurchased in connection with income tax withholding obligations resulting from the exercise of stock options and the vesting of restricted stock grants.
During the period of October 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019, we repurchased the following shares:
| Additional Dollars Authorized For Repurchase (in thousands) | Total number of shares purchased | Total number of shares cancelled | Average price paid per share for forfeited restricted shares | Total Number of shares purchased as part of publicly announced programs | Average price paid per share for shares purchased as part of publicly announced program | Aggregate purchase price paid (in thousands) | Maximum number of dollars that may yet be purchased under the program (in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| October, 2019 | — | 400,469 | 3,589 | $ | 0.01 | 400,000 | $ | 138.38 | $ | 55,353 | $ | 881,949 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| November, 2019 | — | 338,970 | 863 | $ | 0.01 | 337,521 | $ | 139.90 | 47,220 | $ | 834,729 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| December, 2019 | — | 557,459 | 1,535 | $ | 0.01 | 550,000 | $ | 142.92 | $ | 78,606 | $ | 756,123 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total October through December | $ | - | 1,296,898 | 5,987 | $ | 0.01 | 1,287,521 | $ | 140.72 | $ | 181,179 |
Dividends
We have a history of paying quarterly cash dividends to our shareholders and it is our intention at this time to pay comparable dividends in the future. Our Credit Agreement contains covenants that include limitations on, among other things, dividends and stock repurchases (see below in Capital Resources-Credit Facilities and Outstanding Debt Securities).
Equity Compensation
Refer to Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters, of this report for information regarding securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans.
Stock Price Performance Graph
The following graph compares the cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return on the stock included in the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index and a Peer Group Index during the five year period ended December 31, 2019.
The graph assumes an investment of $100 made in our common stock and each Index as of January 1, 2015 and has been weighted based on market capitalization. Note that our common stock price performance shown below should not be viewed as being indicative of future performance.
Companies in the peer group, which consist of companies in the S&P 500 Index or S&P MidCap 400 Index are as follows: Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc., Community Health Systems, Inc., HCA Healthcare, Inc., LifePoint Health, Inc. (included until November, 2018, when it was acquired by Apollo Management) and Tenet Healthcare Corporation.
![]() | ||||||||
| Company Name / Index | 2014 Base | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Universal Health Services, Inc. | $ | 100.00 | $ | 107.74 | $ | 96.24 | $ | 102.90 | $ | 106.16 | $ | 131.23 | ||||||||||||
| S&P 500 Index | $ | 100.00 | $ | 101.38 | $ | 113.51 | $ | 138.29 | $ | 132.23 | $ | 173.86 | ||||||||||||
| Peer Group | $ | 100.00 | $ | 84.91 | $ | 76.50 | $ | 86.85 | $ | 117.80 | $ | 146.47 |
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
| --- | --- |
The following table contains our selected financial data for, or as of the end of, each of the five years ended December 31, 2019. You should read this table in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this report and in Part II, Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
| Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | ||||||||||||||||
| Summary of Operations (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net revenues | $ | 11,378,259 | $ | 10,772,278 | $ | 10,409,865 | $ | 9,766,210 | $ | 9,043,451 | ||||||||||
