sv1
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 7, 2010
Registration
No. 333-
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
HCA Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
8062
(Primary Standard
Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
75-2497104
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
One Park Plaza
Nashville, Tennessee
37203
(615) 344-9551
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number, including area code, of registrants
principal executive offices)
John M. Franck
II, Esq.
HCA Inc.
Vice President and Corporate
Secretary
One Park Plaza
Nashville, Tennessee
37203
(615) 344-9551
(Name, address, including zip
code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for
service)
With copies to:
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph H. Kaufman, Esq.
|
|
J. Page Davidson, Esq.
|
|
James J. Clark, Esq.
|
John C. Ericson, Esq.
|
|
Ryan D. Thomas, Esq.
|
|
Jonathan A. Schaffzin, Esq.
|
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
|
|
Bass, Berry & Sims PLC
|
|
William J. Miller, Esq.
|
425 Lexington Avenue
|
|
150 Third Avenue South, Suite 2800
|
|
Cahill Gordon & Reindel
llp
|
New York, New York
10017-3954
|
|
Nashville, Tennessee 37201-2017
|
|
Eighty Pine Street
|
(212) 455-2000
|
|
(615) 742-6200
|
|
New York, New York
10005-1702
|
|
|
|
|
(212) 701-3000
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after this
Registration Statement is declared effective.
If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following
box. o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
please check the following box and list the Securities Act
registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer o
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
Non-accelerated
filer þ
|
Smaller reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company)
CALCULATION
OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
|
Title of Each Class of
|
|
|
Aggregate Offering
|
|
|
Amount of
|
Securities to be Registered
|
|
|
Price(1)(2)
|
|
|
Registration Fee
|
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share
|
|
|
$
|
4,600,000,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
327,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Includes shares to be sold upon
exercise of the underwriters option. See
Underwriting.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Estimated solely for the purpose of
calculating the amount of the registration fee pursuant to
Rule 457(o) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
|
The registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until the
Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as
the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said
Section 8(a), may determine.
The
information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and
may be changed. We and the selling stockholders may not sell
these securities until the registration statement filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This
preliminary prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities,
and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any
jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.
|
SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED
MAY 7, 2010
PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS
HCA Inc.
Shares
Common
Stock
$
per share
We are
offering shares
of our common stock, and the selling stockholders named in this
prospectus are
offering shares
of our common stock. We will not receive any proceeds from the
sale of the shares by the selling stockholders.
This is an initial public offering of our common stock. Since
November 2006 and prior to this offering, there has been no
public market for our common stock. We currently expect the
initial public offering price will be between
$ and
$ per share. We intend to apply to
list the common stock on the New York Stock Exchange under the
symbol HCA.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
See Risk Factors beginning on page 14 of this
prospectus to read about factors you should consider before
buying shares of our common stock.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this
prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
Total
|
|
Initial price to public
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Underwriting discount
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to the selling stockholders
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
To the extent that the underwriters sell more
than shares
of common stock, the underwriters have the option to purchase up
to an
additional shares
from us and the selling stockholders at the initial price to the
public less the underwriting discount.
The underwriters expect to deliver the shares against payment in
New York, New York on or
about ,
2010.
Joint
Book-Running Managers
|
|
|
BofA
Merrill Lynch |
Citi |
J.P. Morgan |
Prospectus
dated ,
2010.
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus or in any free writing prospectus that we authorize
be delivered to you. Neither we nor the underwriters have
authorized anyone to provide you with additional or different
information. If anyone provides you with additional, different
or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. We and
the underwriters are not making an offer to sell these
securities in any jurisdiction where an offer or sale is not
permitted. You should assume that the information in this
prospectus is accurate only as of the date on the front cover,
regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any
sale of our common stock. Our business, prospects, financial
condition and results of operations may have changed since that
date.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
|
F-1
|
|
EX-23.2 |
MARKET,
RANKING AND OTHER INDUSTRY DATA
The data included in this prospectus regarding markets and
ranking, including the size of certain markets and our position
and the position of our competitors within these markets, are
based on reports of government agencies or published industry
sources and estimates based on our managements knowledge
and experience in the markets in which we operate. These
estimates have been based on information obtained from our trade
and business organizations and other contacts in the markets in
which we operate. We believe these estimates to be accurate as
of the date of this prospectus. However, this information may
prove to be inaccurate because of the method by which we
obtained some of the data for the estimates or because this
information cannot always be verified with complete certainty
due to the limits on the availability and reliability of raw
data, the voluntary nature of the data gathering process and
other limitations and uncertainties. As a result, you should be
aware that market, ranking and other similar industry data
included in this prospectus, and estimates and beliefs based on
that data, may not be reliable. We cannot guarantee the accuracy
or completeness of any such information contained in this
prospectus.
i
PROSPECTUS
SUMMARY
This summary highlights significant aspects of our business
and this offering, but it is not complete and does not contain
all of the information you should consider before making your
investment decision. You should carefully read the entire
prospectus, including the information presented under the
section entitled Risk Factors and the financial
statements and related notes, before making an investment
decision. This summary contains forward-looking statements that
involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ
significantly from the results discussed in the forward-looking
statements as a result of certain factors, including those set
forth in Risk Factors and Forward-Looking
Statements.
The terms Company, HCA,
we, our or us, as used
herein, refer to HCA Inc. and its affiliates unless otherwise
stated or indicated by context. The term affiliates
means direct and indirect subsidiaries of HCA Inc. and
partnerships and joint ventures in which such subsidiaries are
partners. The terms facilities or
hospitals refer to entities owned and operated by
affiliates of HCA and the term employees refers to
employees of affiliates of HCA.
Our
Company
We are the largest non-governmental hospital operator in the
U.S. and a leading comprehensive, integrated provider of
health care and related services. We provide these services
through a network of acute care hospitals, outpatient
facilities, clinics and other patient care delivery settings. As
of March 31, 2010, we operated a diversified portfolio of
162 hospitals (with approximately 41,000 beds) and 106
freestanding surgery centers across 20 states throughout
the U.S. and in England. As a result of our efforts to
establish significant market share in large and growing urban
markets with attractive demographic and economic profiles, we
currently have a substantial market presence in 14 of the top 25
fastest growing markets in the U.S. and currently maintain the
first or second position, based on inpatient admissions, in many
of our key markets. We believe our ability to successfully
position and grow our assets in attractive markets and execute
our operating plan has contributed to the strength of our
financial performance over the last several years. For the year
ended December 31, 2009, we generated revenues of
$30.052 billion, net income attributable to HCA Inc. of
$1.054 billion and Adjusted EBITDA of $5.472 billion.
For the three months ended March 31, 2010, we generated
revenues of $7.544 billion, net income attributable to HCA
Inc. of $388 million and Adjusted EBITDA of
$1.574 billion.
Our patient-first strategy is to provide high quality health
care services in a cost-efficient manner. We intend to build
upon our history of profitable growth by maintaining our
dedication to quality care, increasing our presence in key
markets through organic expansion and strategic acquisitions,
leveraging our scale and infrastructure, and further developing
our physician and employee relationships. We believe pursuing
these core elements of our strategy helps us develop a
faster-growing, more stable and more profitable business and
increases our relevance to patients, physicians, payers and
employers.
Using our scale, significant resources and over 40 years of
operating experience we have developed a significant management
and support infrastructure. Some of the key components of our
support infrastructure include a revenue cycle management
organization, a health care group purchasing organization, or
GPO, an information technology and services provider, a nurse
staffing agency and a medical malpractice insurance underwriter.
These shared services have helped us to maximize our cash
collection efficiency, achieve savings in purchasing through our
scale, more rapidly deploy information technology upgrades, more
effectively manage our labor pool and achieve greater stability
in malpractice insurance premiums. Collectively, these
components have helped us to further enhance our operating
effectiveness, cost efficiency and overall financial results.
Since the founding of our business in 1968 as a single-facility
hospital company, we have demonstrated an ability to
consistently innovate and sustain growth during varying economic
and regulatory climates. Under the leadership of an experienced
senior management team, whose tenure at HCA averages over
20 years, we have established an extensive record of
providing high quality care, profitably growing our business,
making and integrating strategic acquisitions and efficiently
and strategically allocating capital spending.
1
On November 17, 2006, we were acquired by a private
investor group comprised of affiliates of or funds sponsored by
Bain Capital Partners, LLC, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts &
Co., Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity, Citigroup Inc., Bank
of America Corporation and HCA founder Dr. Thomas F. Frist,
Jr., a group we collectively refer to as the
Investors, and by members of management and certain
other investors. We refer to the merger, the financing
transactions related to the merger and other related
transactions collectively as the Recapitalization.
Since the Recapitalization, we have achieved substantial
operational and financial progress. During this time, we have
made significant investments in expanding our service lines and
expanding our alignment with highly specialized and primary care
physicians. In addition, we have enhanced our operating
efficiencies through a number of corporate cost-saving
initiatives and an expansion of our support infrastructure. We
have made investments in information technology to optimize our
facilities and systems. We have also undertaken a number of
initiatives to improve clinical quality and patient
satisfaction. As a result of these initiatives, our financial
performance has improved significantly from the year ended
December 31, 2007, the first full year following the
Recapitalization, to the year ended December 31, 2009, with
revenues growing by $3.194 billion, net income attributable
to HCA Inc. increasing by $180 million and Adjusted EBITDA
increasing by $880 million. This represents compounded
annual growth rates on these key metrics of 5.8%, 9.8% and 9.2%,
respectively.
Our
Industry
We believe well-capitalized, comprehensive and integrated health
care delivery providers are well-positioned to benefit from the
current industry trends, some of which include:
Aging Population and Continued Growth in the Need for Health
Care Services. According to the U.S. Census
Bureau, the demographic age group of persons aged 65 and over is
expected to experience compounded annual growth of 3.0% over the
next 20 years, and constitute 19.3% of the total
U.S. population by 2030. The Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, projects
continued increases in hospital services based on the aging of
the U.S. population, advances in medical procedures,
expansion of health coverage, increasing consumer demand for
expanded medical services and increased prevalence of chronic
conditions such as diabetes, heart disease and obesity. We
believe these factors will continue to drive increased
utilization of health care services and the need for
comprehensive, integrated hospital networks that can provide a
wide array of essential and sophisticated health care.
Continued Evolution of Quality-Based Reimbursement Favors
Large-Scale, Comprehensive and Integrated
Providers. We believe the U.S. health care
system is continuing to evolve in ways that favor large-scale,
comprehensive and integrated providers that provide high levels
of quality care. Specifically, we believe there are a number of
initiatives that will continue to gain importance in the
foreseeable future, including: introduction of value-based
payment methodologies tied to performance, quality and
coordination of care, implementation of integrated electronic
health records and information, and an increasing ability for
patients and consumers to make choices about all aspects of
health care. We believe our company is well positioned to
respond to these emerging trends and has the resources,
expertise and flexibility necessary to adapt in a timely manner
to the changing health care regulatory and reimbursement
environment.
Impact of Health Reform Law. The recently
enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended
by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
(collectively, the Health Reform Law), will change
how health care services are covered, delivered and reimbursed.
It will do so through expanded coverage of uninsured
individuals, significant reductions in the growth of Medicare
program payments, material decreases in Medicare and Medicaid
disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments, and
the establishment of programs where reimbursement is tied in
part to quality and integration. The Health Reform Law is
expected to expand health insurance coverage to approximately 32
to 34 million additional individuals through a combination of
public program expansion and private sector health insurance
reforms. We believe the expansion of private sector and
Medicaid coverage will, over time, increase our reimbursement
related to providing services to individuals who were previously
uninsured. On the other hand, the reductions in the growth in
Medicare payments and the decreases in DSH payments will
adversely affect our government
2
reimbursement. Because of the many variables involved, we are
unable to predict the net impact of the Health Reform Law on us;
however, we believe our experienced management team, emphasis on
quality care and our diverse service offerings will enable us to
capitalize on the opportunities presented by the Health Reform
Law, as well as adapt in a timely manner to its challenges.
Our
Competitive Strengths
We believe our key competitive strengths include:
Largest Comprehensive, Integrated Health Care Delivery
System. We are the largest
non-governmental
hospital operator in the U.S., providing approximately 4% to 5%
of all U.S. hospital services through our national
footprint. The scope and scale of our operations, evidenced by
the types of facilities we operate, the diverse medical
specialties we offer and the numerous patient care access points
we provide enable us to provide a comprehensive range of health
care services in a cost-effective manner. As a result, we
believe the breadth of our platform is a competitive advantage
in the marketplace enabling us to attract patients, physicians
and clinical staff while also providing significant economies of
scale and increasing our relevance with commercial payers.
Reputation for High Quality Patient-Centered
Care. Since our founding, we have maintained an
unwavering focus on patients and clinical outcomes. We believe
clinical quality influences physician and patient choices about
health care delivery. We align our quality initiatives
throughout the organization by engaging corporate, local,
physician and nurse leaders to share best practices and develop
standards for delivering high quality care. We have invested
extensively in quality of care initiatives, with an emphasis on
implementing information technology and adopting industry-wide
best practices and clinical protocols. As a result of these
measures, we have achieved significant progress in clinical
quality, as measured by the CMS HQA Grand Composite Score (based
on publicly available data for the twelve months ended
June 30, 2009) wherein HCA hospitals achieved 97.3% of the
CMS core measures versus the national average of 94.1%, making
HCA the best performing non-governmental system in the U.S.
Similarly, 88% of the core measure sets performed by our
facilities ranked in the top quartile and 65% ranked in the top
decile based on publicly available data for the twelve months
ended June 30, 2009. In addition, the Health Reform Law
establishes a value-based purchasing system and adjusts hospital
payment rates based on
hospital-acquired
conditions and hospital readmissions. We also believe our
quality initiatives favorably position us in a payment
environment that is increasingly performance-based.
Leading Local Market Positions in Large, Growing, Urban
Markets. Over our history, we have sought to
selectively expand and upgrade our asset base to create a
premium portfolio of assets in attractive growing markets. As a
result, we have a strong market presence in 14 of the top 25
fastest growing markets in the U.S. We currently operate in
29 markets, 17 of which have populations of 1 million
or more, with all but one of these markets projecting growth
above the national average from 2009 to 2014. Our inpatient
market share places us first or second in many of our key
markets. In addition, we operate in markets that have
demonstrated relative economic stability, with the unemployment
rate in a majority of our markets below the national average as
of March 2010. We believe the strength and stability of these
market positions will create organic growth opportunities and
allow us to develop long-term relationships with patients,
physicians, large employers and third-party payers.
Diversified Revenue Base and Payer Mix. We
believe our broad geographic footprint, varied service lines and
diverse revenue base mitigate our risks in numerous ways. Our
diversification limits our exposure to competitive dynamics and
economic conditions in any single local market, reimbursement
changes in specific service lines and disruptions with respect
to payers such as state Medicaid programs or large commercial
insurers. We have a diverse portfolio of assets with no single
facility contributing more than 2.4% of our revenues and no
single metropolitan statistical area contributing more than 7.8%
of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009. We have
also developed a highly diversified payer base, including
approximately 3,000 managed care contracts, with no single
commercial payer representing more than 8% of revenues for the
year ended December 31, 2009. In addition, we are one of
the countrys largest providers of outpatient services,
which accounted for approximately 38% of our revenues for the
year ended December 31, 2009. We
3
believe the geographic diversity of our markets and the scope of
our inpatient and outpatient operations help reduce volatility
in our operating results.
Scale and Infrastructure Drives Cost Savings and
Efficiencies. Our scale allows us to leverage our
support infrastructure to achieve significant cost savings and
operating efficiencies, thereby driving margin expansion. We
strategically manage our supply chain through centralized
purchasing and supply warehouses, as well as our revenue cycle
through centralized billing, collections and health information
management functions. We also manage the provision of
information technology through a combination of centralized
systems with regional service support as well as centralize many
other clinical and corporate functions, creating economies of
scale in managing expenses and business processes. In addition
to the cost savings and operating efficiencies, this support
infrastructure simultaneously generates revenue from third
parties that utilize our services.
Well-Capitalized Portfolio of High Quality
Assets. In order to expand the range and improve
the quality of services provided at our facilities, we invested
over $7.8 billion in our facilities and information
technology systems over the five-year period ended
December 31, 2009. We believe our significant capital
investments in these areas will continue to attract new and
returning patients, attract and retain high-quality physicians,
maximize cost efficiencies and address the health care needs of
our local communities. Furthermore, we believe our platform as
well as electronic health record infrastructure, national
research and physician management capabilities provide a
strategic advantage by enhancing our ability to capitalize on
anticipated incentives through the HITECH provisions of the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and positions us
well in an environment that increasingly emphasizes quality,
transparency and coordination of care.
Strong Operating Results and Cash Flows. Our
leading scale, diversification, favorable market positions,
dedication to clinical quality and focus on operational
efficiency have enabled us to achieve attractive historical
financial performance even during the most recent economic
period. In the year ended December 31, 2009, we generated
net income attributable to HCA Inc. of $1.054 billion,
Adjusted EBITDA of $5.472 billion and cash flows from
operating activities of $2.747 billion, while for the three
months ended March 31, 2010, we generated net income
attributable to HCA Inc. of $388 million, Adjusted EBITDA
of $1.574 billion and cash flows from operating activities
of $901 million. Our ability to generate strong and
consistent cash flow from operations has enabled us to invest in
our operations, reduce our debt, enhance earnings per share and
continue to pursue attractive growth opportunities.
Proven and Experienced Management Team. We
believe the extensive experience and depth of our management
team are a distinct competitive advantage in the complicated and
evolving industry in which we compete. Our CEO and Chairman of
the Board of Directors, Richard M. Bracken, began his career
with our company over 28 years ago and has held various
executive positions with us over that period, including, most
recently, as our President and Chief Operating Officer. Our
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Director,
R. Milton Johnson, joined our company over 27 years ago and
has held various positions in our financial operations since
that time. Our six Group Presidents average over 20 years
of experience with our company. Members of our senior management
hold significant equity interests in our company, further
aligning their long-term interests with those of our
stockholders.
Our
Growth Strategy
We are committed to providing the communities we serve with high
quality, cost-effective health care while growing our business,
increasing our profitability and creating long-term value for
our stockholders. To achieve these objectives, we align our
efforts around the following growth agenda:
Grow Our Presence in Existing Markets. We
believe we are well positioned in a number of large and growing
markets that will allow us the opportunity to generate
long-term, attractive growth through the expansion of our
presence in these markets. We plan to continue recruiting and
strategically collaborating with the physician community and
adding attractive service lines such as cardiology, emergency
services, oncology and womens services. Additional
components of our growth strategy include expanding our
footprint through developing various outpatient access points,
including surgery centers, rural outreach, freestanding
emergency
4
departments and walk-in clinics. Since our Recapitalization, we
have invested significant capital into these markets and expect
to continue to see the benefit of this investment.
Achieve Industry-Leading Performance in Clinical and
Satisfaction Measures. Achieving high levels of
patient safety, patient satisfaction and clinical quality are
central goals of our business model. To achieve these goals, we
have implemented a number of initiatives including infection
reduction initiatives, hospitalist programs, advanced health
information technology and evidence-based medicine programs. We
routinely analyze operational practices from our best-performing
hospitals to identify ways to implement organization-wide
performance improvements and reduce clinical variation. We
believe these initiatives will continue to improve patient care,
help us achieve cost efficiencies, grow our revenues and
favorably position us in an environment where our constituents
are increasingly focused on quality, efficacy and efficiency.
Recruit and Employ Physicians to Meet Need for High Quality
Health Services. We depend on the quality and
dedication of the health care providers and other team members
who serve at our facilities. We believe a critical component of
our growth strategy is our ability to successfully recruit and
strategically collaborate with physicians and other
professionals to provide high quality care. We attract and
retain physicians by providing high quality, convenient
facilities with advanced technology, by expanding our specialty
services and by building our outpatient operations. We believe
our continued investment in the employment, recruitment and
retention of physicians will improve the quality of care at our
facilities.
Continue to Leverage Our Scale and Market Positions to
Enhance Profitability. We believe there is
significant opportunity to continue to grow the profitability of
our company by fully leveraging the scale and scope of our
franchise. We are currently pursuing next generation performance
improvement initiatives such as contracting for services on a
multistate basis and expanding our support infrastructure for
additional clinical and support functions, such as physician
credentialing, medical transcription and electronic medical
recordkeeping. We believe our centrally managed business
processes and ability to leverage cost-saving practices across
our extensive network will enable us to continue to manage costs
effectively.
Selectively Pursue a Disciplined Development
Strategy. We continue to believe there are
significant growth opportunities in our markets. We will
continue to provide financial and operational resources to
successfully execute on our in-market opportunities. To
complement our in-market growth agenda, we intend to focus on
selectively developing and acquiring new hospitals, outpatient
facilities and other health care service providers. We believe
the challenges faced by the hospital industry may spur
consolidation and we believe our size, scale, national presence
and access to capital will position us well to participate in
any such consolidation. We have a strong record of successfully
acquiring and integrating hospitals and entering into joint
ventures and intend to continue leveraging this experience.
Recent
Developments
On April 6, 2010, we entered into an amendment of our
senior secured term loan B facility, extending the maturity date
for $2.0 billion of loans from November 17, 2013 to
March 31, 2017.
On May 5, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a
distribution to our existing stockholders and holders of vested
stock options of approximately $500 million in the
aggregate.
Risk
Factors
Investing in our common stock involves substantial risk, and our
ability to successfully operate our business is subject to
numerous risks, including those that are generally associated
with operating in the health care industry. Any of the factors
set forth under Risk Factors may limit our ability
to successfully execute our business strategy. You should
carefully consider all of the information set forth in this
prospectus and, in particular, should evaluate the specific
factors set forth under Risk Factors in deciding
whether to invest in our common stock. Among these important
risks are the following:
|
|
|
|
|
our substantial debt could limit our ability to pursue our
growth strategy;
|
|
|
|
our debt agreements contain restrictions that may limit our
flexibility in operating our business;
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
the current economic climate and general economic factors may
adversely affect our performance;
|
|
|
|
we face intense competition that could limit our growth
opportunities;
|
|
|
|
we are required to comply with extensive laws and regulations
that could impact our operations;
|
|
|
|
legal proceedings and governmental investigations could
negatively impact our business; and
|
|
|
|
uninsured and patient due accounts could adversely affect our
results of operations.
|
In addition, it is difficult to predict the impact on our
company of the Health Reform Law due to the laws
complexity, lack of implementing regulations or interpretive
guidance, gradual implementation and possible amendment, as well
as our inability to foresee how individuals and businesses will
respond to the choices afforded them by the law. Because of the
many variables involved, we are unable to predict the net effect
on the Company of the Health Reform Laws planned
reductions in the growth of Medicare payments, the expected
increases in our revenues from providing care to previously
uninsured individuals, and numerous other provisions in the law
that may affect us.