| Income before income taxes | $ | 1,066,337 | $ | 1,034,525 | $ | 1,135,009 | $ | 1,156,358 | $ | 1,145,901 | ||||||||||
| Net income attributable to UHS | $ | 814,854 | $ | 779,705 | $ | 752,303 | $ | 702,409 | $ | 680,528 | ||||||||||
| Net margin | 7.2 | % | 7.2 | % | 7.2 | % | 7.2 | % | 7.5 | % | ||||||||||
| Return on average equity | 15.0 | % | 14.6 | % | 15.5 | % | 16.0 | % | 16.6 | % | ||||||||||
| Financial Data (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash provided by operating activities | $ | 1,438,469 | $ | 1,274,742 | $ | 1,247,585 | $ | 1,254,509 | $ | 1,045,310 | ||||||||||
| Capital expenditures, net (1) | $ | 634,095 | $ | 664,962 | $ | 557,506 | $ | 519,939 | $ | 379,321 | ||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 11,668,250 | $ | 11,265,480 | $ | 10,761,828 | $ | 10,317,802 | $ | 9,615,444 | ||||||||||
| Current maturities of long-term debt | $ | 87,550 | $ | 63,446 | $ | 545,619 | $ | 105,895 | $ | 62,722 | ||||||||||
| Long-term debt | $ | 3,896,577 | $ | 3,935,187 | $ | 3,494,390 | $ | 4,030,230 | $ | 3,368,634 | ||||||||||
| UHS’s common stockholders’ equity | $ | 5,504,105 | $ | 5,389,262 | $ | 4,989,514 | $ | 4,533,220 | $ | 4,249,647 | ||||||||||
| Percentage of total debt to total capitalization | 42 | % | 43 | % | 45 | % | 48 | % | 45 | % | ||||||||||
| Operating Data—Acute Care Hospitals (2) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Average licensed beds | 6,379 | 6,232 | 6,127 | 5,934 | 5,832 | |||||||||||||||
| Average available beds | 6,205 | 6,056 | 5,954 | 5,759 | 5,656 | |||||||||||||||
| Inpatient admissions | 317,983 | 303,985 | 297,390 | 274,074 | 261,727 | |||||||||||||||
| Average length of patient stay | 4.6 | 4.5 | 4.4 | 4.6 | 4.7 | |||||||||||||||
| Patient days | 1,451,847 | 1,376,988 | 1,312,265 | 1,251,511 | 1,218,969 | |||||||||||||||
| Occupancy rate for licensed beds | 62 | % | 61 | % | 59 | % | 58 | % | 57 | % | ||||||||||
| Occupancy rate for available beds | 64 | % | 62 | % | 60 | % | 59 | % | 59 | % | ||||||||||
| Operating Data—Behavioral Health Facilities (2) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Average licensed beds | 23,812 | 23,509 | 23,151 | 21,829 | 21,202 | |||||||||||||||
| Average available beds | 23,711 | 23,425 | 23,068 | 21,744 | 21,116 | |||||||||||||||
| Inpatient admissions | 488,367 | 482,658 | 467,822 | 456,052 | 447,007 | |||||||||||||||
| Average length of patient stay | 13.3 | 13.3 | 13.6 | 13.2 | 13.1 | |||||||||||||||
| Patient days | 6,487,707 | 6,418,334 | 6,381,756 | 6,004,066 | 5,835,134 | |||||||||||||||
| Occupancy rate for licensed beds | 75 | % | 75 | % | 76 | % | 75 | % | 75 | % | ||||||||||
| Occupancy rate for available beds | 75 | % | 75 | % | 76 | % | 75 | % | 76 | % | ||||||||||
| Per Share Data | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net income attributable to UHS—basic | $ | 9.16 | $ | 8.35 | $ | 7.86 | $ | 7.22 | $ | 6.89 | ||||||||||
| Net income attributable to UHS—diluted | $ | 9.13 | $ | 8.31 | $ | 7.81 | $ | 7.14 | $ | 6.76 | ||||||||||
| Dividends declared | $ | 0.60 | $ | 0.40 | $ | 0.40 | $ | 0.40 | $ | 0.40 | ||||||||||
| Other Information (in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Weighted average number of shares outstanding—basic | 88,762 | 93,276 | 95,652 | 97,208 | 98,797 | |||||||||||||||
| Weighted average number of shares and share equivalents outstanding—diluted | 89,040 | 93,750 | 96,325 | 98,380 | 100,694 |
| (1) | Amounts exclude non-cash capital lease obligations, if any. |
|---|
| (2) | Excludes statistical information related to divested facilities. |
|---|
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
| --- | --- |
Overview
Our principal business is owning and operating, through our subsidiaries, acute care hospitals and outpatient facilities and behavioral health care facilities.
As of February 26, 2020, we owned and/or operated 354 inpatient facilities and 42 outpatient and other facilities including the following located in 37 states, Washington, D.C., the United Kingdom and Puerto Rico:
Acute care facilities located in the U.S.:
| • | 26 inpatient acute care hospitals; |
|---|
| • | 14 free-standing emergency departments, and; |
|---|
| • | 6 outpatient centers & 1 surgical hospital. |
|---|
Behavioral health care facilities (328 inpatient facilities and 21 outpatient facilities):
Located in the U.S.:
| • | 185 inpatient behavioral health care facilities, and; |
|---|
| • | 19 outpatient behavioral health care facilities. |
|---|
Located in the U.K.:
| • | 140 inpatient behavioral health care facilities, and; |
|---|
| • | 2 outpatient behavioral health care facilities. |
|---|
Located in Puerto Rico:
| • | 3 inpatient behavioral health care facilities. |
|---|
As a percentage of our consolidated net revenues, net revenues from our acute care hospitals, outpatient facilities and commercial health insurer accounted for 54% during 2019 and 53% during each of 2018 and 2017. Net revenues from our behavioral health care facilities and commercial health insurer accounted for 46% of our consolidated net revenues during 2019 and 47% during each of 2018 and 2017.
Our behavioral health care facilities located in the U.K. generated net revenues of approximately $554 million in 2019, $505 million in 2018 and $429 million in 2017. Total assets at our U.K. behavioral health care facilities were approximately $1.270 billion as of December 31, 2019, $1.224 billion as of December 31, 2018 and $1.098 billion as of December 31, 2017.
Services provided by our hospitals include general and specialty surgery, internal medicine, obstetrics, emergency room care, radiology, oncology, diagnostic care, coronary care, pediatric services, pharmacy services and/or behavioral health services. We provide capital resources as well as a variety of management services to our facilities, including central purchasing, information services, finance and control systems, facilities planning, physician recruitment services, administrative personnel management, marketing and public relations.
Forward-Looking Statements and Risk Factors
You should carefully review the information contained in this Annual Report, and should particularly consider any risk factors that we set forth in this Annual Report and in other reports or documents that we file from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). In this Annual Report, we state our beliefs of future events and of our future financial performance. This Annual Report contains “forward-looking statements” that reflect our current estimates, expectations and projections about our future results, performance, prospects and opportunities. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, the information concerning our possible future results of operations, business and growth strategies, financing plans, expectations that regulatory developments or other matters will not have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition, our competitive position and the effects of competition, the projected growth of the industry in which we operate, and the benefits and synergies to be obtained from our completed and any future acquisitions, and statements of our goals and objectives, and other similar expressions concerning matters that are not historical facts. Words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “predicts,” “potential,” “continue,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “future,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “estimates,” “appears,” “projects” and similar expressions, as well as statements in future tense, identify forward-looking statements. In evaluating those statements, you should specifically consider various factors, including the risks related to healthcare industry trends and those set forth herein in Item 1A. Risk Factors. Those factors may cause our actual results to differ materially from any of our forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements should not be read as a guarantee of future performance or results, and will not necessarily be accurate indications of the times at, or by which, such performance or results will be achieved. Forward-looking information is based on information available at the time and/or our good faith belief with respect to future events, and is subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those expressed in the statements. Such factors include, among other things, the following:
| • | our ability to comply with the existing laws and government regulations, and/or changes in laws and government regulations; |
|---|
| | • | an increasing number of legislative initiatives have been passed into law that may result in major changes in the health care delivery system on a national or state level. Legislation has already been enacted that has eliminated the penalty for failing to maintain health coverage that was part of the original Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the “Legislation”). President Trump has already taken executive actions: (i) requiring all federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the Legislation to “exercise all authority and discretion available to them to waiver, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay” parts of the Legislation that place “unwarranted economic and regulatory burdens” on states, individuals or health care providers; (ii) the issuance of a final rule in June, 2018 by the Department of Labor to enable the formation of association health plans that would be exempt from certain Legislation requirements such as the provision of essential health benefits; (iii) the issuance of a final rule in August, 2018 by the Department of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services to expand the availability of short-term, limited duration health insurance, (iv) eliminating cost-sharing reduction payments to insurers that would otherwise offset deductibles and other out-of-pocket expenses for health plan enrollees at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level; (v) relaxing requirements for state innovation waivers that could reduce enrollment in the individual and small group markets and lead to additional enrollment in short-term, limited duration insurance and association health plans; (vi) the