Through our predecessors, we commenced operations in 1968. HCA
Inc. was incorporated in Nevada in January 1990 and
reincorporated in Delaware in September 1993. Our principal
executive offices are located at One Park Plaza, Nashville,
Tennessee 37203, and our telephone number is
(615) 344-9551.
Our website address is www.hcahealthcare.com. The
information on our website is not part of this prospectus.
6
The
Offering
|
|
|
Common stock offered by HCA |
|
shares |
|
Common stock offered by selling stockholders |
|
shares |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
shares
( shares
if the underwriters exercise their option in full) |
|
Use of Proceeds |
|
We estimate that the net proceeds to us from this offering,
after deducting underwriting discounts and estimated offering
expenses, will be approximately
$ billion, assuming the
shares are offered at $ per share,
which is the mid-point of the estimated offering price range set
forth on the cover page of this prospectus. |
|
|
|
We intend to use the anticipated net proceeds to repay certain
of our existing indebtedness, as will be determined prior to our
offering, and for general corporate purposes. |
|
|
|
We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares of our
common stock by the selling stockholders. |
|
Underwriters option |
|
We and the selling stockholders have granted the underwriters a
30-day
option to purchase up
to
additional shares of our common stock at the initial public
offering price. |
|
Dividend policy |
|
We do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock for the
foreseeable future following completion of the offering. |
|
Risk Factors |
|
You should carefully read and consider the information set forth
under Risk Factors beginning on page 14 of this
prospectus and all other information set forth in this
prospectus before investing in our common stock. |
|
Conflicts of Interest |
|
Certain of the underwriters and their respective affiliates
have, from time to time, performed, and may in the future
perform, various financial advisory, investment banking,
commercial banking and other services for us for which they
received or will receive customary fees and expenses. See
Underwriting. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner &
Smith Incorporated and/or its affiliates indirectly own in
excess of 10% of our issued and outstanding common stock, and
may therefore be deemed to be one of our affiliates
and to have a conflict of interest with us within
the meaning of NASD Conduct Rule 2720
(Rule 2720) of the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. Therefore, this offering will be
conducted in accordance with Rule 2720, which requires that
a qualified independent underwriter as defined in Rule 2720
participate in the preparation of the registration statement of
which this prospectus forms a part and perform its usual
standard of due diligence with respect thereto. See
Underwriting Conflicts of Interest. |
|
Proposed NYSE ticker symbol |
|
HCA |
7
Unless we indicate otherwise or the context requires, all
information in this prospectus:
|
|
|
|
|
assumes (1) no exercise of the underwriters option to
purchase additional shares of our common stock; and (2) an
initial public offering price of $
per share, the midpoint of the initial public offering range
indicated on the cover of this prospectus;
|
|
|
|
reflects the to 1 stock split that we effected
on ,
2010; and
|
|
|
|
does not reflect
(1) shares
of our common stock issuable upon the exercise of outstanding
stock options at a weighted average exercise price of
$ per share as of March 31,
2010,
of
which
were then exercisable; and
(2) shares
of our common stock reserved for future grants under our stock
incentive plans.
|
8
Summary
Financial Data
The following table sets forth our summary financial data as of
and for the periods indicated. The financial data as of
December 31, 2009 and 2008 and for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 have been derived from our
consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this
prospectus, which have been audited by Ernst & Young
LLP. The financial data as of December 31, 2007 have been
derived from our consolidated financial statements audited by
Ernst & Young LLP that are not included herein.
The summary financial data as of March 31, 2010 and for the
three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 have been
derived from our unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The summary
financial data as of March 31, 2009 have been derived from
our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements that
are not included in this prospectus. The unaudited financial
data presented have been prepared on a basis consistent with our
audited consolidated financial statements. In the opinion of
management, such unaudited financial data reflect all
adjustments, consisting only of normal and recurring
adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the results
for those periods. The results of operations for the interim
periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to be
expected for the full year or any future period.
The summary financial data should be read in conjunction with
Selected Financial Data, Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and our consolidated financial statements, our
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and
related notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Income Statement Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
30,052
|
|
|
$
|
28,374
|
|
|
$
|
26,858
|
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
11,958
|
|
|
|
11,440
|
|
|
|
10,714
|
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
4,868
|
|
|
|
4,620
|
|
|
|
4,395
|
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
4,724
|
|
|
|
4,554
|
|
|
|
4,233
|
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
3,276
|
|
|
|
3,409
|
|
|
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(246
|
)
|
|
|
(223
|
)
|
|
|
(206
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,425
|
|
|
|
1,416
|
|
|
|
1,426
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,987
|
|
|
|
2,021
|
|
|
|
2,215
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Losses (gains) on sales of facilities
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
(471
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,050
|
|
|
|
27,204
|
|
|
|
25,460
|
|
|
|
6,859
|
|
|
|
6,812
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
2,002
|
|
|
|
1,170
|
|
|
|
1,398
|
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
|
619
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
316
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
|
|
902
|
|
|
|
1,082
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
1,054
|
|
|
$
|
673
|
|
|
$
|
874
|
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares (shares in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of Cash Flows Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
2,747
|
|
|
$
|
1,990
|
|
|
$
|
1,564
|
|
|
$
|
901
|
|
|
$
|
615
|
|
Cash flows used in investing activities
|
|
|
(1,035
|
)
|
|
|
(1,467
|
)
|
|
|
(479
|
)
|
|
|
(181
|
)
|
|
|
(288
|
)
|
Cash flows used in financing activities
|
|
|
(1,865
|
)
|
|
|
(451
|
)
|
|
|
(1,326
|
)
|
|
|
(644
|
)
|
|
|
(436
|
)
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA(1)
|
|
$
|
5,093
|
|
|
$
|
4,378
|
|
|
$
|
4,831
|
|
|
$
|
1,468
|
|
|
$
|
1,371
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA(1)
|
|
|
5,472
|
|
|
|
4,574
|
|
|
|
4,592
|
|
|
|
1,574
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
1,317
|
|
|
|
1,600
|
|
|
|
1,444
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
337
|
|
Operating Data(2):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of hospitals at end of period(3)
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
Number of freestanding outpatient surgical centers at end of
period(4)
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
Number of licensed beds at end of period(5)
|
|
|
38,839
|
|
|
|
38,504
|
|
|
|
38,405
|
|
|
|
38,719
|
|
|
|
38,763
|
|
Weighted average licensed beds(6)
|
|
|
38,825
|
|
|
|
38,422
|
|
|
|
39,065
|
|
|
|
38,687
|
|
|
|
38,811
|
|
Admissions(7)
|
|
|
1,556,500
|
|
|
|
1,541,800
|
|
|
|
1,552,700
|
|
|
|
398,900
|
|
|
|
396,200
|
|
Equivalent admissions(8)
|
|
|
2,439,000
|
|
|
|
2,363,600
|
|
|
|
2,352,400
|
|
|
|
615,500
|
|
|
|
610,200
|
|
Average length of stay (days)(9)
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Average daily census(10)
|
|
|
20,650
|
|
|
|
20,795
|
|
|
|
21,049
|
|
|
|
21,696
|
|
|
|
21,701
|
|
Occupancy(11)
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
56
|
%
|
|
|
56
|
%
|
Emergency room visits(12)
|
|
|
5,593,500
|
|
|
|
5,246,400
|
|
|
|
5,116,100
|
|
|
|
1,367,100
|
|
|
|
1,359,700
|
|
Outpatient surgeries(13)
|
|
|
794,600
|
|
|
|
797,400
|
|
|
|
804,900
|
|
|
|
190,700
|
|
|
|
194,400
|
|
Inpatient surgeries(14)
|
|
|
494,500
|
|
|
|
493,100
|
|
|
|
516,500
|
|
|
|
122,500
|
|
|
|
122,600
|
|
Days revenues in accounts receivable(15)
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Gross patient revenues(16)
|
|
$
|
115,682
|
|
|
$
|
102,843
|
|
|
$
|
92,429
|
|
|
$
|
31,054
|
|
|
$
|
28,742
|
|
Outpatient revenues as a percentage of patient revenues(17)
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital(18)
|
|
$
|
2,264
|
|
|
$
|
2,391
|
|
|
$
|
2,356
|
|
|
$
|
2,167
|
|
|
$
|
2,592
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
11,427
|
|
|
|
11,529
|
|
|
|
11,442
|
|
|
|
11,252
|
|
|
|
11,455
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
|
393
|
|
|
|
388
|
|
|
|
356
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
24,131
|
|
|
|
24,280
|
|
|
|
24,025
|
|
|
|
24,091
|
|
|
|
24,284
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
25,670
|
|
|
|
26,989
|
|
|
|
27,308
|
|
|
|
26,855
|
|
|
|
26,567
|
|
Equity securities with contingent redemption rights
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
Stockholders deficit attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
|
(8,986
|
)
|
|
|
(10,255
|
)
|
|
|
(10,538
|
)
|
|
|
(10,313
|
)
|
|
|
(9,888
|
)
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
1,008
|
|
|
|
995
|
|
|
|
938
|
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
1,019
|
|
Total stockholders deficit
|
|
|
(7,978
|
)
|
|
|
(9,260
|
)
|
|
|
(9,600
|
)
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
(8,869
|
)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
EBITDA, a measure used by management to evaluate operating
performance, is defined as net income attributable to HCA Inc.
plus (i) provision for income taxes, (ii) interest
expense and (iii) depreciation and amortization. EBITDA is
not a recognized term under GAAP and does not purport to be an
alternative to net income as a measure of operating performance
or to cash flows from operating activities as a measure of
liquidity. Additionally, EBITDA is not intended to be a measure
of free cash flow available for managements discretionary
use, as it does not consider certain cash requirements such as
interest payments, tax payments and other debt service
requirements. Management believes EBITDA is helpful to investors
and our management in highlighting trends because EBITDA
excludes the results of decisions outside the control of
operating management and that can differ significantly from
company to company depending on long-term strategic decisions
regarding capital structure, the tax jurisdictions in which
companies operate and capital investments. Management
compensates for the limitations of using non-GAAP financial
measures by using them to supplement GAAP results to provide a
more complete understanding of the factors and trends affecting
the business than GAAP results alone. Because not all companies
use identical calculations, our presentation of EBITDA may not
be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. |
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA is defined as EBITDA, adjusted to exclude net
income attributable to noncontrolling interests, losses (gains)
on sales of facilities and impairments of long-lived assets. We
believe Adjusted EBITDA is an important measure that supplements
discussions and analysis of our results of operations. We
believe it is useful to investors to provide disclosures of our
results of operations on the same basis used by management.
Management relies upon Adjusted EBITDA as the primary measure to
review and assess operating performance of its hospital
facilities and their management teams. Adjusted EBITDA target
amounts are the performance measures utilized in our annual
incentive compensation programs and are vesting conditions for a
portion of our stock option grants. Management and investors
review both the overall performance (GAAP net income
attributable to HCA Inc.) and operating performance (Adjusted
EBITDA) of our health care facilities. Adjusted EBITDA and the
Adjusted EBITDA margin (Adjusted EBITDA divided by revenues) are
utilized by management and investors to compare our current
operating results with the corresponding periods during the
previous year and to compare our operating results with other
companies in the health care industry. It is reasonable to
expect that losses (gains) on sales of facilities and impairment
of long-lived assets will occur in future periods, but the
amounts recognized can vary significantly from period to period,
do not directly relate to the ongoing operations of our health
care facilities and complicate period comparisons of our results
of operations and operations comparisons with other health care
companies. Adjusted EBITDA is not a measure of financial
performance under accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States, and should not be considered an alternative |
11
|
|
|
|
|
to net income attributable to HCA Inc. as a measure of operating
performance or cash flows from operating, investing and
financing activities as a measure of liquidity. Because Adjusted
EBITDA is not a measurement determined in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles and is susceptible to
varying calculations, Adjusted EBITDA, as presented, may not be
comparable to other similarly titled measures presented by other
companies. |
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are calculated as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Ended March 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
1,054
|
|
|
$
|
673
|
|
|
$
|
874
|
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
316
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,987
|
|
|
|
2,021
|
|
|
|
2,215
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,425
|
|
|
|
1,416
|
|
|
|
1,426
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
|
5,093
|
|
|
|
4,378
|
|
|
|
4,831
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
1,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests(i)
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
Losses (gains) on sales of facilities(ii)
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
(471
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets(iii)
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
|
$
|
5,472
|
|
|
$
|
4,574
|
|
|
$
|
4,592
|
|
|
$
|
1,574
|
|
|
$
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(i) |
|
Represents the add-back of net income attributable to
noncontrolling interests. |
|
(ii) |
|
Represents the elimination of losses (gains) on sales of
facilities. |
|
(iii) |
|
Represents the add-back of impairments of long-lived assets. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
The operating data set forth in this table includes only those
facilities that are consolidated for financial reporting
purposes. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Excludes eight facilities in 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007 that are
not consolidated (accounted for using the equity method) for
financial reporting purposes. |
|
(4) |
|
Excludes eight facilities in 2010, 2009 and 2008 and nine
facilities in 2007 that are not consolidated (accounted for
using the equity method) for financial reporting purposes. |
|
(5) |
|
Licensed beds are those beds for which a facility has been
granted approval to operate from the applicable state licensing
agency. |
|
(6) |
|
Weighted average licensed beds represents the average number of
licensed beds, weighted based on periods owned. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents the total number of patients admitted to our
hospitals and is used by management and certain investors as a
general measure of inpatient volume. |
|
(8) |
|
Equivalent admissions are used by management and certain
investors as a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. Equivalent admissions are computed by
multiplying admissions (inpatient volume) by the sum of gross
inpatient revenues and gross outpatient revenues and then
dividing the resulting amount by gross inpatient revenues. The
equivalent admissions computation equates outpatient
revenues to the volume measure (admissions) used to measure
inpatient volume, resulting in a general measure of combined
inpatient and outpatient volume. |
|
(9) |
|
Represents the average number of days admitted patients stay in
our hospitals. |
|
(10) |
|
Represents the average number of patients in our hospital beds
each day. |
|
(11) |
|
Represents the percentage of hospital licensed beds occupied by
patients. Both average daily census and occupancy rate provide
measures of the utilization of inpatient rooms. |
|
(12) |
|
Represents the number of patients treated in our emergency rooms. |
12
|
|
|
(13) |
|
Represents the number of surgeries performed on patients who
were not admitted to our hospitals. Pain management and
endoscopy procedures are not included in outpatient surgeries. |
|
(14) |
|
Represents the number of surgeries performed on patients who
have been admitted to our hospitals. Pain management and
endoscopy procedures are not included in inpatient surgeries. |
|
(15) |
|
Revenues per day is calculated by dividing the revenues for the
period by the days in the period. Days revenues in accounts
receivable is then calculated as accounts receivable, net of the
allowance for doubtful accounts, at the end of the period
divided by revenues per day. |
|
(16) |
|
Gross patient revenues are based upon our standard charge
listing. Gross charges/revenues do not reflect what our hospital
facilities are paid. Gross charges/revenues are reduced by
contractual adjustments, discounts and charity care to determine
reported revenues. |
|
|
|
(17) |
|
Represents the percentage of patient revenues related to
patients who are not admitted to our hospitals. |
|
(18) |
|
We define working capital as current assets minus current
liabilities. |
13
RISK
FACTORS
An investment in our common stock involves risk. You should
carefully consider the following risks as well as the other
information included in this prospectus, including
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our financial
statements and related notes, before investing in our common
stock. Any of the following risks could materially and adversely
affect our business, financial condition or results of
operations. However, the selected risks described below are not
the only risks facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not
currently known to us or those we currently view to be
immaterial may also materially and adversely affect our
business, financial condition or results of operations. In such
a case, the trading price of the common stock could decline, and
you may lose all or part of your investment in our Company.
Risks
Related to Our Business
Our
hospitals face competition for patients from other hospitals and
health care providers.
The health care business is highly competitive, and competition
among hospitals and other health care providers for patients has
intensified in recent years. Generally, other hospitals in the
local communities we serve provide services similar to those
offered by our hospitals. In addition, the Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services (CMS) publicizes on its
Medicare website performance data related to quality measures
and data on patient satisfaction surveys hospitals submit in
connection with their Medicare reimbursement. Federal law
provides for the future expansion of the number of quality
measures that must be reported. Additional quality measures and
future trends toward clinical transparency may have an
unanticipated impact on our competitive position and patient
volumes. Further, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act
of 2010 (collectively, the Health Reform Law)
requires all hospitals to annually establish, update and make
public a list of the hospitals standard charges for items
and services. If any of our hospitals achieve poor results (or
results that are lower than our competitors) on these quality
measures or on patient satisfaction surveys or if our standard
charges are higher than our competitors, our patient volumes
could decline.
In addition, the number of freestanding specialty hospitals,
surgery centers and diagnostic and imaging centers in the
geographic areas in which we operate has increased
significantly. As a result, most of our hospitals operate in a
highly competitive environment. Some of the facilities that
compete with our hospitals are owned by governmental agencies or
not-for-profit
corporations supported by endowments, charitable contributions
and/or tax
revenues and can finance capital expenditures and operations on
a tax-exempt basis. Our hospitals are facing increasing
competition from specialty hospitals, some of which are
physician-owned, and from both our own and unaffiliated
freestanding surgery centers for market share in high margin
services and for quality physicians and personnel. If ambulatory
surgery centers are better able to compete in this environment
than our hospitals, our hospitals may experience a decline in
patient volume, and we may experience a decrease in margin, even
if those patients use our ambulatory surgery centers. In states
that do not require a Certificate of Need (CON) for
the purchase, construction or expansion of health care
facilities or services, competition in the form of new services,
facilities and capital spending is more prevalent. Further, if
our competitors are better able to attract patients, recruit
physicians, expand services or obtain favorable managed care
contracts at their facilities than our hospitals and ambulatory
surgery centers, we may experience an overall decline in patient
volume. See Business Competition.
The
growth of uninsured and patient due accounts and a deterioration
in the collectibility of these accounts could adversely affect
our results of operations.
The primary collection risks of our accounts receivable relate
to the uninsured patient accounts and patient accounts for which
the primary insurance carrier has paid the amounts covered by
the applicable agreement, but patient responsibility amounts
(deductibles and copayments) remain outstanding. The provision
for doubtful accounts relates primarily to amounts due directly
from patients.
The amount of the provision for doubtful accounts is based upon
managements assessment of historical writeoffs and
expected net collections, business and economic conditions,
trends in federal and state
14
governmental and private employer health care coverage, the rate
of growth in uninsured patient admissions and other collection
indicators. At March 31, 2010, our allowance for doubtful
accounts represented approximately 94% of the
$4.833 billion patient due accounts receivable balance. The
sum of the provision for doubtful accounts, uninsured discounts
and charity care increased from $6.134 billion for 2007 to
$7.009 billion for 2008 and to $8.362 billion for 2009.
A continuation of the trends that have resulted in an increasing
proportion of accounts receivable being comprised of uninsured
accounts and a deterioration in the collectibility of these
accounts will adversely affect our collection of accounts
receivable, cash flows and results of operations. Prior to the
Health Reform Law being fully implemented, our facilities may
experience growth in bad debts, uninsured discounts and charity
care as a result of a number of factors, including the recent
economic downturn and increase in unemployment. The Health
Reform Law seeks to decrease over time the number of uninsured
individuals. Among other things, the Health Reform Law will,
effective January 1, 2014, expand Medicaid and incentivize
employers to offer, and require individuals to carry, health
insurance or be subject to penalties. However, it is difficult
to predict the full impact of the Health Reform Law due to the
laws complexity, lack of implementing regulations or
interpretive guidance, gradual implementation and possible
amendment, as well as our inability to foresee how individuals
and businesses will respond to the choices afforded them by the
law. In addition, even after implementation of the Health Reform
Law, we may continue to experience bad debts and have to provide
uninsured discounts and charity care for undocumented aliens who
are not permitted to enroll in a health insurance exchange or
government health care programs.
Changes
in governmental programs may reduce our revenues.
A significant portion of our patient volume is derived from
government health care programs, principally Medicare and
Medicaid. Specifically, we derived approximately 40% of our
revenues from the Medicare and Medicaid programs in 2009. In
recent years, legislative and regulatory changes have resulted
in limitations on and, in some cases, reductions in levels of
payments to health care providers for certain services under the
Medicare program. For example, CMS has recently completed a
two-year transition to full implementation of the Medicare
severity diagnosis-related group (MS-DRG) system,
which represents a refinement to the existing diagnosis-related
group system. Future realignments in the MS-DRG system could
impact the margins we receive for certain services. Further, the
Health Reform Law provides for material reductions in the growth
of Medicare program spending, including reductions in Medicare
market basket updates, and Medicare and Medicaid
disproportionate share hospital (DSH) funding.
Reductions to our reimbursement under the Medicare and Medicaid
programs by the Health Reform Law could adversely affect our
business and results of operations to the extent such reductions
are not offset by anticipated increases in revenues from
providing care to previously uninsured individuals.
Since most states must operate with balanced budgets and since
the Medicaid program is often a states largest program,
some states can be expected to enact or consider enacting
legislation designed to reduce their Medicaid expenditures. The
current economic downturn has increased the budgetary pressures
on many states, and these budgetary pressures have resulted, and
likely will continue to result, in decreased spending for
Medicaid programs and the Childrens Health Insurance
Program (CHIP) in many states. Further, many states
have also adopted, or are considering, legislation designed to
reduce coverage, enroll Medicaid recipients in managed care
programs
and/or
impose additional taxes on hospitals to help finance or expand
the states Medicaid systems. Effective March 23,
2010, the Health Reform Law requires states to at least maintain
Medicaid eligibility standards established prior to the
enactment of the law for adults until January 1, 2014 and
for children until October 1, 2019. However, states with
budget deficits may seek exceptions from this requirement to
address eligibility standards that apply to adults making more
than 133% of the federal poverty level. The Health Reform Law
also provides for significant expansions to the Medicaid
program, but these changes are not required until 2014. In
addition, the Health Reform Law will result in increased state
legislative and regulatory changes in order for states to comply
with new federal mandates, such as the requirement to establish
health insurance exchanges, and to participate in grants and
other incentive opportunities.
15
In some cases, commercial third-party payers rely on all or
portions of the MS-DRG system to determine payment rates, which
may result in decreased reimbursement from some commercial
third-party payers. Other changes to government health care
programs may negatively impact payments from commercial
third-party payers.
Current or future health care reform efforts, changes in laws or
regulations regarding government health programs, other changes
in the administration of government health programs and changes
to commercial third-party payers in response to health care
reform and other changes to government health programs could
have a material, adverse effect on our financial position and
results of operations.
We are
unable to predict the impact of the Health Reform Law, which
represents significant change to the health care
industry.
The Health Reform Law will change how health care services are
covered, delivered, and reimbursed through expanded coverage of
uninsured individuals, reduced growth in Medicare program
spending, reductions in Medicare and Medicaid DSH payments and
the establishment of programs where reimbursement is tied to
quality and integration. In addition, the new law reforms
certain aspects of health insurance, expands existing efforts to
tie Medicare and Medicaid payments to performance and quality,
and contains provisions intended to strengthen fraud and abuse
enforcement.
The expansion of health insurance coverage under the Health
Reform Law may result in a material increase in the number of
patients using our facilities who have either private or public
program coverage. In addition, a disproportionately large
percentage of the new Medicaid coverage is likely to be in
states that currently have relatively low income eligibility
requirements. Two such states are Texas and Florida, where about
one-half of the Companys licensed beds are located. The
Company also has a significant presence in other relatively low
income eligibility states, including Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana,
Missouri, Oklahoma and Virginia. Further, the Health Reform Law
provides for a value-based purchasing program, the establishment
of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and bundled
payment pilot programs, which will create possible sources of
additional revenue.
However, it is difficult to predict the size of the potential
revenue gains to the Company as a result of these elements of
the Health Reform Law, because of uncertainty surrounding a
number of material factors, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
how many previously uninsured individuals will obtain coverage
as a result of the Health Reform Law (while the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO) estimates 32 million, CMS
estimates almost 34 million; both agencies made a number of
assumptions to derive that figure, including how many
individuals will ignore substantial subsidies and decide to pay
the penalty rather than obtain health insurance and what
percentage of people in the future will meet the new Medicaid
income eligibility requirements);
|
|
|
|
what percentage of the newly insured patients will be covered
under the Medicaid program and what percentage will be covered
by private health insurers;
|
|
|
|
the extent to which states will enroll new Medicaid participants
in managed care programs;
|
|
|
|
the pace at which insurance coverage expands, including the pace
of different types of coverage expansion;
|
|
|
|
the change, if any, in the volume of inpatient and outpatient
hospital services that are sought by and provided to previously
uninsured individuals;
|
|
|
|
the rate paid to hospitals by private payers for newly covered
individuals, including those covered through the newly created
American Health Benefit Exchanges (Exchanges) and
those who might be covered under the Medicaid program under
contracts with the state;
|
|
|
|
the rate paid by state governments under the Medicaid program
for newly covered individuals;
|
|
|
|
how the value-based purchasing and other quality programs will
be implemented;
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
the percentage of individuals in the Exchanges who select the
high deductible plans, since health insurers offering those
kinds of products have traditionally sought to pay lower rates
to hospitals;
|
|
|
|
whether the net effect of the Health Reform Law, including the
prohibition on excluding individuals based on pre-existing
conditions, the requirement to keep medical costs lower than a
specified percentage of premium revenue, other health insurance
reforms and the annual fee applied to all health insurers, will
be to put pressure on the bottom line of health insurers, which
in turn might cause them to seek to reduce payments to hospitals
with respect to both newly insured individuals and their
existing business; and
|
|
|
|
the possibility that implementation of provisions expanding
health insurance coverage will be delayed or even blocked due to
court challenges or revised or eliminated as a result of efforts
to repeal or amend the new law.
|
On the other hand, the Health Reform Law provides for
significant reductions in the growth of Medicare spending,
reductions in Medicare and Medicaid DSH payments and the
establishment of programs where reimbursement is tied to quality
and integration. Since approximately 40% of our revenues in 2009
were from Medicare and Medicaid, reductions to these programs
may significantly impact the Company and could offset any
positive effects of the Health Reform Law. It is difficult to
predict the size of the revenue reductions to Medicare and
Medicaid spending, because of uncertainty regarding a number of
material factors, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the amount of overall revenues the Company will generate from
Medicare and Medicaid business when the reductions are
implemented;
|
|
|
|
whether reductions required by the Health Reform Law will be
changed by statute prior to becoming effective;
|
|
|
|
the size of the Health Reform Laws annual productivity
adjustment to the market basket beginning in 2012 payment years;
|
|
|
|
the amount of the Medicare DSH reductions that will be made,
commencing in federal fiscal year 2014;
|
|
|
|
the allocation to our hospitals of the Medicaid DSH reductions,
commencing in federal fiscal year 2014;
|
|
|
|
what the losses in revenues will be, if any, from the Health
Reform Laws quality initiatives;
|
|
|
|
how successful ACOs, in which we participate, will be at
coordinating care and reducing costs;
|
|
|
|
the scope and nature of potential changes to Medicare
reimbursement methods, such as an emphasis on bundling payments
or coordination of care programs;
|
|
|
|
whether the Companys revenues from upper payment limit
(UPL) programs will be adversely affected, because
there may be fewer indigent, non-Medicaid patients for whom the
Company provides services pursuant to UPL programs; and
|
|
|
|
reductions to Medicare payments CMS may impose for
excessive readmissions.
|
Because of the many variables involved, we are unable to predict
the net effect on the Company of the expected increases in
insured individuals using our facilities, the reductions in
Medicare spending, reductions in Medicare and Medicaid DSH
funding, and numerous other provisions in the Health Reform Law
that may affect the Company.
If we
are unable to retain and negotiate favorable contracts with
nongovernment payers, including managed care plans, our revenues
may be reduced.
Our ability to obtain favorable contracts with nongovernment
payers, including health maintenance organizations, preferred
provider organizations and other managed care plans
significantly affects the revenues and operating results of our
facilities. Revenues derived from these entities and other
insurers accounted for
17
53%, 52% and 53% of our patient revenues for the quarter ended
March 31, 2010 and the years ended December 31, 2009
and December 31, 2008, respectively. Nongovernment payers,
including managed care payers, continue to demand discounted fee
structures, and the trend toward consolidation among
nongovernment payers tends to increase their bargaining power
over fee structures. As various provisions of the Health Reform
Law are implemented, including the establishment of the
Exchanges, nongovernment payers increasingly may demand reduced
fees. Our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to
retain and renew our managed care contracts and enter into new
managed care contracts on terms favorable to us. Other health
care providers may impact our ability to enter into managed care
contracts or negotiate increases in our reimbursement and other
favorable terms and conditions. For example, some of our
competitors may negotiate exclusivity provisions with managed
care plans or otherwise restrict the ability of managed care
companies to contract with us. It is not clear what impact, if
any, the increased obligations on managed care payers and other
payers imposed by the Health Reform Law will have on our ability
to negotiate reimbursement increases. If we are unable to retain
and negotiate favorable contracts with managed care plans or
experience reductions in payment increases or amounts received
from nongovernment payers, our revenues may be reduced.
Our
performance depends on our ability to recruit and retain quality
physicians.
The success of our hospitals depends in part on the number and
quality of the physicians on the medical staffs of our
hospitals, the admitting practices of those physicians and
maintaining good relations with those physicians. Although we
employ some physicians, physicians are often not employees of
the hospitals at which they practice and, in many of the markets
we serve, most physicians have admitting privileges at other
hospitals in addition to our hospitals. Such physicians may
terminate their affiliation with our hospitals at any time. If
we are unable to provide adequate support personnel or
technologically advanced equipment and hospital facilities that
meet the needs of those physicians and their patients, they may
be discouraged from referring patients to our facilities,
admissions may decrease and our operating performance may
decline.
Our
hospitals face competition for staffing, which may increase
labor costs and reduce profitability.
Our operations are dependent on the efforts, abilities and
experience of our management and medical support personnel, such
as nurses, pharmacists and lab technicians, as well as our
physicians. We compete with other health care providers in
recruiting and retaining qualified management and support
personnel responsible for the daily operations of each of our
hospitals, including nurses and other nonphysician health care
professionals. In some markets, the availability of nurses and
other medical support personnel has been a significant operating
issue to health care providers. We may be required to continue
to enhance wages and benefits to recruit and retain nurses and
other medical support personnel or to hire more expensive
temporary or contract personnel. As a result, our labor costs
could increase. We also depend on the available labor pool of
semi-skilled and unskilled employees in each of the markets in
which we operate. Certain proposed changes in federal labor
laws, including the Employee Free Choice Act, could increase the
likelihood of employee unionization attempts. To the extent a
significant portion of our employee base unionizes, it is
possible our labor costs could increase materially. In addition,
the states in which we operate could adopt mandatory
nurse-staffing ratios or could reduce mandatory nurse staffing
ratios already in place. State-mandated nurse-staffing ratios
could significantly affect labor costs and have an adverse
impact on revenues if we are required to limit admissions in
order to meet the required ratios. If our labor costs increase,
we may not be able to raise rates to offset these increased
costs. Because a significant percentage of our revenues consists
of fixed, prospective payments, our ability to pass along
increased labor costs is constrained. Our failure to recruit and
retain qualified management, nurses and other medical support
personnel, or to control labor costs, could have a material,
adverse effect on our results of operations.
If we
fail to comply with extensive laws and government regulations,
we could suffer penalties or be required to make significant
changes to our operations.
The health care industry is required to comply with extensive
and complex laws and regulations at the federal, state and local
government levels relating to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
billing and coding for services and properly handling
overpayments;
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
relationships with physicians and other referral sources;
|
|
|
|
adequacy of medical care;
|
|
|
|
quality of medical equipment and services;
|
|
|
|
qualifications of medical and support personnel;
|
|
|
|
confidentiality, maintenance, data breach, identity theft and
security issues associated with health-related and personal
information and medical records;
|
|
|
|
the screening, stabilization and transfer of individuals who
have emergency medical conditions;
|
|
|
|
licensure and certification;
|
|
|
|
hospital rate or budget review;
|
|
|
|
preparing and filing of cost reports;
|
|
|
|
operating policies and procedures;
|
|
|
|
activities regarding competitors; and
|
|
|
|
addition of facilities and services.
|
Among these laws are the federal Anti-kickback Statute, the
federal physician self-referral law (commonly called the Stark
Law), the federal False Claims Act (FCA) and similar
state laws. We have a variety of financial relationships with
physicians and others who either refer or influence the referral
of patients to our hospitals and other health care facilities,
and these laws govern those relationships. The Office of
Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services
(OIG) has enacted safe harbor regulations that
outline practices deemed protected from prosecution under the
Anti-kickback Statute. While we endeavor to comply with the
applicable safe harbors, certain of our current arrangements,
including joint ventures and financial relationships with
physicians and other referral sources and persons and entities
to which we refer patients, do not qualify for safe harbor
protection. Failure to qualify for a safe harbor does not mean
the arrangement necessarily violates the Anti-kickback Statute,
but may subject the arrangement to greater scrutiny. However, we
cannot offer assurance that practices outside of a safe harbor
will not be found to violate the Anti-kickback Statute.
Allegations of violations of the Anti-kickback Statute may be
brought under the federal Civil Monetary Penalty Law, which
requires a lower burden of proof than other fraud and abuse
laws, including the Anti-kickback Statute.
Our financial relationships with referring physicians and their
immediate family members must comply with the Stark Law by
meeting an exception. We attempt to structure our relationships
to meet an exception to the Stark Law, but the regulations
implementing the exceptions are detailed and complex, and we
cannot provide assurance every relationship complies fully with
the Stark Law. Unlike the Anti-kickback Statute, failure to meet
an exception under the Stark Law results in a violation of the
Stark Law, even if such violation is technical in nature.
Additionally, if we violate the Anti-kickback Statute or Stark
Law, or if we improperly bill for our services, we may be found
to violate the FCA, either under a suit brought by the
government or by a private person under a qui tam, or
whistleblower, suit.
If we fail to comply with the Anti-kickback Statute, the Stark
Law, the FCA or other applicable laws and regulations, we could
be subjected to liabilities, including civil penalties
(including the loss of our licenses to operate one or more
facilities), exclusion of one or more facilities from
participation in the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and
state health care programs and, for violations of certain laws
and regulations, criminal penalties. See Regulation and
Other Factors.
CMS published a proposal to collect information from 400
hospitals regarding their ownership, investment and compensation
arrangements with physicians. Called the Disclosure of Financial
Relationships Report (or DFRR), CMS intends to
use this data to monitor compliance with the Stark Law, and CMS
may share this information with other government agencies. Many
of these agencies have not previously analyzed this
19
information and have the authority to bring enforcement actions
against hospitals filing such reports. The DFRR and its
supporting documentation are currently under review by the
Office of Management and Budget, and it is unclear when, or if,
it will be finalized.
Because many of these laws and their implementing regulations
are relatively new, we do not always have the benefit of
significant regulatory or judicial interpretation of these laws
and regulations. In the future, different interpretations or
enforcement of these laws and regulations could subject our
current or past practices to allegations of impropriety or
illegality or could require us to make changes in our
facilities, equipment, personnel, services, capital expenditure
programs and operating expenses. A determination we have
violated these laws, or the public announcement that we are
being investigated for possible violations of these laws, could
have a material, adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations or prospects, and our business
reputation could suffer significantly. In addition, other
legislation or regulations at the federal or state level may be
adopted that adversely affect our business.
We
have been and could become the subject of governmental
investigations, claims and litigation.
Health care companies are subject to numerous investigations by
various governmental agencies. Further, under the FCA, private
parties have the right to bring qui tam, or
whistleblower, suits against companies that submit
false claims for payments to, or improperly retain overpayments
from, the government. Some states have adopted similar state
whistleblower and false claims provisions. Certain of our
individual facilities have received, and other facilities may
receive, government inquiries from federal and state agencies.
Depending on whether the underlying conduct in these or future
inquiries or investigations could be considered systemic, their
resolution could have a material, adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations and liquidity.
Governmental agencies and their agents, such as the Medicare
Administrative Contractors, fiscal intermediaries and carriers,
as well as the OIG, CMS and state Medicaid programs, conduct
audits of our health care operations. Private payers may conduct
similar post-payment audits, and we also perform internal audits
and monitoring. Depending on the nature of the conduct found in
such audits and whether the underlying conduct could be
considered systemic, the resolution of these audits could have a
material, adverse effect on our financial position, results of
operations and liquidity.
As required by statute, CMS is in the process of implementing
the Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program on a
nationwide basis. Under the program, CMS contracts with RACs to
conduct post-payment reviews to detect and correct improper
payments in the
fee-for-service
Medicare program. The Health Reform Law expands the RAC
programs scope to include managed Medicare plans and to
include Medicaid claims by requiring all states to enter into
contracts with RACs by December 31, 2010. In addition, CMS
employs Medicaid Integrity Contractors (MICs) to
perform post-payment audits of Medicaid claims and identify
overpayments. Throughout 2010, MIC audits will continue to
expand. The Health Reform Law increases federal funding for the
MIC program for federal fiscal year 2011 and later years. In
addition to RACs and MICs, several other contractors, including
the state Medicaid agencies, have increased their review
activities.
Should we be found out of compliance with any of these laws,
regulations or programs, depending on the nature of the
findings, our business, our financial position and our results
of operations could be negatively impacted.
Controls
designed to reduce inpatient services may reduce our
revenues.
Controls imposed by Medicare, managed Medicare, Medicaid,
managed Medicaid and commercial third-party payers designed to
reduce admissions and lengths of stay, commonly referred to as
utilization review, have affected and are expected
to continue to affect our facilities. Utilization review entails
the review of the admission and course of treatment of a patient
by health plans. Inpatient utilization, average lengths of stay
and occupancy rates continue to be negatively affected by
payer-required preadmission authorization and utilization review
and by payer pressure to maximize outpatient and alternative
health care delivery services for less acutely ill patients.
Efforts to impose more stringent cost controls are expected to
continue. For example, the Health Reform Law potentially expands
the use of prepayment review by Medicare contractors
20
by eliminating statutory restrictions on their use. Although we
are unable to predict the effect these changes will have on our
operations, significant limits on the scope of services
reimbursed and on reimbursement rates and fees could have a
material, adverse effect on our business, financial position and
results of operations.
Our
overall business results may suffer from the recent economic
downturn.
During periods of high unemployment, governmental entities often
experience budget deficits as a result of increased costs and
lower than expected tax collections. These budget deficits at
federal, state and local government entities have decreased, and
may continue to decrease, spending for health and human service
programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and similar programs,
which represent significant payer sources for our hospitals.
Other risks we face during periods of high unemployment include
potential declines in the population covered under managed care
agreements, patient decisions to postpone or cancel elective and
non-emergency health care procedures, potential increases in the
uninsured and underinsured populations and further difficulties
in our collecting patient co-payment and deductible receivables.
The
industry trend towards value-based purchasing may negatively
impact our revenues.
There is a trend in the health care industry toward value-based
purchasing of health care services. These value-based purchasing
programs include both public reporting of quality data and
preventable adverse events tied to the quality and efficiency of
care provided by facilities. Governmental programs including
Medicare and Medicaid currently require hospitals to report
certain quality data to receive full reimbursement updates. In
addition, Medicare does not reimburse for care related to
certain preventable adverse events (also called never
events). Many large commercial payers currently require
hospitals to report quality data, and several commercial payers
do not reimburse hospitals for certain preventable adverse
events. Further, we have implemented a policy pursuant to which
we do not bill patients or third-party payers for fees or
expenses incurred due to certain preventable adverse events.
The Health Reform Law contains a number of provisions intended
to promote value-based purchasing. Effective July 1, 2011,
the Health Reform Law will prohibit the use of federal funds
under the Medicaid program to reimburse providers for medical
assistance provided to treat hospital acquired conditions
(HACs). Beginning in federal fiscal year 2015,
hospitals that fall into the top 25% of national risk-adjusted
HAC rates for all hospitals in the previous year will receive a
1% reduction in their total Medicare payments. Hospitals with
excessive readmissions for conditions designated by the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) will
receive reduced payments for all inpatient discharges, not just
discharges relating to the conditions subject to the excessive
readmission standard.
The Health Reform Law also requires HHS to implement a
value-based purchasing program for inpatient hospital services.
Beginning in federal fiscal year 2013, HHS will reduce inpatient
hospital payments for all discharges by a percentage specified
by statute ranging from 1% to 2% and pool the total amount
collected from these reductions to fund payments to reward
hospitals that meet or exceed certain quality performance
standards established by HHS. HHS will determine the amount each
hospital that meets or exceeds the quality performance standards
will receive from the pool of dollars created by these payment
reductions.
We expect value-based purchasing programs, including programs
that condition reimbursement on patient outcome measures, to
become more common and to involve a higher percentage of
reimbursement amounts. We are unable at this time to predict how
this trend will affect our results of operations, but it could
negatively impact our revenues.
Our
operations could be impaired by a failure of our information
systems.
Any system failure that causes an interruption in service or
availability of our systems could adversely affect operations or
delay the collection of revenues. Even though we have
implemented network security measures, our servers are
vulnerable to computer viruses, break-ins and similar
disruptions from unauthorized tampering. The occurrence of any
of these events could result in interruptions, delays, the loss
or corruption of data, cessations in the availability of systems
or liability under privacy and security laws, all of which could
21
have a material adverse effect on our financial position and
results of operations and harm our business reputation.
The performance of our information technology and systems is
critical to our business operations. In addition to our shared
services initiatives, our information systems are essential to a
number of critical areas of our operations, including:
|
|
|
|
|
accounting and financial reporting;
|
|
|
|
billing and collecting accounts;
|
|
|
|
coding and compliance;
|
|
|
|
clinical systems;
|
|
|
|
medical records and document storage;
|
|
|
|
inventory management;
|
|
|
|
negotiating, pricing and administering managed care contracts
and supply contracts; and
|
|
|
|
monitoring quality of care and collecting data on quality
measures necessary for full Medicare payment updates.
|
If we
fail to effectively and timely implement electronic health
record systems, our operations could be adversely
affected.
As required by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009, HHS is in the process of developing and implementing an
incentive payment program for eligible hospitals and health care
professionals that adopt and meaningfully use certified
electronic health record (EHR) technology. If our
hospitals and employed professionals are unable to meet the
requirements for participation in the incentive payment program,
we will not be eligible to receive incentive payments that could
offset some of the costs of implementing EHR systems. Further,
beginning in 2015, eligible hospitals and professionals that
fail to demonstrate meaningful use of certified EHR technology
will be subject to reduced payments from Medicare. Failure to
implement EHR systems effectively and in a timely manner could
have a material, adverse effect on our financial position and
results of operations.
State
efforts to regulate the construction or expansion of health care
facilities could impair our ability to operate and expand our
operations.
Some states, particularly in the eastern part of the country,
require health care providers to obtain prior approval, known as
a CON, for the purchase, construction or expansion of health
care facilities, to make certain capital expenditures or to make
changes in services or bed capacity. In giving approval, these
states consider the need for additional or expanded health care
facilities or services. We currently operate health care
facilities in a number of states with CON laws. The failure to
obtain any requested CON could impair our ability to operate or
expand operations. Any such failure could, in turn, adversely
affect our ability to attract patients to our facilities and
grow our revenues, which would have an adverse effect on our
results of operations.
Our
facilities are heavily concentrated in Florida and Texas, which
makes us sensitive to regulatory, economic, environmental and
competitive conditions and changes in those
states.
We operated 162 hospitals at March 31, 2010, and 73 of
those hospitals are located in Florida and Texas. Our Florida
and Texas facilities combined revenues represented
approximately 52% and 51%, respectively, of our consolidated
revenues for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 and year
ended December 31, 2009. This concentration makes us
particularly sensitive to regulatory, economic, environmental
and competitive conditions and changes in those states. Any
material change in the current payment programs or regulatory,
economic, environmental or competitive conditions in those
states could have a disproportionate effect on our overall
business results.
22
In addition, our hospitals in Florida and Texas and other areas
across the Gulf Coast are located in hurricane-prone areas. In
the recent past, hurricanes have had a disruptive effect on the
operations of our hospitals in Florida, Texas and other coastal
states, and the patient populations in those states. Our
business activities could be harmed by a particularly active
hurricane season or even a single storm, and the property
insurance we obtain may not be adequate to cover losses from
future hurricanes or other natural disasters.
We may
be subject to liabilities from claims by the Internal Revenue
Service.
At March 31, 2010, we were contesting before the Appeals
Division of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
certain claimed deficiencies and adjustments proposed by the IRS
in connection with its examination of the 2003 and 2004 federal
income tax returns for HCA and eight affiliates that are treated
as partnerships for federal income tax purposes
(affiliated partnerships). The disputed items
include the timing of recognition of certain patient service
revenues and our method for calculating the tax allowance for
doubtful accounts.
Six taxable periods of HCA and its predecessors ended in 1997
through 2002 and the 2002 taxable year of four affiliated
partnerships, for which the primary remaining issue is the
computation of the tax allowance for doubtful accounts, are
pending before the IRS Examination Division as of March 31,
2010.
The IRS completed its audit of HCAs 2005 and 2006 federal
income tax returns in April 2010. We will contest certain
claimed deficiencies and adjustments proposed by the IRS
Examination Division in connection with this audit, including
the timing of recognition of certain patient service revenues,
before the IRS Appeals Division. We anticipate the IRS will
begin an audit of the 2007, 2008 and 2009 federal income tax
returns for HCA and one or more affiliated partnerships during
2010.
Management believes HCA, its predecessors and affiliates
properly reported taxable income and paid taxes in accordance
with applicable laws and agreements established with the IRS and
final resolution of these disputes will not have a material,
adverse effect on our results of operations or financial
position. However, if payments due upon final resolution of
these issues exceed our recorded estimates, such resolutions
could have a material, adverse effect on our results of
operations or financial position.