issuance of a final rule in June, 2019 by the Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services that would incentivize the use of health reimbursement arrangements by employers to permit employees to purchase health insurance in the individual market, and; (vii) directing the issuance of federal rulemaking by executive agencies to increase transparency of healthcare price and quality information. The uncertainty resulting from these Executive Branch policies has led to reduced Exchange enrollment in 2018, 2019 and 2020 and is expected to further worsen the individual and small group market risk pools in future years. It is also anticipated that these and future policies may create additional cost and reimbursement pressures on hospitals, including ours. In addition, while attempts to repeal the entirety of the Legislation have not been successful to date, a key provision of the Legislation was repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and on December 14, 2018, a federal U.S. District Court Judge in Texas ruled the entire Legislation is unconstitutional. That ruling was stayed and has been appealed. On December 18, 2019, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
Showing the first 8K of 202K characters. Open the full section
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
| --- | --- |
We manage our ratio of fixed and floating rate debt with the objective of achieving a mix that management believes is appropriate. To manage this risk in a cost-effective manner, we, from time to time, enter into interest rate swap agreements in which we agree to exchange various combinations of fixed and/or variable interest rates based on agreed upon notional amounts. We account for our derivative and hedging activities using the Financial Accounting Standard Board’s guidance which requires all derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, to be carried at fair value on the balance sheet. For derivative transactions designated as hedges, we formally document all relationships between the hedging instrument and the related hedged item, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking each hedge transaction.
Derivative instruments designated in a hedge relationship to mitigate exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow hedges. Cash flow hedges are accounted for by recording the fair value of the derivative instrument on the balance sheet as either an asset or liability, with a corresponding amount recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) within shareholders’ equity. Amounts are reclassified from AOCI to the income statement in the period or periods the hedged transaction affects earnings. From time to time, we use interest rate derivatives in our cash flow hedge transactions. Such derivatives are designed to be highly effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows related to the hedged liability.
For hedge transactions that do not qualify for the short-cut method, at the hedge’s inception and on a regular basis thereafter, a formal assessment is performed to determine whether changes in the fair values or cash flows of the derivative instruments have been highly effective in offsetting changes in cash flows of the hedged items and whether they are expected to be highly effective in the future.
The fair value of interest rate swap agreements approximates the amount at which they could be settled, based on estimates obtained from the counterparties. We assess the effectiveness of our hedge instruments on a quarterly basis. We performed periodic assessments of the cash flow hedge instruments during 2019 and 2018 and determined the hedges to be highly effective. Although we do not anticipate nonperformance by our counterparties to interest rate swap agreements, the counterparties expose us to credit risk in the event of nonperformance. We do not hold or issue derivative financial instruments for trading purposes.
During 2015, we entered into nine forward starting interest rate swaps whereby we paid a fixed rate on a total notional amount of $1.0 billion and received one-month LIBOR. The average fixed rate payable on these swaps, all of which matured on April 15, 2019, was 1.31%.
Although we can provide no assurance that we will ultimately do so, we are currently monitoring the interest rate environment and evaluating the terms of potential replacement interest rate swaps that we may enter into for a large portion, or potentially all, of the $1 billion total notional amount that expired on April 15, 2019.
The table below presents information about our long-term financial instruments that are sensitive to changes in interest rates as of December 31, 2019. For debt obligations, the table presents principal cash flows and related weighted-average interest rates by contractual maturity dates.
Maturity Date, Fiscal Year Ending December 31
(dollar amounts in thousands)
| 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | Thereafter | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-term debt: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fixed rate: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Debt | $ | 1,650 | $ | 1,696 | $ | 700,266 | $ | 2,475 | $ | 2,823 | $ | 408,005 | $ | 1,116,915 | ||||||||||||||
| Average interest rates | 4.9 | % | 4.9 | % | 4.9 | % | 5.2 | % | 5.1 | % | 4.7 | % | 5.0 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Variable rate: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Debt | $ | 85,900 | $ | 454,659 | 105,000 | 1,751,150 | 5,000 | 465,503 | $ | 2,867,212 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Average interest rates | 3.2 | % | 3.2 | % | 3.2 | % | 3.2 | % | 3.6 | % | 3.6 | % | 3.3 | % |
As calculated based upon our variable rate debt outstanding as of December 31, 2019 that is subject to interest rate fluctuations, each 1% change in interest rates would impact our pre-tax income by approximately $29 million.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
| --- | --- |
Our Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Income, Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity, Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income, together with the reports of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, independent registered public accounting firm, are included elsewhere herein. Reference is made to the “Index to Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedule.”