We may
be subject to liabilities from claims brought against our
facilities.
We are subject to litigation relating to our business practices,
including claims and legal actions by patients and others in the
ordinary course of business alleging malpractice, product
liability or other legal theories. See
Business Legal Proceedings. Many of
these actions involve large claims and significant defense
costs. We insure a portion of our professional liability risks
through a wholly-owned subsidiary. Management believes our
reserves for self-insured retentions and insurance coverage are
sufficient to cover insured claims arising out of the operation
of our facilities. Our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary has
entered into certain reinsurance contracts, and the obligations
covered by the reinsurance contracts are included in its
reserves for professional liability risks, as the subsidiary
remains liable to the extent that the reinsurers do not meet
their obligations under the reinsurance contracts. If payments
for claims exceed actuarially determined estimates, are not
covered by insurance, or reinsurers, if any, fail to meet their
obligations, our results of operations and financial position
could be adversely affected.
We are
exposed to market risks related to changes in the market values
of securities and interest rate changes.
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in market
values of securities. The investments in debt and equity
securities of our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary were
$1.296 billion and $7 million, respectively, at
March 31, 2010. These investments are carried at fair
value, with changes in unrealized gains and losses being
recorded as adjustments to other comprehensive income. At
March 31, 2010, we had a net unrealized gain of
$22 million on the insurance subsidiarys investment
securities.
We are exposed to market risk related to market illiquidity.
Liquidity of the investments in debt and equity securities of
our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary could be impaired by the
inability to access the
23
capital markets. Should the wholly-owned insurance subsidiary
require significant amounts of cash in excess of normal cash
requirements to pay claims and other expenses on short notice,
we may have difficulty selling these investments in a timely
manner or be forced to sell them at a price less than what we
might otherwise have been able to in a normal market
environment. At March 31, 2010, our wholly-owned insurance
subsidiary had invested $333 million ($336 million par
value) in municipal, tax-exempt student loan auction rate
securities (ARS). Since February 2008, when multiple
failed auctions occurred due to a severe credit and liquidity
crisis in the capital markets, the ARS have experienced market
illiquidity. It is uncertain if auction-related market liquidity
will resume for these securities. We may be required to
recognize
other-than-temporary
impairments on these investments in future periods should
issuers default on interest payments or should the fair market
valuations of the securities deteriorate due to ratings
downgrades or other issue specific factors.
We are also exposed to market risk related to changes in
interest rates, and we periodically enter into interest rate
swap agreements to manage our exposure to these fluctuations.
Our interest rate swap agreements involve the exchange of fixed
and variable rate interest payments between two parties, based
on common notional principal amounts and maturity dates. The net
notional amounts of the swap agreements represent balances used
to calculate the exchange of cash flows and are not our assets
or liabilities. See Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Market Risk.
Risks
Related to Our Indebtedness
Our
substantial leverage could adversely affect our ability to raise
additional capital to fund our operations, limit our ability to
react to changes in the economy or our industry, expose us to
interest rate risk to the extent of our variable rate debt and
prevent us from meeting our obligations.
We are highly leveraged. As of March 31, 2010, our total
indebtedness is $26.855 billion. Our high degree of
leverage could have important consequences, including:
|
|
|
|
|
increasing our vulnerability to downturns or adverse changes in
general economic, industry or competitive conditions and adverse
changes in government regulations;
|
|
|
|
requiring a substantial portion of cash flow from operations to
be dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on our
indebtedness, therefore reducing our ability to use our cash
flow to fund our operations, capital expenditures and future
business opportunities;
|
|
|
|
exposing us to the risk of increased interest rates as certain
of our unhedged borrowings are at variable rates of interest;
|
|
|
|
limiting our ability to make strategic acquisitions or causing
us to make nonstrategic divestitures;
|
|
|
|
limiting our ability to obtain additional financing for working
capital, capital expenditures, product or service line
development, debt service requirements, acquisitions and general
corporate or other purposes; and
|
|
|
|
limiting our ability to adjust to changing market conditions and
placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our
competitors who are less highly leveraged.
|
We and our subsidiaries have the ability to incur additional
indebtedness in the future, subject to the restrictions
contained in our senior secured credit facilities and the
indentures governing our outstanding notes. If new indebtedness
is added to our current debt levels, the related risks that we
now face could intensify.
We may
not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our
indebtedness and may not be able to refinance our indebtedness
on favorable terms. If we are unable to do so, we may be forced
to take other actions to satisfy our obligations under our
indebtedness, which may not be successful.
Our ability to make scheduled payments on or to refinance our
debt obligations depends on our financial condition and
operating performance, which are subject to prevailing economic
and competitive conditions and to certain financial, business
and other factors beyond our control. We cannot assure you we
will maintain a
24
level of cash flows from operating activities sufficient to
permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on
our indebtedness.
As of March 31, 2010, our substantial indebtedness included
$9.648 billion of indebtedness under our senior secured
credit facilities maturing in 2012 and 2013, $4.150 billion
aggregate principal amount of first lien notes maturing in 2019
and 2020, $6.088 billion aggregate principal amount of
second lien notes maturing in 2014, 2016 and 2017 and
$6.723 billion aggregate principal amount of unsecured
senior notes and debentures that mature on various dates from
2010 to 2095 (including $5.321 billion maturing through
2016). Because a significant portion of our indebtedness matures
in the next few years, we may find it necessary or prudent to
refinance that indebtedness with longer-maturity debt at a
higher interest rate. In February, April and August of 2009 and
in March of 2010, for example, we issued $310 million in
aggregate principal amount of
97/8%
second lien notes due 2017, $1.500 billion in aggregate
principal amount of
81/2%
first lien notes due 2019, $1.250 billion in aggregate
principal amount of
77/8%
first lien notes due 2020 and $1.400 billion in aggregate
principal amount of
71/4%
first lien notes due 2020, respectively. We used the net
proceeds of those offerings to prepay term loans under our cash
flow credit facility, which currently bears interest at a lower
floating rate. Our ability to refinance our indebtedness on
favorable terms, or at all, is directly affected by the current
global economic and financial conditions. In addition, our
ability to incur secured indebtedness (which would generally
enable us to achieve better pricing than the incurrence of
unsecured indebtedness) depends in part on the value of our
assets, which depends, in turn, on the strength of our cash
flows and results of operations, and on economic and market
conditions and other factors.
If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund
our debt service obligations or we are unable to refinance our
indebtedness, we may be forced to reduce or delay investments
and capital expenditures, or to sell assets, seek additional
capital or restructure our indebtedness. These alternative
measures may not be successful and may not permit us to meet our
scheduled debt service obligations. If our operating results and
available cash are insufficient to meet our debt service
obligations, we could face substantial liquidity problems and
might be required to dispose of material assets or operations to
meet our debt service and other obligations. We may not be able
to consummate those dispositions, or the proceeds from the
dispositions may not be adequate to meet any debt service
obligations then due.
Our
debt agreements contain restrictions that limit our flexibility
in operating our business.
Our senior secured credit facilities and the indentures
governing our outstanding notes contain various covenants that
limit our ability to engage in specified types of transactions.
These covenants limit our and certain of our subsidiaries
ability to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred shares;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends on, repurchase or make distributions in respect of
our capital stock or make other restricted payments;
|
|
|
|
make certain investments;
|
|
|
|
sell or transfer assets;
|
|
|
|
create liens;
|
|
|
|
consolidate, merge, sell or otherwise dispose of all or
substantially all of our assets; and
|
|
|
|
enter into certain transactions with our affiliates.
|
Under our asset-based revolving credit facility, when (and for
as long as) the combined availability under our asset-based
revolving credit facility and our senior secured revolving
credit facility is less than a specified amount for a certain
period of time or, if a payment or bankruptcy event of default
has occurred and is continuing, funds deposited into any of our
depository accounts will be transferred on a daily basis into a
blocked account with the administrative agent and applied to
prepay loans under the asset-based revolving credit facility and
to cash collateralize letters of credit issued thereunder.
25
Under our senior secured credit facilities, we are required to
satisfy and maintain specified financial ratios. Our ability to
meet those financial ratios can be affected by events beyond our
control, and there can be no assurance we will continue to meet
those ratios. A breach of any of these covenants could result in
a default under both our cash flow credit facility and our
asset-based revolving credit facility. Upon the occurrence of an
event of default under our senior secured credit facilities, our
lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under our
senior secured credit facilities to be immediately due and
payable and terminate all commitments to extend further credit.
If we were unable to repay those amounts, the lenders under our
senior secured credit facilities could proceed against the
collateral granted to them to secure such indebtedness. We have
pledged a significant portion of our assets as collateral under
our senior secured credit facilities, and that collateral (other
than certain European collateral securing our senior secured
European term loan facility) is also pledged as collateral under
our first lien notes. If any of the lenders under our senior
secured credit facilities accelerate the repayment of
borrowings, there can be no assurance we will have sufficient
assets to repay our senior secured credit facilities and the
first lien notes.
Risks
Related to this Offering and Ownership of Our Common
Stock
An
active, liquid trading market for our common stock may not
develop.
After our Recapitalization and prior to this offering, there has
not been a public market for our common stock. We cannot predict
the extent to which investor interest in our company will lead
to the development of a trading market on the New York Stock
Exchange or otherwise or how active and liquid that market may
become. If an active and liquid trading market does not develop,
you may have difficulty selling any of our common stock that you
purchase. The initial public offering price for the shares will
be determined by negotiations between us and the underwriters
and may not be indicative of prices that will prevail in the
open market following this offering. The market price of our
common stock may decline below the initial offering price, and
you may not be able to sell your shares of our common stock at
or above the price you paid in this offering, or at all.
You
will incur immediate and substantial dilution in the net
tangible book value of the shares you purchase in this
offering.
Prior investors have paid substantially less per share of our
common stock than the price in this offering. The initial public
offering price of our common stock is substantially higher than
the net tangible book value per share of outstanding common
stock prior to completion of the offering. Based on our net
tangible book value as of March 31, 2010 and upon the
issuance and sale
of shares
of common stock by us at an assumed initial public offering
price of $ per share (the midpoint
of the initial public offering price range indicated on the
cover of this prospectus), if you purchase our common stock in
this offering, you will pay more for your shares than the
amounts paid by our existing stockholders for their shares and
you will suffer immediate dilution of approximately
$ per share in net tangible book
value. We also have a large number of outstanding stock options
to purchase common stock with exercise prices that are below the
estimated initial public offering price of our common stock. To
the extent that these options are exercised, you will experience
further dilution. See Dilution.
Our
stock price may change significantly following the offering, and
you could lose all or part of your investment as a
result.
We and the underwriters will negotiate to determine the initial
public offering price. You may not be able to resell your shares
at or above the initial public offering price due to a number of
factors such as those listed in Risks Related
to Our Business and the following, some of which are
beyond our control:
|
|
|
|
|
quarterly variations in our results of operations;
|
|
|
|
results of operations that vary from the expectations of
securities analysts and investors;
|
|
|
|
results of operations that vary from those of our competitors;
|
|
|
|
changes in expectations as to our future financial performance,
including financial estimates by securities analysts and
investors;
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
announcements by us, our competitors or our vendors of
significant contracts, acquisitions, joint marketing
relationships, joint ventures or capital commitments;
|
|
|
|
announcements by third parties or governmental entities of
significant claims or proceedings against us;
|
|
|
|
new laws and governmental regulations applicable to the health
care industry, including the Health Reform Law;
|
|
|
|
a default under the agreements governing our indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
future sales of our common stock by us, directors, executives
and significant stockholders; and
|
|
|
|
changes in domestic and international economic and political
conditions and regionally in our markets.
|
Furthermore, the stock market has recently experienced extreme
volatility that, in some cases, has been unrelated or
disproportionate to the operating performance of particular
companies. These broad market and industry fluctuations may
adversely affect the market price of our common stock,
regardless of our actual operating performance.
In the past, following periods of market volatility,
stockholders have instituted securities class action litigation.
If we were involved in securities litigation, it could have a
substantial cost and divert resources and the attention of
executive management from our business regardless of the outcome
of such litigation.
If we
or our existing investors sell additional shares of our common
stock after this offering, the market price of our common stock
could decline.
The market price of our common stock could decline as a result
of sales of a large number of shares of common stock in the
market after this offering, or the perception that such sales
could occur. These sales, or the possibility that these sales
may occur, also might make it more difficult for us to sell
equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we
deem appropriate. After the completion of this offering, we will
have million shares of common
stock outstanding ( million
shares if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase
additional shares in full). This number
includes million shares that
are being sold in this offering, which may be resold immediately
in the public market.
We and the selling stockholders, our executive officers and
directors and the Investors have agreed not to sell or transfer
any common stock or securities convertible into, exchangeable
for, exercisable for, or repayable with common stock, for
180 days after the date of this prospectus without first
obtaining the written consent of two of the representatives. In
addition, pursuant to stockholders agreements, we have granted
certain members of our management and other stockholders the
right to cause us, in certain instances, at our expense, to file
registration statements under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended (the Securities Act) covering resales of our
common stock held by them. These shares will represent
approximately % of our outstanding
common stock after this offering,
or % if the underwriters exercise
their option to purchase additional shares in full. These shares
also may be sold pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities
Act, depending on their holding period and subject to
restrictions in the case of shares held by persons deemed to be
our affiliates. As restrictions on resale end or if these
stockholders exercise their registration rights, the market
price of our stock could decline if the holders of restricted
shares sell them or are perceived by the market as intending to
sell them. See Certain Relationships and Related Party
Transactions Stockholder Agreements
Management Stockholders Agreement, Certain
Relationships and Related Party Transactions
Registration Rights Agreement, Shares Eligible for
Future Sale and Underwriting.
As
of ,
2010, shares
of our common stock were
outstanding, shares
were issuable upon the exercise of outstanding vested stock
options under our stock incentive
plans, shares
were subject to outstanding unvested stock options under our
stock incentive plans,
and shares
were reserved for future grant under our stock incentive plans.
Shares acquired upon the exercise of vested options under our
stock incentive plan will first become eligible for
resale days after the date of
this prospectus. Sales of a substantial number of shares of our
common stock following the vesting of outstanding stock options
could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.
27
Because
we do not currently intend to pay cash dividends on our common
stock for the foreseeable future, you may not receive any return
on investment unless you sell your common stock for a price
greater than that which you paid for it.
We currently intend to retain future earnings, if any, for
future operation, expansion and debt repayment and do not intend
to pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Any
decision to declare and pay dividends in the future will be made
at the discretion of our board of directors (the
Board or the Board of Directors) and
will depend on, among other things, our results of operations,
financial condition, cash requirements, contractual restrictions
and other factors that our Board of Directors may deem relevant.
In addition, our ability to pay dividends may be limited by
covenants of any existing and future outstanding indebtedness we
or our subsidiaries incur, including our senior secured credit
facilities and the indentures governing our notes. As a result,
you may not receive any return on an investment in our common
stock unless you sell our common stock for a price greater than
that which you paid for it.
Some
provisions of Delaware law and our governing documents could
discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider
favorable.
In addition to the Investors ownership of a controlling
percentage of our common stock, Delaware law and provisions
contained in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could
make it difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing
so might be beneficial to our stockholders. For example, our
charter authorizes our Board of Directors to determine the
rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions of unissued
preferred stock, without any vote or action by our stockholders.
As a result, our Board could authorize and issue shares of
preferred stock with voting or conversion rights that could
adversely affect the voting or other rights of holders of our
common stock or with other terms that could impede the
completion of a merger, tender offer or other takeover attempt.
In addition, as described under Description of Capital
Stock Delaware Anti-Takeover Statutes
elsewhere in this prospectus, we are subject to certain
provisions of Delaware law that may discourage potential
acquisition proposals and may delay, deter or prevent a change
of control of our company, including through transactions, and,
in particular, unsolicited transactions, that some or all of our
stockholders might consider to be desirable. As a result,
efforts by our stockholders to change the direction or
management of our company may be unsuccessful.
The
Investors will continue to have significant influence over us
after this offering, including control over decisions that
require the approval of stockholders, which could limit your
ability to influence the outcome of key transactions, including
a change of control.
We are controlled, and after this offering is completed will
continue to be controlled, by the Investors. The Investors will
indirectly own through their investment in Hercules Holding II,
LLC (Hercules Holding)
approximately % of our common stock
(or % if the underwriters exercise
their option to purchase additional shares in full) after the
completion of this offering. In addition, representatives of the
Investors will have the right to designate a majority of the
seats on our Board of Directors. As a result, the Investors will
have control over our decisions to enter into any corporate
transaction (and the terms thereof) and the ability to prevent
any change in the composition of our Board of Directors and any
transaction that requires stockholder approval regardless of
whether others believe that such change or transaction is in our
best interests. So long as the Investors continue to indirectly
hold a majority of our outstanding common stock, they will have
the ability to control the vote in any election of directors,
amend our certificate of incorporation or bylaws or take other
actions requiring the vote of our stockholders. Even if such
amount is less than 50%, the Investors will continue to be able
to strongly influence or effectively control our decisions.
Additionally, Bain Capital Partners, LLC, Kohlberg Kravis
Roberts & Co., and BAML Capital Partners, the successor
organization to Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity (each a
Sponsor, collectively, the Sponsors),
are in the business of making investments in companies and may
acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete directly
or indirectly with us. One or more of the Sponsors may also
pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to
our business and, as a result, those acquisition opportunities
may not be available to us.
28
We are
a controlled company within the meaning of the New
York Stock Exchange rules and, as a result, will qualify for,
and intend to rely on, exemptions from certain corporate
governance requirements. You will not have the same protections
afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to such
requirements.
After completion of this offering, the Investors will continue
to control a majority of the voting power of our outstanding
common stock. As a result, we are a controlled
company within the meaning of the corporate governance
standards of the New York Stock Exchange. Under these rules, a
company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by an
individual, group or another company is a controlled
company and may elect not to comply with certain corporate
governance requirements, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the requirement that a majority of the Board of Directors
consist of independent directors;
|
|
|
|
the requirement that we have a nominating/corporate governance
committee that is composed entirely of independent directors
with a written charter addressing the committees purpose
and responsibilities;
|
|
|
|
the requirement that we have a compensation committee that is
composed entirely of independent directors with a written
charter addressing the committees purpose and
responsibilities; and
|
|
|
|
the requirement for an annual performance evaluation of the
nominating/corporate governance and compensation committees.
|
Following this offering, we intend to utilize these exemptions.
As a result, we will not have a majority of independent
directors, our nominating and corporate governance committee, if
any, and compensation committee will not consist entirely of
independent directors and such committees will not be subject to
annual performance evaluations. Accordingly, you will not have
the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that
are subject to all of the corporate governance requirements of
the New York Stock Exchange.
29
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This prospectus contains forward-looking statements
within the meaning of the federal securities laws, which involve
risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking statements include all
statements that do not relate solely to historical or current
facts, and you can identify forward-looking statements because
they contain words such as believes,
expects, may, will,
should, seeks,
approximately, intends,
plans, estimates, projects,
continue, initiative or
anticipates or similar expressions that concern our
prospects, objectives, strategies, plans or intentions. All
statements made relating to our estimated and projected
earnings, margins, costs, expenditures, cash flows, growth
rates, operating and growth strategies, ability to repay or
refinance our substantial existing indebtedness and financial
results or to the impact of existing or proposed laws or
regulations (including the Health Reform Law) described in this
prospectus are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking
statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may
change at any time, and, therefore, our actual results may
differ materially from those expected. We derive many of our
forward-looking statements from our operating budgets and
forecasts, which are based upon many detailed assumptions. While
we believe our assumptions are reasonable, it is very difficult
to predict the impact of known factors, and, of course, it is
impossible to anticipate all factors that could affect our
actual results. These factors include, but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to recognize the benefits of the Recapitalization;
|
|
|
|
the impact of the substantial indebtedness incurred to finance
the Recapitalization and the ability to refinance such
indebtedness on acceptable terms;
|
|
|
|
the passage of the Health Reform Law and the enactment of
additional federal or state health care reform and changes in
federal, state or local laws or regulations affecting the health
care industry;
|
|
|
|
increases, particularly in the current economic downturn, in the
amount and risk of collectibility of uninsured accounts, and
deductibles and copayment amounts for insured accounts;
|
|
|
|
the ability to achieve operating and financial targets, attain
expected levels of patient volumes and control the costs of
providing services;
|
|
|
|
possible changes in the Medicare, Medicaid and other state
programs, including Medicaid supplemental payments pursuant to
UPL programs, that may impact reimbursements to health care
providers and insurers;
|
|
|
|
the highly competitive nature of the health care business;
|
|
|
|
changes in revenue mix, including potential declines in the
population covered under managed care agreements due to the
economic downturn, and the ability to enter into and renew
managed care provider agreements on acceptable terms;
|
|
|
|
the efforts of insurers, health care providers and others to
contain health care costs;
|
|
|
|
the outcome of our continuing efforts to monitor, maintain and
comply with appropriate laws, regulations, policies and
procedures;
|
|
|
|
increases in wages and the ability to attract and retain
qualified management and personnel, including affiliated
physicians, nurses and medical and technical support personnel;
|
|
|
|
the availability and terms of capital to fund the expansion of
our business and improvements to our existing facilities;
|
|
|
|
changes in accounting practices;
|
|
|
|
changes in general economic conditions nationally and regionally
in our markets;
|
|
|
|
future divestitures which may result in charges;
|
|
|
|
changes in business strategy or development plans;
|
|
|
|
delays in receiving payments for services provided;
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
the outcome of pending and any future tax audits, appeals and
litigation associated with our tax positions;
|
|
|
|
potential liabilities and other claims that may be asserted
against us; and
|
|
|
|
other risk factors described in this prospectus.
|
All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements
attributable to us, or persons acting on our behalf, are
expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary
statements.
We caution you that the important factors discussed above may
not contain all of the material factors that are important to
you. The forward-looking statements included in this prospectus
are made only as of the date hereof. We undertake no obligation
to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a
result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as
otherwise required by law.
31
USE OF
PROCEEDS
We estimate that the gross proceeds we will receive from the
sale of shares of our common stock sold by us in this offering,
excluding the underwriters option to purchase additional
shares, will be $2.5 billion. We estimate that the net
proceeds we will receive from the sale
of shares of our common stock
in this offering, after deducting underwriter discounts and
commissions and estimated expenses payable by us, will be
approximately $ billion (or
$ billion if the underwriters
exercise the option to purchase additional shares in full). This
estimate assumes an initial public offering price of
$ per share, the midpoint of the
range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus. A $1.00
increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price
of $ per share would increase
(decrease) the net proceeds to us from this offering by
$ million, assuming the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting the
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
expenses payable by us. We will not receive any proceeds from
the sale of shares of our common stock by the selling
stockholders.
We intend to use the anticipated net proceeds to repay certain
of our existing indebtedness, as will be determined prior to
this offering, and for general corporate purposes.
32
DIVIDEND
POLICY
Following completion of the offering, we do not intend to pay
any cash dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable
future and instead may retain earnings, if any, for future
operation and expansion and debt repayment. Any decision to
declare and pay dividends in the future will be made at the
discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on, among
other things, our results of operations, cash requirements,
financial condition, contractual restrictions and other factors
that our Board of Directors may deem relevant. In addition, our
ability to pay dividends is limited by covenants in our senior
secured credit facilities and in the indentures governing
certain of our notes. See Description of
Indebtedness and Note 9 to our consolidated financial
statements for restrictions on our ability to pay dividends.
On January 27, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a
distribution to the Companys stockholders and holders of
vested stock options of $1.751 billion in the aggregate. On
May 5, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a distribution to
the Companys existing stockholders and holders of vested
stock options of approximately $500 million in the aggregate.
33
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
March 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
on an actual basis; and
|
|
|
|
on an as adjusted basis to give effect to (1) the issuance
of common stock in this offering and the application of proceeds
from the offering as described in Use of Proceeds as
if each had occurred on March 31, 2010, (2) the
payment of a distribution to our existing stockholders and
holders of vested stock options of approximately $500 million in
the aggregate as announced on May 5, 2010,
(3) the to 1
stock split that we effected on ,
2010 and (4) the payment of approximately
$ million in fees under our
management agreement with the Sponsors in connection with its
termination. See Certain Relationships and Related Party
Transactions Sponsor Management Agreement.
|
You should read this table in conjunction with Use of
Proceeds, Selected Financial Data, and
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our financial
statements and notes thereto, included elsewhere in this
prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured credit facilities(1)
|
|
$
|
9,648
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Senior secured first lien notes(2)
|
|
|
4,071
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured second lien notes(3)
|
|
|
6,079
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other secured indebtedness
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured indebtedness(4)
|
|
|
6,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term obligations
|
|
|
26,855
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders deficit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock: $.01 par
value; authorized
shares; outstanding
shares
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital in excess of par value
|
|
|
291
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(479
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Retained deficit
|
|
|
(10,126
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders deficit attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
|
(10,313
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders deficit
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization(5)
|
|
$
|
17,557
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In connection with the Recapitalization, we entered into
(i) a $2.000 billion asset-based revolving credit
facility with an original six-year maturity (the
asset-based revolving credit facility)
($1.825 billion outstanding at March 31, 2010);
(ii) a $2.000 billion senior secured revolving credit
facility with an original six-year maturity (the senior
secured revolving credit facility) ($229 million
outstanding at March 31, 2010, without giving effect to
outstanding letters of credit); (iii) a $2.750 billion
senior secured term loan A facility with an original six-year
maturity ($1.618 billion outstanding at March 31,
2010); (iv) an $8.800 billion senior secured term loan
B facility with an original seven-year maturity
($5.525 billion outstanding at March 31, 2010); and
(v) a 1.000 billion (334 million, or
$451 million-equivalent, outstanding at March 31,
2010), senior secured European term loan facility with an
original seven-year maturity. |
34
|
|
|
|
|
We refer to the facilities described under (ii) through
(v) above, collectively, as the cash flow credit
facility and, together with the asset-based revolving
credit facility, the senior secured credit
facilities. |
|
(2) |
|
In April 2009, we issued $1.500 billion aggregate principal
amount of first lien notes at a price of 96.755% of their face
value, resulting in $1.451 billion of gross proceeds, which
were used to repay obligations under our cash flow credit
facility after the payment of related fees and expenses. In
August 2009, we issued $1.250 billion aggregate principal
amount of first lien notes at a price of 98.254% of their face
value, resulting in $1.228 billion of gross proceeds, which
were used to repay obligations under our cash flow credit
facility after the payment of related fees and expenses. In
March 2010, we issued $1.400 billion aggregate principal
amount of first lien notes at a price of 99.095% of their face
value, resulting in approximately $1.387 billion of gross
proceeds, which were used to repay obligations under our cash
flow credit facility after the payment of related fees and
expenses. In each case, the discount will accrete and be
included in interest expense until the applicable first lien
notes mature. |
|
(3) |
|
Consists of $4.200 billion of second lien notes (comprised
of $1.000 billion of
91/8% notes
due 2014 and $3.200 billion of
91/4% notes
due 2016) and $1.578 billion of
95/8%/103/8%
second lien toggle notes (which allow us, at our option, to pay
interest in kind during the first five years at the higher
interest rate of
103/8%)
due 2016. In addition, in February 2009 we issued
$310 million aggregate principal amount of
97/8%
second lien notes due 2017 at a price of 96.673% of their face
value, resulting in $300 million of gross proceeds, which
were used to repay obligations under our cash flow credit
facility after payment of related fees and expenses. The
discount on the 2009 second lien notes will accrete and be
included in interest expense until those 2009 second lien notes
mature. |
|
(4) |
|
Consists of (i) an aggregate principal amount of
$246 million medium-term notes with maturities in 2014 and
2025 and a weighted average interest rate of 8.28%; (ii) an
aggregate principal amount of $886 million debentures with
maturities ranging from 2015 to 2095 and a weighted average
interest rate of 7.55%; (iii) an aggregate principal amount
of $5.407 billion senior notes with maturities ranging from
2010 to 2033 and a weighted average interest rate of 6.79%; (iv)
£121 million ($184 million-equivalent at
March 31, 2010) aggregate principal amount of
8.75% senior notes due 2010; and (v) $11 million
of unamortized debt discounts that reduce the existing
indebtedness. For more information regarding our unsecured and
other indebtedness, see Description of Indebtedness. |
|
(5) |
|
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share
would increase (decrease) each of cash and cash equivalents,
equity and total capitalization by
$ ,
$ and
$ , respectively, assuming the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting the
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
expenses payable by us. |
The table set forth above is based on the number of shares of
our common stock outstanding as of March 31, 2010. This
table does not reflect:
|
|
|
|
|
shares of our common stock
issuable upon the exercise of outstanding stock options at a
weighted average exercise price of
$ per share as of March 31,
2010, of
which
were then exercisable; and
|
|
|
|
shares of our common stock
reserved for future grants under our stock incentive plans.
|
35
DILUTION
If you invest in our common stock, your interest will be diluted
to the extent of the difference between the initial public
offering price per share of our common stock and the net
tangible book value per share of our common stock after this
offering. Dilution results from the fact that the initial public
offering price per share of common stock is substantially in
excess of the net tangible book value per share of our common
stock attributable to the existing stockholders for our
presently outstanding shares of common stock. We calculate net
tangible book value per share of our common stock by dividing
the net tangible book value (total consolidated tangible assets
less total consolidated liabilities) by the number of
outstanding shares of our common stock.
Our net tangible book value as of March 31, 2010 was a
deficit of $(12.1) billion or
$ per share of our common stock,
based on shares of our common
stock outstanding. Dilution is determined by subtracting net
tangible book value per share of our common stock from the
assumed initial public offering price per share of our common
stock.
Without taking into account any other changes in such net
tangible book value after March 31, 2010, after giving
effect to the sale
of shares
of our common stock in this offering assuming an initial public
offering price of $ per share,
less the underwriting discounts and commissions and the
estimated offering expenses payable by us, our pro forma as
adjusted net tangible book value at March 31, 2010 would
have been $ , or
$ per share. This represents an
immediate increase in net tangible book value of
$ per share of our common stock to
the existing stockholders and an immediate dilution in net
tangible book value of $ per
share of our common stock, to investors purchasing shares of our
common stock in this offering. The following table illustrates
such dilution per share of our common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed initial public offering price per share of our common
stock
|
|
$
|
|
|
Net tangible book value per share of our common stock as of
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net tangible book value per share of our common stock
after giving effect to this offering
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of dilution in net tangible book value per share of our
common stock to new investors in this offering
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their overallotment option in full,
the adjusted net tangible book value per share of our common
stock after giving effect to the offering would be
$ per share of our common stock.
This represents an increase in adjusted net tangible book value
of $ per share of our common stock
to existing stockholders and dilution in adjusted net tangible
book value of $ per share of our
common stock to new investors.
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share of
our common stock would increase (decrease) our net tangible book
value after giving to the offering by
$ million, or by
$ per share of our common stock,
assuming no change to the number of shares of our common stock
offered by us as set forth on the cover page of this prospectus,
and after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and
estimated expenses payable by us.
The following table summarizes, on a pro forma basis as of
March 31, 2010, the total number of shares of our common
stock purchased from us, the total cash consideration paid to us
and the average price per share of our common stock paid by
purchasers of such shares and by new investors purchasing shares
of our common stock in this offering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares of our
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Price Per
|
|
|
|
Common Stock Purchased
|
|
|
Total Consideration
|
|
|
Share of our
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Prior purchasers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
New investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
36
If the underwriters were to fully exercise their overallotment
option to
purchase additional
shares of our common stock from the selling stockholders, the
percentage of shares of our common stock held by existing
stockholders who are directors, officers or affiliated persons
would be %, and the percentage of shares of shares of
our common stock held by new investors would be %.
To the extent that we grant options to our employees or
directors in the future, and those options or existing options
are exercised or other issuances of shares of our common stock
are made, there will be further dilution to new investors.
37
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth selected financial data of HCA
Inc. as of the dates and for the periods indicated. The selected
financial data as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 and for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2009 have been derived from our consolidated financial
statements appearing elsewhere in this prospectus, which have
been audited by Ernst & Young LLP. The selected financial
data as of December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and for each of
the two years in the period ended December 31, 2006
presented in this table have been derived from our consolidated
financial statements audited by Ernst & Young LLP that are
not included in this prospectus.
The selected financial data as of March 31, 2010 and for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 have been
derived from our unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The selected
financial data as of March 31, 2009 have been derived from
our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements that
are not included in this prospectus. The unaudited financial
data presented have been prepared on a basis consistent with our
audited consolidated financial statements. In the opinion of
management, such unaudited financial data reflect all
adjustments, consisting only of normal and recurring
adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the results
for those periods. The results of operations for the interim
periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to be
expected for the full year or any future period.
The selected financial data set forth below should be read in
conjunction with, and are qualified by reference to,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our consolidated
financial statements, our unaudited condensed consolidated
financial statements and related notes thereto appearing
elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
As of and for the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
Summary of Operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
30,052
|
|
|
$
|
28,374
|
|
|
$
|
26,858
|
|
|
$
|
25,477
|
|
|
$
|
24,455
|
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
11,958
|
|
|
|
11,440
|
|
|
|
10,714
|
|
|
|
10,409
|
|
|
|
9,928
|
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
4,868
|
|
|
|
4,620
|
|
|
|
4,395
|
|
|
|
4,322
|
|
|
|
4,126
|
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
4,724
|
|
|
|
4,554
|
|
|
|
4,233
|
|
|
|
4,056
|
|
|
|
4,034
|
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
3,276
|
|
|
|
3,409
|
|
|
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
2,660
|
|
|
|
2,358
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(246
|
)
|
|
|
(223
|
)
|
|
|
(206
|
)
|
|
|
(197
|
)
|
|
|
(221
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Gains on sales of investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(243
|
)
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,425
|
|
|
|
1,416
|
|
|
|
1,426
|
|
|
|
1,391
|
|
|
|
1,374
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,987
|
|
|
|
2,021
|
|
|
|
2,215
|
|
|
|
955
|
|
|
|
655
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Losses (gains) on sales of facilities
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
(471
|
)
|
|
|
(205
|
)
|
|
|
(78
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Transaction costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,050
|
|
|
|
27,204
|
|
|
|
25,460
|
|
|
|
23,614
|
|
|
|
22,123
|
|
|
|
6,859
|
|
|
|
6,812
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
2,002
|
|
|
|
1,170
|
|
|
|
1,398
|
|
|
|
1,863
|
|
|
|
2,332
|
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
|
619
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
316
|
|
|
|
626
|
|
|
|
730
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
|
|
902
|
|
|
|
1,082
|
|
|
|
1,237
|
|
|
|
1,602
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
1,054
|
|
|
$
|
673
|
|
|
$
|
874
|
|
|
$
|
1,036
|
|
|
$
|
1,424
|
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
As of and for the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
Earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares (shares in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
(a
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Position:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
$
|
24,131
|
|
|
$
|
24,280
|
|
|
$
|
24,025
|
|
|
$
|
23,675
|
|
|
$
|
22,225
|
|
|
$
|
24,091
|
|
|
$
|
24,284
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
2,264
|
|
|
|
2,391
|
|
|
|
2,356
|
|
|
|
2,502
|
|
|
|
1,320
|
|
|
|
2,167
|
|
|
|
2,592
|
|
Long-term debt, including amounts due within one year
|
|
|
25,670
|
|
|
|
26,989
|
|
|
|
27,308
|
|
|
|
28,408
|
|
|
|
10,475
|
|
|
|
26,855
|
|
|
|
26,567
|
|
Equity securities with contingent redemption rights
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
1,008
|
|
|
|
995
|
|
|
|
938
|
|
|
|
907
|
|
|
|
828
|
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
1,019
|
|
Stockholders (deficit) equity
|
|
|
(7,978
|
)
|
|
|
(9,260
|
)
|
|
|
(9,600
|
)
|
|
|
(10,467
|
)
|
|
|
5,691
|
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
(8,869
|
)
|
Cash Flow Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
2,747
|
|
|
$
|
1,990
|
|
|
$
|
1,564
|
|
|
$
|
1,988
|
|
|
$
|
3,162
|
|
|
$
|
901
|
|
|
$
|
615
|
|
Cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(1,035
|
)
|
|
|
(1,467
|
)
|
|
|
(479
|
)
|
|
|
(1,307
|
)
|
|
|
(1,681
|
)
|
|
|
(181
|
)
|
|
|
(288
|
)
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(1,317
|
)
|
|
|
(1,600
|
)
|
|
|
(1,444
|
)
|
|
|
(1,865
|
)
|
|
|
(1,592
|
)
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
|
|
(337
|
)
|
Cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(1,865
|
)
|
|
|
(451
|
)
|
|
|
(1,326
|
)
|
|
|
(383
|
)
|
|
|
(1,403
|
)
|
|
|
(644
|
)
|
|
|
(436
|
)
|
Operating Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of hospitals at end of period(b)
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
Number of freestanding outpatient surgical centers at end of
period(c)
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
Number of licensed beds at end of period(d)
|
|
|
38,839
|
|
|
|
38,504
|
|
|
|
38,405
|
|
|
|
39,354
|
|
|
|
41,265
|
|
|
|
38,719
|
|
|
|
38,763
|
|
Weighted average licensed beds(e)
|
|
|
38,825
|
|
|
|
38,422
|
|
|
|
39,065
|
|
|
|
40,653
|
|
|
|
41,902
|
|
|
|
38,687
|
|
|
|
38,811
|
|
Admissions(f)
|
|
|
1,556,500
|
|
|
|
1,541,800
|
|
|
|
1,552,700
|
|
|
|
1,610,100
|
|
|
|
1,647,800
|
|
|
|
398,900
|
|
|
|
396,200
|
|
Equivalent admissions(g)
|
|
|
2,439,000
|
|
|
|
2,363,600
|
|
|
|
2,352,400
|
|
|
|
2,416,700
|
|
|
|
2,476,600
|
|
|
|
615,500
|
|
|
|
610,200
|
|
Average length of stay (days)(h)
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Average daily census(i)
|
|
|
20,650
|
|
|
|
20,795
|
|
|
|
21,049
|
|
|
|
21,688
|
|
|
|
22,225
|
|
|
|
21,696
|
|
|
|
21,701
|
|
Occupancy(j)
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
56
|
%
|
|
|
56
|
%
|
Emergency room visits(k)
|
|
|
5,593,500
|
|
|
|
5,246,400
|
|
|
|
5,116,100
|
|
|
|
5,213,500
|
|
|
|
5,415,200
|
|
|
|
1,367,100
|
|
|
|
1,359,700
|
|
Outpatient surgeries(l)
|
|
|
794,600
|
|
|
|
797,400
|
|
|
|
804,900
|
|
|
|
820,900
|
|
|
|
836,600
|
|
|
|
190,700
|
|
|
|
194,400
|
|
Inpatient surgeries(m)
|
|
|
494,500
|
|
|
|
493,100
|
|
|
|
516,500
|
|
|
|
533,100
|
|
|
|
541,400
|
|
|
|
122,500
|
|
|
|
122,600
|
|
Days revenues in accounts receivable(n)
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Gross patient revenues(o)
|
|
$
|
115,682
|
|
|
$
|
102,843
|
|
|
$
|
92,429
|
|
|
$
|
84,913
|
|
|
$
|
78,662
|
|
|
$
|
31,054
|
|
|
$
|
28,742
|
|
Outpatient revenues as a % of patient revenues(p)
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
37
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Due to our November 2006 merger and Recapitalization, our
capital structure and share-based compensation plans for periods
before and after the Recapitalization are not comparable,
therefore we are presenting earnings per share information only
for periods subsequent to the Recapitalization. |
39
|
|
|
(b) |
|
Excludes eight facilities in 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and seven
facilities in 2006 and 2005 that are not consolidated (accounted
for using the equity method) for financial reporting purposes. |
|
(c) |
|
Excludes eight facilities in 2010, 2009 and 2008, nine
facilities in 2007 and 2006 and seven facilities in 2005 that
are not consolidated (accounted for using the equity method) for
financial reporting purposes. |
|
(d) |
|
Licensed beds are those beds for which a facility has been
granted approval to operate from the applicable state licensing
agency. |
|
(e) |
|
Weighted average licensed beds represents the average number of
licensed beds, weighted based on periods owned. |
|
(f) |
|
Represents the total number of patients admitted to our
hospitals and is used by management and certain investors as a
general measure of inpatient volume. |
|
(g) |
|
Equivalent admissions are used by management and certain
investors as a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. Equivalent admissions are computed by
multiplying admissions (inpatient volume) by the sum of gross
inpatient revenue and gross outpatient revenue and then dividing
the resulting amount by gross inpatient revenue. The equivalent
admissions computation equates outpatient revenue to
the volume measure (admissions) used to measure inpatient
volume, resulting in a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. |
|
(h) |
|
Represents the average number of days admitted patients stay in
our hospitals. |
|
(i) |
|
Represents the average number of patients in our hospital beds
each day. |
|
(j) |
|
Represents the percentage of hospital licensed beds occupied by
patients. Both average daily census and occupancy rate provide
measures of the utilization of inpatient rooms. |
|
(k) |
|
Represents the number of patients treated in our emergency rooms. |
|
(l) |
|
Represents the number of surgeries performed on patients who
were not admitted to our hospitals. Pain management and
endoscopy procedures are not included in outpatient surgeries. |
|
(m) |
|
Represents the number of surgeries performed on patients who
have been admitted to our hospitals. Pain management and
endoscopy procedures are not included in inpatient surgeries. |
|
(n) |
|
Revenues per day is calculated by dividing the revenues for the
period by the days in the period. Days revenues in accounts
receivable is then calculated as accounts receivable, net of the
allowance for doubtful accounts, at the end of the period
divided by revenues per day. |
|
(o) |
|
Gross patient revenues are based upon our standard charge
listing. Gross charges/revenues do not reflect what our hospital
facilities are paid. Gross charges/revenues are reduced by
contractual adjustments, discounts and charity care to determine
reported revenues. |
|
(p) |
|
Represents the percentage of patient revenues related to
patients who are not admitted to our hospitals. |
40
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
You should read the following discussion of our results of
operations and financial condition with Selected Financial
Data and the consolidated financial statements and related
notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. This discussion
contains forward-looking statements and involves numerous risks
and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, those
described in the Risk Factors section of this
prospectus. Actual results may differ materially from those
contained in any forward-looking statements.
You also should read the following discussion of our results
of operations and financial condition with
Business Business Drivers and Measures
for a discussion of certain of our important financial policies
and objectives; performance measures and operational factors we
use to evaluate our financial condition and operating
performance; and our business segments.
Overview
We are one of the leading health care services companies in the
United States. At March 31, 2010, we operated 162
hospitals, comprised of 156 general, acute care hospitals; five
psychiatric hospitals; and one rehabilitation hospital. The 162
hospital total includes eight hospitals (seven general, acute
care hospitals and one rehabilitation hospital) owned by joint
ventures in which an affiliate of HCA is a partner, and these
joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method. In
addition, we operated 106 freestanding surgery centers, eight of
which are owned by joint ventures in which an affiliate of HCA
is a partner, and these joint ventures are accounted for using
the equity method. Our facilities are located in 20 states
and England. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we
generated revenues of $30.052 billion and net income
attributable to HCA Inc. of $1.054 billion, and for the
quarter ended March 31, 2010, we generated revenues of
$7.544 billion and net income attributable to HCA Inc. of
$388 million.
On November 17, 2006, we were acquired by a private
investor group comprised of affiliates of or funds sponsored by
Bain Capital Partners, LLC, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts &
Co., Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity (now BAML Capital
Partners), Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corporation and HCA
founder Dr. Thomas F. Frist, Jr., and by members of
management and certain other investors. We refer to the merger,
the financing transactions related to the merger and other
related transactions collectively as the
Recapitalization.
First
Quarter 2010 Operations Summary
Net income attributable to HCA Inc. totaled $388 million
for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, compared to
$360 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.
Revenues increased to $7.544 billion in the first quarter
of 2010 from $7.431 billion in the first quarter of 2009.
First quarter 2010 results include impairments of long-lived
assets of $18 million. First quarter 2009 results include
losses on sales of facilities of $5 million and impairments
of long-lived assets of $9 million.
Revenues increased 1.5% on a consolidated basis and on a same
facility basis for the quarter ended March 31, 2010
compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2009. The increase
in consolidated revenues can be attributed to the combined
impact of a 0.6% increase in revenue per equivalent admission
and a 0.9% increase in equivalent admissions. The same facility
revenues increase resulted from the combined impact of a 0.4%
increase in same facility revenue per equivalent admission and a
1.1% increase in same facility equivalent admissions.
During the quarter ended March 31, 2010, consolidated
admissions and same facility admissions increased 0.7% and 0.9%,
respectively, compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2009.
Inpatient surgeries declined 0.1% on a consolidated basis and
declined 0.4% on a same facility basis during the quarter ended
March 31, 2010, compared to the quarter ended
March 31, 2009. Outpatient surgeries declined 1.9% on a
consolidated basis and declined 1.8% on a same facility basis
during the quarter ended March 31, 2010, compared to the
quarter ended March 31, 2009. Emergency department visits
increased 0.5% on a consolidated basis and
41
increased 1.0% on a same facility basis during the quarter ended
March 31, 2010, compared to the quarter ended
March 31, 2009.
For the quarter ended March 31, 2010, the provision for
doubtful accounts declined $243 million to 7.5% of
revenues, from 10.9% of revenues for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009. The self-pay revenue deductions for charity
care and uninsured discounts increased $55 million and
$418 million (we increased our uninsured discount
percentages during August 2009), respectively, during the
first quarter of 2010, compared to the first quarter of 2009.