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
| --- | --- |
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
| --- | --- |
As of December 31, 2019, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), we performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) or Rule 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Based on this evaluation, the CEO and CFO have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that material information is recorded, processed, summarized and reported by management on a timely basis in order to comply with our disclosure obligations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the SEC rules thereunder.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
On January 1, 2019, we adopted ASC 842. In connection with our adoption of ASC 842 we did implement changes to our internal controls relating to leases. These changes included the development of new policies, enhanced contract review requirements and other ongoing monitoring activities. These controls were designed to provide assurance at a reasonable level of the fair presentation of our condensed consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
There have been no other changes in our internal control over financial reporting or in other factors during the fourth quarter of 2019 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate system of internal control over our financial reporting. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, management has conducted an assessment, including testing, using the criteria on Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013), issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Our system of internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections
of any evaluation of effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Based on its assessment, management has concluded that we maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013), issued by the COSO. The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm as stated in its report which appears herein.
Item 9B. Other Information
| --- | --- |
None.
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
| --- | --- |
There is hereby incorporated by reference the information to appear under the captions “Election of Directors”, “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” and “Corporate Governance” in our Proxy Statement, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2019. See also “Executive Officers of the Registrant” appearing in Item 1 hereof.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
| --- | --- |
There is hereby incorporated by reference the information to appear under the caption “Executive Compensation” in our Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2019.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
| --- | --- |
There is hereby incorporated by reference the information to appear under the caption “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” and “Executive Compensation” in our Proxy Statement, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2019.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
| --- | --- |
There is hereby incorporated by reference the information to appear under the captions “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Corporate Governance” in our Proxy Statement, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2019.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
| --- | --- |
There is hereby incorporated by reference the information to appear under the caption “Relationship with Independent Auditors” in our Proxy Statement, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2019.
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
| --- | --- |
(a) Documents filed as part of this report:
(1) Financial Statements:
See “Index to Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedule.”
(2) Financial Statement Schedules:
See “Index to Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedule.”
(3) Exhibits:
*Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
Exhibits, other than those incorporated by reference, have been included in copies of this Annual Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Stockholders of the Company will be provided with copies of those exhibits upon written request to the Company.
Item 16. Form 10-K Summary
| --- | --- |
None.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
| UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC. | ||
| By: | /s/ ALAN B. MILLER | |
| Alan B. Miller Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |
February 26, 2020
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
| Signatures | Title | Date | |||||||||
| /s/ ALAN B. MILLER Alan B. Miller | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ MARC D. MILLER Marc D. Miller | Director and President | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ LAWRENCE S. GIBBS Lawrence S. Gibbs | Director | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ ROBERT H.HOTZ Robert H. Hotz | Director | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ EILEEN C. MCDONNELL Eileen C. McDonnell | Director | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ WARREN J. NIMETZ Warren J. Nimetz | Director | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ ELLIOTT J. SUSSMAN M.D. Elliot J. Sussman M.D. | Director | February 26, 2020 | |||||||||
| /s/ STEVE FILTON Steve Filton | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) | February 26, 2020 |
UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC.
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULE
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Universal Health Services, Inc.
Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We have audited the consolidated financial statements, including the related notes and financial statement schedule, of Universal Health Services, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) as listed in the accompanying index (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). We also have audited the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the COSO.
Change in Accounting Principle
As discussed in Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company changed the manner in which it accounts for leases in 2019.
Basis for Opinions
The Company's management is responsible for these consolidated financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.
Our audits of the consolidated financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in acco
Showing the first 8K of 223K characters. Open the full section