The sum of the provision for doubtful accounts, uninsured
discounts and charity care, as a percentage of the sum of
revenues, uninsured discounts and charity care, was 23.5% for
the first quarter of 2010, compared to 22.4% for the first
quarter of 2009. Same facility uninsured admissions increased
6.8% and same facility uninsured emergency room visits decreased
1.6% for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, compared to the
quarter ended March 31, 2009.
The increases in the self-pay revenue deductions result in
reductions to both the provision for doubtful accounts and
revenues, and were the primary contributing factors to the lower
growth rates we experienced in revenues and revenue per
equivalent admission during the quarter ended March 31,
2010.
Interest expense increased $45 million to $516 million
for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, from
$471 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2009. The
additional interest expense was due primarily to an increase in
the average effective interest rate.
Cash flows from operating activities increased
$286 million, from $615 million for the first quarter
of 2009 to $901 million for the first quarter of 2010. The
increase related primarily to income tax payments, as we
received a net refund of $71 million in the first quarter
of 2010 and made net payments of $146 million in the first
quarter of 2009.
2009
Operations Summary
Net income attributable to HCA Inc. totaled $1.054 billion
for 2009, compared to $673 million for 2008. The 2009
results include losses on sales of facilities of
$15 million and impairments of long-lived assets of
$43 million. The 2008 results include gains on sales of
facilities of $97 million and impairments of long-lived
assets of $64 million.
Revenues increased to $30.052 billion for 2009 from
$28.374 billion for 2008. Revenues increased 5.9% on a
consolidated basis and 6.1% on a same facility basis for 2009,
compared to 2008. The consolidated revenues increase can be
attributed to the combined impact of a 2.6% increase in revenue
per equivalent admission and a 3.2% increase in equivalent
admissions. The same facility revenues increase resulted from a
2.6% increase in same facility revenue per equivalent admission
and a 3.4% increase in same facility equivalent admissions.
During 2009, consolidated admissions increased 1.0% and same
facility admissions increased 1.2%, compared to 2008. Inpatient
surgical volumes increased 0.3% on a consolidated basis and
increased 0.5% on a same facility basis during 2009, compared to
2008. Outpatient surgical volumes declined 0.4% on a
consolidated basis and declined 0.1% on a same facility basis
during 2009, compared to 2008. Emergency department visits
increased 6.6% on a consolidated basis and increased 7.0% on a
same facility basis during 2009, compared to 2008.
For 2009, the provision for doubtful accounts declined to 10.9%
of revenues from 12.0% of revenues for 2008. The combined
self-pay revenue deductions for charity care and uninsured
discounts increased $1.486 billion for 2009, compared to
2008. The sum of the provision for doubtful accounts, uninsured
discounts and charity care, as a percentage of the sum of net
revenues, uninsured discounts and charity care, was 23.8% for
2009, compared to 21.9% for 2008. Same facility uninsured
admissions increased 4.7% and same facility uninsured emergency
room visits increased 6.5% for 2009, compared to 2008.
Interest expense totaled $1.987 billion for 2009, compared
to $2.021 billion for 2008. The $34 million decline in
interest expense for 2009 was due to a reduction in the average
debt balance offsetting an increase in the average interest rate.
42
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of our consolidated financial statements
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the
disclosure of contingent liabilities and the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses. Our estimates are based on historical
experience and various other assumptions we believe are
reasonable under the circumstances. We evaluate our estimates on
an ongoing basis and make changes to the estimates and related
disclosures as experience develops or new information becomes
known. Actual results may differ from these estimates.
We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our
more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation
of our consolidated financial statements.
Revenues
Revenues are recorded during the period the health care services
are provided, based upon the estimated amounts due from payers.
Estimates of contractual allowances under managed care health
plans are based upon the payment terms specified in the related
contractual agreements. Laws and regulations governing the
Medicare and Medicaid programs are complex and subject to
interpretation. The estimated reimbursement amounts are made on
a payer-specific basis and are recorded based on the best
information available regarding managements interpretation
of the applicable laws, regulations and contract terms.
Management continually reviews the contractual estimation
process to consider and incorporate updates to laws and
regulations and the frequent changes in managed care contractual
terms resulting from contract renegotiations and renewals. We
have invested significant resources to refine and improve our
computerized billing systems and the information system data
used to make contractual allowance estimates. We have developed
standardized calculation processes and related training programs
to improve the utility of our patient accounting systems.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
(EMTALA) requires any hospital participating in the
Medicare program to conduct an appropriate medical screening
examination of every person who presents to the hospitals
emergency room for treatment and, if the individual is suffering
from an emergency medical condition, to either stabilize the
condition or make an appropriate transfer of the individual to a
facility able to handle the condition. The obligation to screen
and stabilize emergency medical conditions exists regardless of
an individuals ability to pay for treatment. Federal and
state laws and regulations, including but not limited to EMTALA,
require, and our commitment to providing quality patient care
encourages, the provision of services to patients who are
financially unable to pay for the health care services they
receive. The Health Reform Law requires health plans offered
through an Exchange to reimburse hospitals for emergency
services provided to enrollees without prior authorization and
without regard to whether a participating provider contract is
in place. Further, the Health Reform Law contains provisions
that seek to decrease the number of uninsured individuals,
including requirements or incentives, which do not become
effective until 2014, for individuals to obtain, and large
employers to provide, insurance coverage. These mandates may
reduce the financial impact of screening for and stabilizing
emergency medical conditions. However, many factors are unknown
regarding the impact of the Health Reform Law, including how
many previously uninsured individuals will obtain coverage as a
result of the new law or the change, if any, in the volume of
inpatient and outpatient hospital services that are sought by
and provided to previously uninsured individuals.
We do not pursue collection of amounts related to patients who
meet our guidelines to qualify as charity care; therefore, they
are not reported in revenues. Patients treated at our hospitals
for nonelective care, who have income at or below 200% of the
federal poverty level, are eligible for charity care. The
federal poverty level is established by the federal government
and is based on income and family size. We provide discounts
from our gross charges to uninsured patients who do not qualify
for Medicaid or charity care. These discounts are similar to
those provided to many local managed care plans.
Due to the complexities involved in the classification and
documentation of health care services authorized and provided,
the estimation of revenues earned and the related reimbursement
are often subject to interpretations that could result in
payments that are different from our estimates. Adjustments to
estimated Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement amounts and
disproportionate-share funds, which resulted in net
43
increases to revenues, related primarily to cost reports filed
during the respective year were $40 million,
$32 million and $47 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. The adjustments to estimated reimbursement
amounts, which resulted in net increases to revenues, related
primarily to cost reports filed during previous years were
$60 million, $35 million and $83 million in 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively. We expect adjustments during the
next 12 months related to Medicare and Medicaid cost report
filings and settlements and disproportionate-share funds will
result in increases to revenues within generally similar ranges.
Provision
for Doubtful Accounts and the Allowance for Doubtful
Accounts
The collection of outstanding receivables from Medicare, managed
care payers, other third-party payers and patients is our
primary source of cash and is critical to our operating
performance. The primary collection risks relate to uninsured
patient accounts, including patient accounts for which the
primary insurance carrier has paid the amounts covered by the
applicable agreement, but patient responsibility amounts
(deductibles and copayments) remain outstanding. The provision
for doubtful accounts and the allowance for doubtful accounts
relate primarily to amounts due directly from patients. An
estimated allowance for doubtful accounts is recorded for all
uninsured accounts, regardless of the aging of those accounts.
Accounts are written off when all reasonable internal and
external collection efforts have been performed. Our collection
policies include a review of all accounts against certain
standard collection criteria, upon completion of our internal
collection efforts. Accounts determined to possess positive
collectibility attributes are forwarded to a secondary external
collection agency and the other accounts are written off. The
accounts that are not collected by the secondary external
collection agency are written off when they are returned to us
by the collection agency (usually within 12 months).
Writeoffs are based upon specific identification and the
writeoff process requires a writeoff adjustment entry to the
patient accounting system. We do not pursue collection of
amounts related to patients that meet our guidelines to qualify
as charity care.
The amount of the provision for doubtful accounts is based upon
managements assessment of historical writeoffs and
expected net collections, business and economic conditions,
trends in federal, state, and private employer health care
coverage and other collection indicators. Management relies on
the results of detailed reviews of historical writeoffs and
recoveries at facilities that represent a majority of our
revenues and accounts receivable (the hindsight
analysis) as a primary source of information in estimating
the collectibility of our accounts receivable. We perform the
hindsight analysis quarterly, utilizing rolling twelve-months
accounts receivable collection and writeoff data. We believe our
quarterly updates to the estimated allowance for doubtful
accounts at each of our hospital facilities provide reasonable
valuations of our accounts receivable. These routine, quarterly
changes in estimates have not resulted in material adjustments
to our allowance for doubtful accounts, provision for doubtful
accounts or
period-to-period
comparisons of our results of operations. At March 31, 2010
and 2009, the allowance for doubtful accounts represented
approximately 94% and 93%, respectively, of the
$4.833 billion and $5.266 billion, respectively,
patient due accounts receivable balance. At December 31,
2009 and 2008, the allowance for doubtful accounts represented
approximately 94% and 92%, respectively, of the
$5.176 billion and $5.148 billion, respectively,
patient due accounts receivable balance. The patient due
accounts receivable balance represents the estimated uninsured
portion of our accounts receivable. The estimated uninsured
portion of Medicaid pending and uninsured discount pending
accounts is included in our patient due accounts receivable
balance.
The revenue deductions related to uninsured accounts (charity
care and uninsured discounts) generally have the inverse effect
on the provision for doubtful accounts. To quantify the total
impact of and trends related to uninsured accounts, we believe
it is beneficial to view these revenue deductions and provision
for doubtful accounts in combination, rather than each
separately. A summary of these amounts for the years
44
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and for the
three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 follows
(dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
Ended March 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
3,276
|
|
|
$
|
3,409
|
|
|
$
|
3,130
|
|
|
$
|
564
|
|
|
$
|
807
|
|
Uninsured discounts
|
|
|
2,935
|
|
|
|
1,853
|
|
|
|
1,474
|
|
|
|
1,035
|
|
|
|
617
|
|
Charity care
|
|
|
2,151
|
|
|
|
1,747
|
|
|
|
1,530
|
|
|
|
546
|
|
|
|
491
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
8,362
|
|
|
$
|
7,009
|
|
|
$
|
6,134
|
|
|
$
|
2,145
|
|
|
$
|
1,915
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision for doubtful accounts, as a percentage of
revenues, increased from 11.7% for 2007 to 12.0% for 2008 and
declined to 10.9% for 2009. However, the sum of the provision
for doubtful accounts, uninsured discounts and charity care, as
a percentage of the sum of net revenues, uninsured discounts and
charity care increased from 20.5% for 2007 to 21.9% for 2008 and
to 23.8% for 2009.
Days revenues in accounts receivable were 46 days and
47 days at March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and
45 days, 49 days and 53 days at December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Management expects a
continuation of the challenges related to the collection of the
patient due accounts. Adverse changes in the percentage of our
patients having adequate health care coverage, general economic
conditions, patient accounting service center operations, payer
mix, or trends in federal, state, and private employer health
care coverage could affect the collection of accounts
receivable, cash flows and results of operations.
The approximate breakdown of accounts receivable by payer
classification as of March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009
and 2008 is set forth in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Accounts Receivable
|
|
|
|
Under 91 Days
|
|
|
91180 Days
|
|
|
Over 180 Days
|
|
|
Accounts receivable aging at March 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medicare and Medicaid
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
47
|
%
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
42
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable aging at December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medicare and Medicaid
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
13
|
%
|
|
|
44
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable aging at December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medicare and Medicaid
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
48
|
%
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional
Liability Claims
We, along with virtually all health care providers, operate in
an environment with professional liability risks. Our facilities
are insured by our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary for losses
up to $50 million per occurrence, subject to a
$5 million per occurrence self-insured retention. We
purchase excess insurance on a claims-made basis for losses in
excess of $50 million per occurrence. Our professional
liability reserves, net of receivables under reinsurance
contracts, do not include amounts for any estimated losses
covered by our excess
45
insurance coverage. Provisions for losses related to
professional liability risks were $56 million and
$45 million for the three months ended March 31,
2010 and 2009, respectively, and $211 million,
$175 million and $163 million for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Reserves for professional liability risks represent the
estimated ultimate cost of all reported and unreported losses
incurred through the respective consolidated balance sheet
dates. The estimated ultimate cost includes estimates of direct
expenses and fees paid to outside counsel and experts, but does
not include the general overhead costs of our insurance
subsidiary or corporate office. Individual case reserves are
established based upon the particular circumstances of each
reported claim and represent our estimates of the future costs
that will be paid on reported claims. Case reserves are reduced
as claim payments are made and are adjusted upward or downward
as our estimates regarding the amounts of future losses are
revised. Once the case reserves for known claims are determined,
information is stratified by loss layers and retentions,
accident years, reported years, and geographic location of our
hospitals. Several actuarial methods are employed to utilize
this data to produce estimates of ultimate losses and reserves
for incurred but not reported claims, including: paid and
incurred extrapolation methods utilizing paid and incurred loss
development to estimate ultimate losses; frequency and severity
methods utilizing paid and incurred claims development to
estimate ultimate average frequency (number of claims) and
ultimate average severity (cost per claim); and
Bornhuetter-Ferguson methods which add expected development to
actual paid or incurred experience to estimate ultimate losses.
These methods use our company-specific historical claims data
and other information. Company-specific claim reporting and
settlement data collected over an approximate
20-year
period is used in our reserve estimation process. This
company-specific data includes information regarding our
business, including historical paid losses and loss adjustment
expenses, historical and current case loss reserves, actual and
projected hospital statistical data, professional liability
retentions for each policy year, geographic information and
other data.
Reserves and provisions for professional liability risks are
based upon actuarially determined estimates. The estimated
reserve ranges, net of amounts receivable under reinsurance
contracts, were $1.024 billion to $1.270 billion at
December 31, 2009 and $1.102 billion to
$1.332 billion at December 31, 2008. Our estimated
reserves for professional liability claims may change
significantly if future claims differ from expected trends. We
perform sensitivity analyses which model the volatility of key
actuarial assumptions and monitor our reserves for adequacy
relative to all our assumptions in the aggregate. Based on our
analysis, we believe the estimated professional liability
reserve ranges represent the reasonably likely outcomes for
ultimate losses. We consider the number and severity of claims
to be the most significant assumptions in estimating reserves
for professional liabilities. A 2% change in the expected
frequency trend could be reasonable likely and would increase
the reserve estimate by $16 million or reduce the reserve
estimate by $15 million. A 2% change in the expected claim
severity trend could be reasonably likely and would increase the
reserve estimate by $69 million or reduce the reserve
estimate by $63 million. We believe adequate reserves have
been recorded for our professional liability claims; however,
due to the complexity of the claims, the extended period of time
to settle the claims and the wide range of potential outcomes,
our ultimate liability for professional liability claims could
change by more than the estimated sensitivity amounts and could
change materially from our current estimates.
The reserves for professional liability risks cover
approximately 2,600 and 2,800 individual claims at
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and estimates for
unreported potential claims. The time period required to resolve
these claims can vary depending upon the jurisdiction and
whether the claim is settled or litigated. The average time
period between the occurrence and payment of final settlement
for our professional liability claims is approximately five
years, although the facts and circumstances of each individual
claim can result in an
occurrence-to-settlement
timeframe that varies from this average. The estimation of the
timing of payments beyond a year can vary significantly.
Reserves for professional liability risks were
$1.335 billion, $1.322 billion and $1.387 billion
at March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The current portion of these reserves,
$277 million, $265 million and $279 million at
March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, is included in other accrued expenses.
Obligations covered by reinsurance contracts are included in the
reserves for professional liability risks, as the insurance
subsidiary remains liable to the extent reinsurers do not meet
their obligations. Reserves for professional liability risks
(net of $49 million, $53 million and $57 million
receivable
46
under reinsurance contracts at March 31, 2010,
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively) were
$1.286 billion, $1.269 billion and $1.330 billion
at March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The estimated total net reserves for professional
liability risks at March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009
and 2008 are comprised of $736 million, $680 million
and $724 million, respectively, of case reserves for known
claims and $550 million, $589 million and
$606 million, respectively, of reserves for incurred but
not reported claims.
Changes in our professional liability reserves, net of
reinsurance recoverable, for the years ended December 31,
are summarized in the following table (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Net reserves for professional liability claims, January 1
|
|
$
|
1,330
|
|
|
$
|
1,469
|
|
|
$
|
1,542
|
|
Provision for current year claims
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
|
239
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
Favorable development related to prior years claims
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
|
|
(64
|
)
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision
|
|
|
211
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments for current year claims
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Payments for prior years claims
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total claim payments
|
|
|
272
|
|
|
|
314
|
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net reserves for professional liability claims, December 31
|
|
$
|
1,269
|
|
|
$
|
1,330
|
|
|
$
|
1,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The favorable development related to prior years claims
resulted from declining claim frequency and moderating claim
severity trends. We believe these favorable trends are primarily
attributable to tort reforms enacted in key states, particularly
Texas, and our risk management and patient safety initiatives,
particularly in the area of obstetrics.
Income
Taxes
We calculate our provision for income taxes using the asset and
liability method, under which deferred tax assets and
liabilities are recognized by identifying the temporary
differences that arise from the recognition of items in
different periods for tax and accounting purposes. Deferred tax
assets generally represent the tax effects of amounts expensed
in our income statement for which tax deductions will be claimed
in future periods.
Although we believe we have properly reported taxable income and
paid taxes in accordance with applicable laws, federal, state or
international taxing authorities may challenge our tax positions
upon audit. Significant judgment is required in determining and
assessing the impact of uncertain tax positions. We report a
liability for unrecognized tax benefits from uncertain tax
positions taken or expected to be taken in our income tax
return. During each reporting period, we assess the facts and
circumstances related to uncertain tax positions. If the
realization of unrecognized tax benefits is deemed probable
based upon new facts and circumstances, the estimated liability
and the provision for income taxes are reduced in the current
period. Final audit results may vary from our estimates.
Results
of Operations
Revenue/Volume
Trends
Our revenues depend upon inpatient occupancy levels, the
ancillary services and therapy programs ordered by physicians
and provided to patients, the volume of outpatient procedures
and the charge and negotiated payment rates for such services.
Gross charges typically do not reflect what our facilities are
actually paid. Our facilities have entered into agreements with
third-party payers, including government programs and managed
care health plans, under which the facilities are paid based
upon the cost of providing services, predetermined rates per
diagnosis, fixed per diem rates or discounts from gross charges.
We do not pursue collection of amounts related to patients who
meet our guidelines to qualify for charity care; therefore, they
are not reported in revenues. We provide discounts to uninsured
patients who do not qualify for Medicaid or charity care that
are similar to the discounts provided to many local managed care
plans.
47
Revenues increased 5.9% to $30.052 billion for 2009 from
$28.374 billion for 2008 and increased 5.6% for 2008 from
$26.858 billion for 2007. The increase in revenues in 2009
can be primarily attributed to the combined impact of a 2.6%
increase in revenue per equivalent admission and a 3.2% increase
in equivalent admissions compared to the prior year. The
increase in revenues in 2008 can be primarily attributed to the
combined impact of a 5.2% increase in revenue per equivalent
admission and a 0.5% increase in equivalent admissions compared
to 2007.
Consolidated admissions increased 1.0% in 2009 compared to 2008
and declined 0.7% in 2008 compared to 2007. Consolidated
inpatient surgeries increased 0.3% and consolidated outpatient
surgeries declined 0.4% during 2009 compared to 2008.
Consolidated inpatient surgeries declined 4.5% and consolidated
outpatient surgeries declined 0.9% during 2008 compared to 2007.
Consolidated emergency department visits increased 6.6% during
2009 compared to 2008 and increased 2.5% during 2008 compared to
2007.
Same facility revenues increased 6.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2009 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2008 and increased 7.0% for the year ended
December 31, 2008 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2007. The 6.1% increase for 2009 can be
primarily attributed to the combined impact of a 2.6% increase
in same facility revenue per equivalent admission and a 3.4%
increase in same facility equivalent admissions. The 7.0%
increase for 2008 can be primarily attributed to the combined
impact of a 5.1% increase in same facility revenue per
equivalent admission and a 1.9% increase in same facility
equivalent admissions.
Same facility admissions increased 1.2% in 2009 compared to 2008
and increased 0.9% in 2008 compared to 2007. Same facility
inpatient surgeries increased 0.5% and same facility outpatient
surgeries declined 0.1% during 2009 compared to 2008. Same
facility inpatient surgeries declined 0.5% and same facility
outpatient surgeries declined 0.2% during 2008 compared to 2007.
Same facility emergency department visits increased 7.0% during
2009 compared to 2008 and increased 3.6% during 2008 compared to
2007.
Same facility uninsured emergency room visits increased 6.5% and
same facility uninsured admissions increased 4.7% during 2009
compared to 2008. Same facility uninsured emergency room visits
increased 4.5% and same facility uninsured admissions increased
1.7% during 2008 compared to 2007. Management believes same
facility uninsured emergency department visits and same facility
uninsured admissions could continue to increase during 2010 if
the adverse general economic and unemployment trends continue.
Admissions related to Medicare, managed Medicare, Medicaid,
managed Medicaid, managed care and other insurers and the
uninsured for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and
2007 and for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
are set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Medicare
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Managed Medicare
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Medicaid
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Managed Medicaid
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48
The approximate percentages of our inpatient revenues related to
Medicare, managed Medicare, Medicaid, managed Medicaid, managed
care plans and other insurers and the uninsured for the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and for the three
months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 are set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Medicare
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
33
|
%
|
Managed Medicare
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Medicaid
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Managed Medicaid
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2009, we owned and operated 38 hospitals
and 33 surgery centers in the state of Florida. Our Florida
facilities revenues totaled $7.343 billion and
$7.099 billion for the years ended December 31, 2009
and 2008, respectively. At December 31, 2009, we owned and
operated 35 hospitals and 23 surgery centers in the state of
Texas. Our Texas facilities revenues totaled
$8.042 billion and $7.351 billion for the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. During 2009 and
2008, 57% and 55%, respectively, of our admissions and 51% of
our revenues were generated by our Florida and Texas facilities.
Uninsured admissions in Florida and Texas represented 64% and
63% of our uninsured admissions during 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
We provided $2.151 billion, $1.747 billion and
$1.530 billion of charity care (amounts are based upon our
gross charges) during the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively. We provide discounts to uninsured
patients who do not qualify for Medicaid or charity care. These
discounts are similar to those provided to many local managed
care plans and totaled $2.935 billion, $1.853 billion
and $1.474 billion for the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
We receive a significant portion of our revenues from government
health programs, principally Medicare and Medicaid, which are
highly regulated and subject to frequent and substantial
changes. We have increased the indigent care services we provide
in several communities in the state of Texas, in affiliation
with other hospitals. The state of Texas has been involved in
the effort to increase the indigent care provided by private
hospitals. As a result of this additional indigent care provided
by private hospitals, public hospital districts or counties in
Texas have available funds that were previously devoted to
indigent care. The public hospital districts or counties are
under no contractual or legal obligation to provide such
indigent care. The public hospital districts or counties have
elected to transfer some portion of these available funds to the
states Medicaid program. Such action is at the sole
discretion of the public hospital districts or counties. It is
anticipated that these contributions to the state will be
matched with federal Medicaid funds. The state then may make
supplemental payments to hospitals in the state for Medicaid
services rendered. Hospitals receiving Medicaid supplemental
payments may include those that are providing additional
indigent care services. Such payments must be within the federal
UPL established by federal regulation. Our Texas Medicaid
revenues included $169 million and $63 million for the
three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009,
respectively, and $474 million, $262 million and
$232 million for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively, of Medicaid supplemental payments
pursuant to UPL programs.
49
Operating
Results Summary
The following are comparative summaries of operating results for
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
30,052
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
$
|
28,374
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
$
|
26,858
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
11,958
|
|
|
|
39.8
|
|
|
|
11,440
|
|
|
|
40.3
|
|
|
|
10,714
|
|
|
|
39.9
|
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
|
|
40.7
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
4,868
|
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
|
|
4,620
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
|
4,395
|
|
|
|
16.4
|
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
4,724
|
|
|
|
15.7
|
|
|
|
4,554
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
|
|
|
4,233
|
|
|
|
15.7
|
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
3,276
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
3,409
|
|
|
|
12.0
|
|
|
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(246
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(223
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(206
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,425
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
1,416
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
1,426
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
1,987
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
2,021
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
2,215
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
Losses (gains) on sales of facilities
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(471
|
)
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,050
|
|
|
|
93.3
|
|
|
|
27,204
|
|
|
|
95.9
|
|
|
|
25,460
|
|
|
|
94.8
|
|
|
|
6,859
|
|
|
|
90.9
|
|
|
|
6,812
|
|
|
|
91.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
2,002
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
|
|
1,170
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
1,398
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
619
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
316
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
902
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
1,082
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
1,054
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
$
|
673
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
$
|
874
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% changes from prior year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
5.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
71.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
|
56.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admissions(a)
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Equivalent admissions(b)
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue per equivalent admission
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same facility % changes from prior year(c):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admissions(a)
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Equivalent admissions(b)
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue per equivalent admission
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Represents the total number of patients admitted to our
hospitals and is used by management and certain investors as a
general measure of inpatient volume. |
|
(b) |
|
Equivalent admissions are used by management and certain
investors as a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. Equivalent admissions are computed by
multiplying admissions (inpatient volume) by the sum of gross
inpatient revenue and gross outpatient revenue and then dividing
the resulting amount by gross inpatient revenue. The equivalent
admissions computation equates outpatient revenue to
the volume measure (admissions) used to measure inpatient
volume, resulting in a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. |
|
(c) |
|
Same facility information excludes the operations of hospitals
and their related facilities that were either acquired, divested
or removed from service during the current and prior year. |
50
Supplemental
Non-GAAP Disclosures
Operating Measures on a Cash Revenues Basis
(Dollars in millions)
The results from operations presented on a cash revenues basis
for the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 follow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Cash
|
|
|
GAAP % of
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Cash
|
|
|
GAAP % of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratios(b)
|
|
|
Ratios(b)
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratios(b)
|
|
|
Ratios(b)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash revenues(a)
|
|
|
6,980
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,624
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
|
|
44.0
|
|
|
|
40.7
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
|
|
44.1
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
17.2
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
|
|
18.3
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
|
|
17.3
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
16.6
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% changes from prior year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash revenues
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue per equivalent admission
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash revenue per equivalent admission
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Cash revenues is defined as reported revenues less the provision
for doubtful accounts. We use cash revenues as an analytical
indicator for purposes of assessing the effect of uninsured
patient volumes, adjusted for the effect of both the revenue
deductions related to uninsured accounts (charity care and
uninsured discounts) and the provision for doubtful accounts
(which relates primarily to uninsured accounts), on our revenues
and certain operating expenses, as a percentage of cash
revenues. Variations in the revenue deductions related to
uninsured accounts generally have the inverse effect on the
provision for doubtful accounts. We increased our uninsured
discount percentages during August 2009 and the resulting
effects, for the first quarter of 2010, were an increase in
uninsured discounts of $418 million and a decline in the
provision for doubtful accounts of $243 million, compared
to the first quarter of 2009. Cash revenues is commonly used as
an analytical indicator within the health care industry. Cash
revenues should not be considered as a measure of financial
performance under generally accepted accounting principles.
Because cash revenues is not a measurement determined in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and is
thus susceptible to varying calculations, cash revenues, as
presented, may not be comparable to other similarly titled
measures of other health care companies. |
|
(b) |
|
Salaries and benefits, supplies and other operating expenses, as
a percentage of cash revenues (a non-GAAP financial measure),
present the impact on these ratios due to the adjustment of
deducting the provision for doubtful accounts from reported
revenues and results in these ratios being non-GAAP financial
measures. We believe these non-GAAP financial measures are
useful to investors to provide disclosures of our results of
operations on the same basis as that used by management.
Management uses this information to compare certain operating
expense categories as a percentage of cash revenues. Management
finds this information useful to evaluate certain expense
category trends without the influence of whether adjustments
related to revenues for uninsured accounts are recorded as
revenue adjustments (charity care and uninsured discounts) or
operating expenses (provision for doubtful accounts), and thus
the expense category trends are generally analyzed as a
percentage of cash revenues. These non-GAAP financial measures
should not be considered alternatives to GAAP financial
measures. We believe this supplemental information provides
management and the users of our financial statements with useful
information for
period-to-period
comparisons. Investors are encouraged to use GAAP measures when
evaluating our overall financial performance. |
51
Three
Months Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
Net income attributable to HCA Inc. totaled $388 million
for the first quarter of 2010 compared to $360 million for
the first quarter of 2009. Revenues increased 1.5% due to the
combined impact of revenue per equivalent admission growth of
0.6% and an increase of 0.9% in equivalent admissions for the
first quarter of 2010 compared to the first quarter of 2009.
Cash revenues (reported revenues less the provision for doubtful
accounts) increased 5.4% for the first quarter of 2010 compared
to the first quarter of 2009.
For the first quarter of 2010, consolidated admissions and same
facility admissions increased 0.7% and 0.9%, respectively,
compared to the first quarter of 2009. Outpatient surgical
volumes declined 1.9% on a consolidated basis and declined 1.8%
on a same facility basis during the first quarter of 2010,
compared to the first quarter of 2009. Consolidated inpatient
surgeries declined 0.1% and same facility inpatient surgeries
declined 0.4% in the first quarter of 2010, compared to the
first quarter of 2009. Emergency department visits increased
0.5% on a consolidated basis and increased 1.0% on a same
facility basis during the quarter ended March 31, 2010,
compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2009.
Salaries and benefits, as a percentage of revenues, were 40.7%
in the first quarter of 2010 and 39.3% in the first quarter of
2009. Salaries and benefits, as a percentage of cash revenues,
were 44.0% in the first quarter of 2010 and 44.1% in the first
quarter of 2009. Salaries and benefits per equivalent admission
increased 4.2% in the first quarter of 2010 compared to the
first quarter of 2009. Same facility labor rate increases
averaged 2.7% for the first quarter of 2010 compared to the
first quarter of 2009.
Supplies, as a percentage of revenues, were 15.9% in the first
quarter of 2010 and 16.3% in the first quarter of 2009.
Supplies, as a percentage of cash revenues, were 17.2% in the
first quarter of 2010 and 18.3% in the first quarter of 2009.
Supply cost per equivalent admission declined 1.7% in the first
quarter of 2010 compared to the first quarter of 2009. Supply
costs per equivalent admission increased 3.0% for medical
devices, 4.3% for blood products and 4.8% for general medical
and surgical items and declined 7.2% for pharmacy supplies in
the first quarter of 2010 compared to the first quarter of 2009.
Other operating expenses, as a percentage of revenues, increased
to 15.9% in the first quarter of 2010 compared to 14.8% in the
first quarter of 2009. Other operating expenses, as a percentage
of cash revenues, increased to 17.3% in the first quarter of
2010 compared to 16.6% in the first quarter of 2009. Other
operating expenses is primarily comprised of contract services,
professional fees, repairs and maintenance, rents and leases,
utilities, insurance (including professional liability
insurance) and nonincome taxes. Other operating expenses include
$90 million and $39 million of indigent care costs in
certain Texas markets during the first quarters of 2010 and
2009, respectively, and this increase is the primary component
of the overall increase in other operating expenses. Provisions
for losses related to professional liability risks were
$56 million and $45 million for the first quarters of
2010 and 2009, respectively.
Provision for doubtful accounts declined $243 million, from
$807 million in the first quarter of 2009 to
$564 million in the first quarter of 2010, and as a
percentage of revenues, declined to 7.5% in the first quarter of
2010 compared to 10.9% in the first quarter of 2009. The
provision for doubtful accounts and the allowance for doubtful
accounts relate primarily to uninsured amounts due directly from
patients. The combined self-pay revenue deductions for charity
care and uninsured discounts increased $473 million during
the first quarter of 2010, compared to the first quarter of
2009. The sum of the provision for doubtful accounts, uninsured
discounts and charity care, as a percentage of the sum of
revenues, uninsured discounts and charity care, was 23.5% for
the first quarter of 2010, compared to 22.4% for the first
quarter of 2009. To quantify the total impact of and trends
related to uninsured accounts, we believe it is beneficial to
review the related revenue deductions and the provision for
doubtful accounts in combination, rather than separately. At
March 31, 2010, our allowance for doubtful accounts
represented approximately 94% of the $4.833 billion total
patient due accounts receivable balance. The patient due
accounts receivable balance represents the estimated uninsured
portion of our accounts receivable.
Equity in earnings of affiliates was $68 million in each of
the first quarters of 2010 and 2009. Equity in earnings of
affiliates relates primarily to our Denver, Colorado market
joint venture.
52
Depreciation and amortization increased $2 million, from
$353 million in the first quarter of 2009 to
$355 million in the first quarter of 2010.
Interest expense increased from $471 million in the first
quarter of 2009 to $516 million in the first quarter of
2010 primarily due to an increase in the average effective
interest rate. Our average debt balance was $26.314 billion
for the first quarter of 2010 compared to $26.794 billion
for the first quarter of 2009. The average effective interest
rate for our long term debt increased from 7.1% for the quarter
ended March 31, 2009 to 8.0% for the quarter ended
March 31, 2010.
During the first quarter of 2010, no gains or losses on sales of
facilities were recognized. During the first quarter of 2009, we
recorded a net loss on sales of facilities and other investments
of $5 million.
During the first quarter of 2010, we recorded asset impairment
charges of $18 million to adjust the values of real estate
and other investments to estimated fair value. During the first
quarter of 2009, we recorded an asset impairment charge of
$9 million to adjust the value of certain real estate
investments to estimated fair value.
The effective tax rate was 35.0% and 34.1% for the first
quarters of 2010 and 2009, respectively. The effective tax rate
computations exclude net income attributable to noncontrolling
interests as it relates to consolidated partnerships.
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests increased
from $72 million for the first quarter of 2009 to
$88 million for the first quarter of 2010. The increase in
net income attributable to noncontrolling interests related
primarily to growth in operating results of hospital joint
ventures in two Texas markets.
Years
Ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
Net income attributable to HCA Inc. totaled $1.054 billion
for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to
$673 million for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Financial results for 2009 include losses on sales of facilities
of $15 million and asset impairment charges of
$43 million. Financial results for 2008 include gains on
sales of facilities of $97 million and asset impairment
charges of $64 million.
Revenues increased 5.9% to $30.052 billion for 2009 from
$28.374 billion for 2008. The increase in revenues was due
primarily to the combined impact of a 2.6% increase in revenue
per equivalent admission and a 3.2% increase in equivalent
admissions compared to 2008. Same facility revenues increased
6.1% due primarily to the combined impact of a 2.6% increase in
same facility revenue per equivalent admission and a 3.4%
increase in same facility equivalent admissions compared to 2008.
During 2009, consolidated admissions increased 1.0% and same
facility admissions increased 1.2% for 2009, compared to 2008.
Consolidated inpatient surgical volumes increased 0.3%, and same
facility inpatient surgeries increased 0.5% during 2009 compared
to 2008. Consolidated outpatient surgical volumes declined 0.4%,
and same facility outpatient surgeries declined 0.1% during 2009
compared to 2008. Emergency department visits increased 6.6% on
a consolidated basis and increased 7.0% on a same facility basis
during 2009 compared to 2008.
Salaries and benefits, as a percentage of revenues, were 39.8%
in 2009 and 40.3% in 2008. Salaries and benefits per equivalent
admission increased 1.3% in 2009 compared to 2008. Same facility
labor rate increases averaged 3.7% for 2009 compared to 2008.
Supplies, as a percentage of revenues, were 16.2% in 2009 and
16.3% in 2008. Supply costs per equivalent admission increased
2.1% in 2009 compared to 2008. Same facility supply costs
increased 5.9% for medical devices, 4.0% for pharmacy supplies,
7.1% for blood products and 7.0% for general medical and
surgical items in 2009 compared to 2008.
Other operating expenses, as a percentage of revenues, declined
to 15.7% in 2009 from 16.1% in 2008. Other operating expenses
are primarily comprised of contract services, professional fees,
repairs and maintenance, rents and leases, utilities, insurance
(including professional liability insurance) and nonincome
taxes. The overall decline in other operating expenses, as a
percentage of revenues, is comprised of relatively small
53
reductions in several areas, including utilities, employee
recruitment and travel and entertainment. Other operating
expenses include $248 million and $144 million of
indigent care costs in certain Texas markets during 2009 and
2008, respectively. Provisions for losses related to
professional liability risks were $211 million and
$175 million for 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Provision for doubtful accounts declined $133 million, from
$3.409 billion in 2008 to $3.276 billion in 2009, and
as a percentage of revenues, declined to 10.9% for 2009 from
12.0% in 2008. The provision for doubtful accounts and the
allowance for doubtful accounts relate primarily to uninsured
amounts due directly from patients. The decline in the provision
for doubtful accounts can be attributed to the
$1.486 billion increase in the combined self-pay revenue
deductions for charity care and uninsured discounts during 2009,
compared to 2008. The sum of the provision for doubtful
accounts, uninsured discounts and charity care, as a percentage
of the sum of net revenues, uninsured discounts and charity
care, was 23.8% for 2009, compared to 21.9% for 2008. At
December 31, 2009, our allowance for doubtful accounts
represented approximately 94% of the $5.176 billion total
patient due accounts receivable balance, including accounts, net
of estimated contractual discounts, related to patients for
which eligibility for Medicaid coverage or uninsured discounts
was being evaluated.
Equity in earnings of affiliates increased from
$223 million for 2008 to $246 million for 2009. Equity
in earnings of affiliates relates primarily to our Denver,
Colorado market joint venture.
Depreciation and amortization decreased, as a percentage of
revenues, to 4.8% in 2009 from 5.0% in 2008. Depreciation
expense was $1.419 billion for 2009 and $1.412 billion
for 2008.
Interest expense decreased to $1.987 billion for 2009 from
$2.021 billion for 2008. The decrease in interest expense
was due to reductions in the average debt balance. Our average
debt balance was $26.267 billion for 2009 compared to
$27.211 billion for 2008. The average interest rate for our
long-term debt increased from 7.4% for 2008 to 7.6% for 2009.
Net losses on sales of facilities were $15 million for 2009
and included $8 million of net losses on the sales of three
hospital facilities and $7 million of net losses on sales
of real estate and other health care entity investments. Gains
on sales of facilities were $97 million for 2008 and
included $81 million of gains on the sales of two hospital
facilities and $16 million of net gains on sales of real
estate and other health care entity investments.
Impairments of long-lived assets were $43 million for 2009
and included $19 million related to goodwill and
$24 million related to property and equipment. Impairments
of long-lived assets were $64 million for 2008 and included
$48 million related to goodwill and $16 million
related to property and equipment.
The effective tax rate was 37.3% and 28.5% for 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The effective tax rate computations exclude net
income attributable to noncontrolling interests as it relates to
consolidated partnerships. Primarily as a result of reaching a
settlement with the IRS Appeals Division and the revision of the
amount of a proposed IRS adjustment related to prior taxable
periods, we reduced our provision for income taxes by
$69 million in 2008. Excluding the effect of these
adjustments, the effective tax rate for 2008 would have been
35.8%.
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests increased
from $229 million for 2008 to $321 million for 2009.
The increase in net income attributable to noncontrolling
interests related primarily to growth in operating results of
hospital joint ventures in two Texas markets.
Years
Ended December 31, 2008 and 2007
Net income attributable to HCA Inc. totaled $673 million
for the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to
$874 million for the year ended December 31, 2007.
Financial results for 2008 include gains on sales of facilities
of $97 million and asset impairment charges of
$64 million. Financial results for 2007 include gains on
sales of facilities of $471 million and an asset impairment
charge of $24 million.
Revenues increased 5.6% to $28.374 billion for 2008 from
$26.858 billion for 2007. The increase in revenues was due
primarily to the combined impact of a 5.2% increase in revenue
per equivalent admission
54
and a 0.5% increase in equivalent admissions compared to 2007.
Same facility revenues increased 7.0% due primarily to the
combined impact of a 5.1% increase in same facility revenue per
equivalent admission and a 1.9% increase in same facility
equivalent admissions compared to 2007.
During 2008, consolidated admissions declined 0.7% and same
facility admissions increased 0.9%, compared to 2007. Inpatient
surgical volumes declined 4.5% on a consolidated basis and same
facility inpatient surgeries declined 0.5% during 2008 compared
to 2007. Outpatient surgical volumes declined 0.9% on a
consolidated basis and same facility outpatient surgeries
declined 0.2% during 2008 compared to 2007. Emergency department
visits increased 2.5% on a consolidated basis and increased 3.6%
on a same facility basis during 2008 compared to 2007.
Salaries and benefits, as a percentage of revenues, were 40.3%
in 2008 and 39.9% in 2007. Salaries and benefits per equivalent
admission increased 6.3% in 2008 compared to 2007. Same facility
labor rate increases averaged 5.1% for 2008 compared to 2007.
Supplies, as a percentage of revenues, were 16.3% in 2008 and
16.4% in 2007. Supply costs per equivalent admission increased
4.5% in 2008 compared to 2007. Same facility supply costs
increased 8.0% for medical devices, 2.8% for pharmacy supplies,
18.7% for blood products and 6.6% for general medical and
surgical items in 2008 compared to 2007.
Other operating expenses, as a percentage of revenues, increased
to 16.1% in 2008 from 15.7% in 2007. Other operating expenses
are primarily comprised of contract services, professional fees,
repairs and maintenance, rents and leases, utilities, insurance
(including professional liability insurance) and nonincome
taxes. Increases in professional fees paid to hospitalists,
emergency room physicians and anesthesiologists represented
20 basis points of the 2008 increase in other operating
expenses. Other operating expenses include $144 million and
$187 million of indigent care costs in certain Texas
markets during 2008 and 2007, respectively. Provisions for
losses related to professional liability risks were
$175 million and $163 million for 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Provision for doubtful accounts, as a percentage of revenues,
increased to 12.0% for 2008 from 11.7% in 2007. The provision
for doubtful accounts and the allowance for doubtful accounts
relate primarily to uninsured amounts due directly from
patients. The increase in the provision for doubtful accounts,
as a percentage of revenues, can be attributed to an increasing
amount of patient financial responsibility under certain managed
care plans and same facility increases in uninsured emergency
room visits of 4.5% and uninsured admissions of 1.7% in 2008
compared to 2007. At December 31, 2008, our allowance for
doubtful accounts represented approximately 92% of the
$5.148 billion total patient due accounts receivable
balance, including accounts, net of estimated contractual
discounts, related to patients for which eligibility for
Medicaid coverage or uninsured discounts was being evaluated.
Equity in earnings of affiliates increased from
$206 million for 2007 to $223 million for 2008. Equity
in earnings of affiliates relates primarily to our Denver,
Colorado market joint venture.
Depreciation and amortization declined, as a percentage of
revenues, to 5.0% in 2008 from 5.4% in 2007. Depreciation
expense was $1.412 billion for 2008 and $1.421 billion
for 2007.
Interest expense declined to $2.021 billion for 2008 from
$2.215 billion for 2007. The decline in interest expense
was due to reductions in both the average debt balance and the
average interest rate on long-term debt. Our average debt
balance was $27.211 billion for 2008 compared to
$27.732 billion for 2007. The average interest rate for our
long-term debt declined from 8.0% for 2007 to 7.4% for 2008.
Gains on sales of facilities were $97 million for 2008 and
included $81 million of net gains on the sales of two
hospital facilities and $16 million of net gains on sales
of real estate and other health care entity investments. Gains
on sales of facilities were $471 million for 2007 and
included a $312 million gain on the sale of our two
Switzerland hospitals, a $131 million gain on the sale of a
facility in Florida and $28 million of net gains on sales
of real estate and other health care entity investments.
55
Impairments of long-lived assets were $64 million for 2008
and included $48 million related to goodwill and
$16 million related to property and equipment. The
$24 million asset impairment for 2007 related to property
and equipment.
The effective tax rate was 28.5% for 2008 and 26.6% for 2007,
respectively. The effective tax rate computations exclude net
income attributable to noncontrolling interests as it relates to
consolidated partnerships. Primarily as a result of reaching a
settlement with the IRS Appeals Division and the revision of the
amount of a proposed IRS adjustment related to prior taxable
periods, we reduced our provision for income taxes by
$69 million in 2008. Our 2007 provision for income taxes
was reduced by $85 million, principally based on receiving
new information related to tax positions taken in a prior
taxable year, and by an additional $39 million to adjust
2006 state tax accruals to the amounts reported on
completed tax returns and based upon an analysis of the
Recapitalization costs. Excluding the effect of these
adjustments, the effective tax rates for 2008 and 2007 would
have been 35.8% and 37.0%, respectively.
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests increased
from $208 million for 2007 to $229 million for 2008.
The increase relates primarily to our Austin, Texas market
partnership and our group purchasing organization.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Our primary cash requirements are paying our operating expenses,
servicing our debt, capital expenditures on our existing
properties, acquisitions of hospitals and other health care
entities and distributions to noncontrolling interests. Our
primary cash sources are cash flow from operating activities,
issuances of debt and equity securities and dispositions of
hospitals and other health care entities.
Cash provided by operating activities totaled $901 million
for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 compared to
$615 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2009. The
$286 million increase in cash provided by operating
activities in the first quarter of 2010 compared to the first
quarter of 2009 related primarily to a $239 million
decrease in income taxes and a $44 million increase in net
income. Working capital totaled $2.167 billion at
March 31, 2010. Cash provided by operating activities
totaled $2.747 billion in 2009 compared to
$1.990 billion in 2008 and $1.564 billion in 2007.
Working capital totaled $2.264 billion at December 31,
2009 and $2.391 billion at December 31, 2008. The
$757 million increase in cash provided by operating
activities for 2009, compared to 2008, related primarily to the
$473 million increase in net income and $143 million
improvement from changes in operating assets and liabilities and
the provision for doubtful accounts. The $426 million
increase in cash provided by operating activities for 2008,
compared to 2007, relates primarily to changes in working
capital items. The changes in accounts receivable (net of the
provision for doubtful accounts), inventories and other assets,
and accounts payable and accrued expenses contributed
$42 million to cash provided by operating activities for
2008 while changes in these items decreased cash provided by
operating activities by $485 million for 2007. The net
impact of the cash payments for interest and income taxes was an
increase in cash payments of $203 million for 2009 compared
to 2008 and an increase of $111 million for 2008 compared
to 2007.
Cash used in investing activities was $181 million for the
quarter ended March 31, 2010 compared to $288 million
for the quarter ended March 31, 2009. Excluding
acquisitions, capital expenditures were $214 million in the
first quarter of 2010 and $337 million in the first quarter
of 2009. Cash used in investing activities was
$1.035 billion, $1.467 billion and $479 million
in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Excluding acquisitions,
capital expenditures were $1.317 billion in 2009,
$1.600 billion in 2008 and $1.444 billion in 2007. We
expended $61 million, $85 million and $32 million
for acquisitions of hospitals and health care entities during
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Expenditures for acquisitions
in all three years were generally comprised of outpatient and
ancillary services entities and were funded by a combination of
cash flows from operations and the issuance or incurrence of
debt. Planned capital expenditures are expected to approximate
$1.5 billion in 2010. At March 31, 2010, there were
projects under construction which had an estimated additional
cost to complete and equip over the next five years of
$1.230 billion. We expect to finance capital expenditures
with internally generated and borrowed funds.
56
During 2009, we received cash proceeds of $41 million from
dispositions of three hospitals and sales of other health care
entities and real estate investments. We also received net cash
proceeds of $303 million related to net changes in our
investments. During 2008, we received cash proceeds of
$143 million from dispositions of two hospitals and
$50 million from sales of other health care entities and
real estate investments. During 2007, we sold three hospitals
for cash proceeds of $661 million, and we also received
cash proceeds of $106 million related primarily to the
sales of real estate investments and $207 million related
to net changes in our investments.
Cash used in financing activities totaled $644 million for
the quarter ended March 31, 2010 compared to
$436 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.
During the first quarter of 2010, cash flows used in financing
activities included payment of a cash distribution to
stockholders of $1.751 billion, increases in net borrowings
of $1.216 billion, payments of debt issuance costs of
$25 million and distributions to noncontrolling interests
of $83 million. During the first quarter of 2009, cash
flows used in financing activities included reductions in net
borrowings of $374 million, payments of debt issuance costs
of $14 million and distributions to noncontrolling
interests of $55 million. Cash used in financing activities
totaled $1.865 billion in 2009, $451 million in 2008
and $1.326 billion in 2007. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, we
used cash proceeds from sales of facilities and available cash
provided by operations to make net debt repayments of
$1.459 billion, $260 million and $1.270 billion,
respectively. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, we made distributions
to noncontrolling interests of $330 million,
$178 million and $152 million, respectively. We also
paid debt issuance costs of $70 million for 2009. We or our
affiliates, including affiliates of the Sponsors, may in the
future repurchase portions of our debt securities, subject to
certain limitations, from time to time in either the open market
or through privately negotiated transactions, in accordance with
applicable SEC and other legal requirements. The timing, prices,
and sizes of purchases depend upon prevailing trading prices,
general economic and market conditions, and other factors,
including applicable securities laws. Funds for the repurchase
of debt securities have, and are expected to, come primarily
from cash generated from operations and borrowed funds.
In addition to cash flows from operations, available sources of
capital include amounts available under our senior secured
credit facilities ($1.851 billion as of March 31, 2010
and $3.181 billion as of December 31, 2009) and
anticipated access to public and private debt markets.
On January 27, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a
distribution to the Companys stockholders and holders of
vested stock options. The distribution was $17.50 per share and
vested stock option, or $1.751 billion in the aggregate.
The distribution was paid on February 5, 2010 to holders of
record on February 1, 2010. The distribution was funded
using funds available under our existing senior secured credit
facilities and approximately $100 million of cash on hand.
On May 5, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a
distribution to the Companys existing stockholders and
holders of vested options. The distribution will be $5.00 per
share and vested stock option, or approximately
$500 million in the aggregate. The distribution is expected
to be paid on May 14, 2010 to holders of record on
May 6, 2010. The distribution is expected to be funded
using funds available under our senior secured credit facilities.
Investments of our professional liability insurance subsidiary,
to maintain statutory equity and pay claims, totaled
$1.303 billion, $1.316 billion and $1.622 billion
at March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The insurance subsidiary maintained net reserves
for professional liability risks of $588 million,
$590 million and $782 million at March 31, 2010,
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our facilities
are insured by our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary for losses
up to $50 million per occurrence; however, since January
2007, this coverage is subject to a $5 million per
occurrence self-insured retention. Net reserves for the
self-insured professional liability risks retained were
$698 million, $679 million and $548 million at
March 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. At March 31, 2010, claims payments, net of
reinsurance recoveries, during the next 12 months are
expected to approximate $250 million. We estimate that
approximately $100 million of the expected net claim
payments during the next 12 months will relate to claims
subject to the self-insured retention.
57
Financing
Activities
We are a highly leveraged company with significant debt service
requirements. Our debt totaled $26.855 billion,
$25.670 billion and $26.989 billion at March 31,
2010, December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our
interest expense was $516 million and $471 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and March 31,
2009, respectively, and $1.987 billion for 2009 and
$2.021 billion for 2008.
During February 2009, we issued $310 million aggregate
principal amount of
97/8% senior
secured second lien notes due 2017 at a price of 96.673% of
their face value, resulting in $300 million of gross
proceeds. During April 2009, we issued $1.500 billion
aggregate principal amount of
81/2% senior
secured first lien notes due 2019 at a price of 96.755% of their
face value, resulting in $1.451 billion of gross proceeds.
During August 2009, we issued $1.250 billion aggregate
principal amount of
77/8% senior
secured first lien notes due 2020 at a price of 98.254% of their
face value, resulting in $1.228 billion of gross proceeds.
During March 2010, we issued $1.400 billion aggregate
principal amount of
71/4%
senior secured first lien notes due 2020 at a price of 99.095%
of their face value, resulting in $1.387 billion of gross
proceeds. After the payment of related fees and expenses, we
used the proceeds from these debt offerings to repay outstanding
indebtedness under our senior secured term loan facilities.
On April 6, 2010 we amended our cash flow credit facility
to (i) extend the maturity date for $2.0 billion of
our tranche B term loans from November 17, 2013 to
March 31, 2017 and (ii) increase the ABR margin and
LIBOR margin with respect to such extended term loans to 2.25%
and 3.25%, respectively.
Management believes that cash flows from operations, amounts
available under our senior secured credit facilities and our
anticipated access to public and private debt markets will be
sufficient to meet expected liquidity needs during the next
twelve months.
Contractual
Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2009, maturities of contractual
obligations and other commercial commitments are presented in
the table below (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
Contractual Obligations(a)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
2-3 Years
|
|
|
4-5 Years
|
|
|
After 5 Years
|
|
|
Long-term debt including interest, excluding the senior secured
credit facilities(b)
|
|
$
|
26,739
|
|
|
$
|
2,175
|
|
|
$
|
3,780
|
|
|
$
|
4,915
|
|
|
$
|
15,869
|
|
Loans outstanding under the senior secured credit facilities,
including interest(b)
|
|
|
11,786
|
|
|
|
649
|
|
|
|
3,565
|
|
|
|
7,410
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
Operating leases(c)
|
|
|
1,190
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
223
|
|
|
|
386
|
|
Purchase and other obligations(c)
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual obligations
|
|
$
|
39,911
|
|
|
$
|
3,093
|
|
|
$
|
7,733
|
|
|
$
|
12,578
|
|
|
$
|
16,507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Commercial Commitments Not Recorded on the
|
|
Commitment Expiration by Period
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
2-3 Years
|
|
|
4-5 Years
|
|
|
After 5 Years
|
|
|
Surety bonds(d)
|
|
$
|
106
|
|
|
$
|
105
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Letters of credit(e)
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
Physician commitments(f)
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantees(g)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial commitments
|
|
$
|
248
|
|
|
$
|
158
|
|
|
$
|
55
|
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
We have not included obligations to pay estimated professional
liability claims ($1.322 billion at December 31,
2009) in this table. The estimated professional liability
claims, which occurred prior to 2007, are expected to be funded
by the designated investment securities that are restricted for
this purpose ($1.316 billion at December 31, 2009). We
also have not included obligations related to unrecognized tax |
58
|
|
|
|
|
benefits of $628 million at December 31, 2009, as we
cannot reasonably estimate the timing or amounts of additional
cash payments, if any, at this time. |
|
(b) |
|
Estimates of interest payments assumes that interest rates,
borrowing spreads and foreign currency exchange rates at
December 31, 2009, remain constant during the period
presented. |
|
(c) |
|
Amounts relate to future operating lease obligations, purchase
obligations and other obligations and are not recorded in our
consolidated balance sheet. Amounts also include physician
commitments that are recorded in our consolidated balance sheet. |
|
(d) |
|
Amounts relate primarily to instances in which we have agreed to
indemnify various commercial insurers who have provided surety
bonds to cover damages for malpractice cases which were awarded
to plaintiffs by the courts. These cases are currently under
appeal and the bonds will not be released by the courts until
the cases are closed. |
|
(e) |
|
Amounts relate primarily to various employee benefit plan
obligations in which we have letters of credit outstanding. |
|
(f) |
|
In consideration for physicians relocating to the communities in
which our hospitals are located and agreeing to engage in
private practice for the benefit of the respective communities,
we make advances to physicians, normally over a period of one
year, to assist in establishing the physicians practices.
The actual amount of these commitments to be advanced often
depends upon the financial results of the physicians
private practices during the recruitment agreement payment
period. The physician commitments reflected were based on our
maximum exposure on effective agreements at December 31,
2009. |
|
(g) |
|
We have entered into guarantee agreements related to certain
leases. |
Market
Risk
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in market
values of securities. The investments in debt and equity
securities of our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary were
$1.296 billion and $7 million, respectively, at
March 31, 2010. These investments are carried at fair
value, with changes in unrealized gains and losses being
recorded as adjustments to other comprehensive income. At
March 31, 2010, we had a net unrealized gain of
$22 million on the insurance subsidiarys investment
securities.
We are exposed to market risk related to market illiquidity.
Liquidity of the investments in debt and equity securities of
our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary could be impaired by the
inability to access the capital markets. Should the wholly-owned
insurance subsidiary require significant amounts of cash in
excess of normal cash requirements to pay claims and other
expenses on short notice, we may have difficulty selling these
investments in a timely manner or be forced to sell them at a
price less than what we might otherwise have been able to in a
normal market environment. At March 31, 2010, our
wholly-owned insurance subsidiary had invested $333 million
($336 million par value) in municipal, tax-exempt student
loan auction rate securities (ARS) that continue to
experience market illiquidity since February 2008 when multiple
failed auctions occurred due to a severe credit and liquidity
crisis in the capital markets. It is uncertain if
auction-related market liquidity will resume for these
securities. We may be required to recognize
other-than-temporary
impairments on these investments in future periods should
issuers default on interest payments or should the fair market
valuations of the securities deteriorate due to ratings
downgrades or other issue specific factors.
We are also exposed to market risk related to changes in
interest rates, and we periodically enter into interest rate
swap agreements to manage our exposure to these fluctuations.
Our interest rate swap agreements involve the exchange of fixed
and variable rate interest payments between two parties, based
on common notional principal amounts and maturity dates. The
notional amounts of the swap agreements represent balances used
to calculate the exchange of cash flows and are not our assets
or liabilities. Our credit risk related to these agreements is
considered low because the swap agreements are with creditworthy
financial institutions. The interest payments under these
agreements are settled on a net basis. These derivatives have
been recognized in the financial statements at their respective
fair values. Changes in the fair value of these derivatives are
included in other comprehensive income, and changes in the fair
value of derivatives which have not been designated as hedges
are recorded in operations.
59
With respect to our interest-bearing liabilities, approximately
$2.550 billion of long-term debt at March 31, 2010 is
subject to variable rates of interest, while the remaining
balance in long-term debt of $24.305 billion at
March 31, 2010 is subject to fixed rates of interest. Both
the general level of interest rates and, for the senior secured
credit facilities, our leverage affect our variable interest
rates. Our variable rate debt is comprised primarily of amounts
outstanding under the senior secured credit facilities.
Borrowings under the senior secured credit facilities bear
interest at a rate equal to an applicable margin plus, at our
option, either (a) a base rate determined by reference to
the higher of (1) the federal funds rate plus 0.50% and
(2) the prime rate of Bank of America or (b) a LIBOR
rate for the currency of such borrowing for the relevant
interest period. The applicable margin for borrowings under the
senior secured credit facilities, with the exception of term
loan B where the margin is static, may be reduced subject to
attaining certain leverage ratios. The average effective
interest rate for our long-term debt increased from 7.1% for the
quarter ended March 31, 2009 to 8.0% for the quarter ended
March 31, 2010.
On March 2, 2009, we amended our $13.550 billion and
1.000 billion senior secured cash flow credit
facility, dated as of November 17, 2006, as amended
February 16, 2007 (the cash flow credit
facility), to allow for one or more future issuances of
additional secured notes, which may include notes that are
secured on a pari passu basis or on a junior basis with
the obligations under the cash flow credit facility, so long as
(1) such notes do not require any scheduled payment or
redemption prior to the scheduled term loan B final maturity
date as currently in effect and (2) the proceeds from any
such issuance are used within three business days of receipt to
prepay term loans under the cash flow credit facility in
accordance with the terms of the cash flow credit facility. The
U.S. security documents related to the cash flow credit
facility were also amended and restated in connection with the
amendment in order to give effect to the security interests
granted to holders of such additional secured notes. On
June 18, 2009, we further amended our cash flow credit
facility to permit the unlimited incurrence of new term loans to
refinance the term loans initially incurred as well as any
previously incurred refinancing term loans and to permit the
establishment of commitments under a replacement cash flow
revolver under the cash flow credit facility to replace all or a
portion of the revolving commitments initially established under
the cash flow credit facility as well as any previously issued
replacement revolvers. On April 6, 2010, we further amended
our cash flow credit facility to (i) extend the maturity
date for $2.0 billion of our tranche B term loans from
November 17, 2013 to March 31, 2017 and
(ii) increase the ABR margin and LIBOR margin with respect
to such extended term loans to 2.25% and 3.25%, respectively.
On March 2, 2009, we amended our $2.000 billion senior
secured asset-based revolving credit facility, dated as of
November 17, 2006, as amended and restated as of
June 20, 2007 (the
asset-based
revolving credit facility), to allow for one or more
future issuances of additional secured notes or loans, which may
include notes or loans that are secured on a pari passu
basis or on a junior basis with the obligations under the
cash flow credit facility, so long as the proceeds from any such
issuance are used to prepay term loans under the cash flow
credit facility within three business days of the receipt
thereof. The amendment to the ABL credit facility also altered
the excess facility availability requirement to include a
separate minimum facility availability requirement applicable to
the ABL credit facility, and increased the applicable LIBOR and
ABR margins for all borrowings under the ABL credit facility by
0.25% each.
The estimated fair value of our total long-term debt was
$27.007 billion at March 31, 2010. The estimates of
fair value are based upon the quoted market prices for the same
or similar issues of long-term debt with the same maturities.
Based on a hypothetical 1% increase in interest rates, the
potential annualized reduction to future pretax earnings would
be approximately $26 million. To mitigate the impact of
fluctuations in interest rates, we generally target a portion of
our debt portfolio to be maintained at fixed rates.
Our international operations and foreign currency denominated
loans expose us to market risks associated with foreign
currencies. In order to mitigate the currency exposure related
to foreign currency denominated debt service obligations, we
have entered into cross currency swap agreements. A cross
currency swap is an agreement between two parties to exchange a
stream of principal and interest payments in one currency for a
stream of principal and interest payments in another currency
over a specified period. Our credit risk related to these
agreements is considered low because the swap agreements are
with creditworthy financial institutions.
60
Financial
Instruments
Derivative financial instruments are employed to manage risks,
including foreign currency and interest rate exposures, and are
not used for trading or speculative purposes. We recognize
derivative instruments, such as interest rate swap agreements
and foreign exchange contracts, in the consolidated balance
sheets at fair value. Changes in the fair value of derivatives
are recognized periodically either in earnings or in
stockholders equity, as a component of other comprehensive
income, depending on whether the derivative financial instrument
qualifies for hedge accounting, and if so, whether it qualifies
as a fair value hedge or a cash flow hedge. Gains and losses on
derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, to the extent they
are effective, are recorded in other comprehensive income, and
subsequently reclassified to earnings to offset the impact of
the hedged items when they occur. Changes in the fair value of
derivatives not qualifying as hedges, and for any portion of a
hedge that is ineffective, are reported in earnings.
The net interest paid or received on interest rate swaps is
recognized as interest expense. Gains and losses resulting from
the early termination of interest rate swap agreements are
deferred and amortized as adjustments to expense over the
remaining period of the debt originally covered by the
terminated swap.
Effects
of Inflation and Changing Prices
Various federal, state and local laws have been enacted that, in
certain cases, limit our ability to increase prices. Revenues
for general, acute care hospital services rendered to Medicare
patients are established under the federal governments
prospective payment system. Total
fee-for-service
Medicare revenues approximated 23% in 2009, 23% in 2008 and 24%
in 2007 of our total patient revenues.
Management believes hospital industry operating margins have
been, and may continue to be, under significant pressure because
of changes in payer mix and growth in operating expenses in
excess of the increase in prospective payments under the
Medicare program. In addition, as a result of increasing
regulatory and competitive pressures, our ability to maintain
operating margins through price increases to non-Medicare
patients is limited.
IRS
Disputes
At March 31, 2010, we were contesting before the Appeals
Division of the IRS certain claimed deficiencies and adjustments
proposed by the IRS in connection with its examinations of the
2003 and 2004 federal income returns for HCA and eight
affiliates that are treated as partnerships for federal income
tax purposes (affiliated partnerships). The disputed
items include the timing of recognition of certain patient
service revenues and our method for calculating the tax
allowance for doubtful accounts.
Six taxable periods of HCA and its predecessors ended in 1997
through 2002 and the 2002 taxable year of four affiliated
partnerships, for which the remaining issue is the computation
of the tax allowance for doubtful accounts, are pending before
the IRS Examination Division as of March 31, 2010.
The IRS completed its audit of HCAs 2005 and 2006 federal
income tax returns in April 2010. We will contest certain
claimed deficiencies and adjustments proposed by the IRS
Examination Division in connection with this audit, including
the timing of recognition of certain patient service revenues,
before the IRS Appeals Division. We anticipate the IRS will
begin an audit of the 2007, 2008 and 2009 federal income tax
returns for HCA and one or more affiliated partnerships during
2010.
Management believes HCA, its predecessors and affiliates
properly reported taxable income and paid taxes in accordance
with applicable laws and agreements established with the IRS and
final resolution of these disputes will not have a material,
adverse effect on our results of operations or financial
position. However, if payments due upon final resolution of
these issues exceed our recorded estimates, such resolutions
could have a material, adverse effect on our results of
operations or financial position.
61
BUSINESS
Our
Company
We are the largest non-governmental hospital operator in the
U.S. and a leading comprehensive, integrated provider of
health care and related services. We provide these services
through a network of acute care hospitals, outpatient
facilities, clinics and other patient care delivery settings. As
of March 31, 2010, we operated a diversified portfolio of
162 hospitals (with approximately 41,000 beds) and 106
freestanding surgery centers across 20 states throughout
the U.S. and in England. As a result of our efforts to
establish significant market share in large and growing urban
markets with attractive demographic and economic profiles, we
currently have a substantial market presence in 14 of the top 25
fastest growing markets in the U.S. and currently maintain the
first or second position, based on inpatient admissions, in many
of our key markets. We believe our ability to successfully
position and grow our assets in attractive markets and execute
our operating plan has contributed to the strength of our
financial performance over the last several years. For the year
ended December 31, 2009, we generated revenues of
$30.052 billion, net income attributable to HCA Inc. of
$1.054 billion and Adjusted EBITDA of $5.472 billion.
For the three months ended March 31, 2010, we generated
revenues of $7.544 billion, net income attributable to HCA
Inc. of $388 million and Adjusted EBITDA of
$1.574 billion.
Our patient-first strategy is to provide high quality health
care services in a cost-efficient manner. We intend to build
upon our history of profitable growth by maintaining our
dedication to quality care, increasing our presence in key
markets through organic expansion and strategic acquisitions,
leveraging our scale and infrastructure, and further developing
our physician and employee relationships. We believe pursuing
these core elements of our strategy helps us develop a
faster-growing, more stable and more profitable business and
increases our relevance to patients, physicians, payers and
employers.
Using our scale, significant resources and over 40 years of
operating experience we have developed a significant management
and support infrastructure. Some of the key components of our
support infrastructure include a revenue cycle management
organization, a health care group purchasing organization, or
GPO, an information technology and services provider, a nurse
staffing agency and a medical malpractice insurance underwriter.
These shared services have helped us to maximize our cash
collection efficiency, achieve savings in purchasing through our
scale, more rapidly deploy information technology upgrades, more
effectively manage our labor pool and achieve greater stability
in malpractice insurance premiums. Collectively, these
components have helped us to further enhance our operating
effectiveness, cost efficiency and overall financial results.
Since the founding of our business in 1968 as a single-facility
hospital company, we have demonstrated an ability to
consistently innovate and sustain growth during varying economic
and regulatory climates. Under the leadership of an experienced
senior management team, whose tenure at HCA averages over
20 years, we have established an extensive record of
providing high quality care, profitably growing our business,
making and integrating strategic acquisitions and efficiently
and strategically allocating capital spending.
On November 17, 2006, we were acquired by a private
investor group comprised of affiliates of or funds sponsored by
Bain Capital Partners, LLC, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts &
Co., Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity (now BAML Capital
Partners), Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corporation and HCA
founder Dr. Thomas F. Frist, Jr., a group we collectively
refer to as the Investors, and by members of
management and certain other investors. We refer to the merger,
the financing transactions related to the merger and other
related transactions collectively as the
Recapitalization.
Since the Recapitalization, we have achieved substantial
operational and financial progress. During this time, we have
made significant investments in expanding our service lines and
expanding our alignment with highly specialized and primary care
physicians. In addition, we have enhanced our operating
efficiencies through a number of corporate cost-saving
initiatives and an expansion of our support infrastructure. We
have made investments in information technology to optimize our
facilities and systems. We have also undertaken a number of
initiatives to improve clinical quality and patient
satisfaction. As a result of these initiatives, our financial
performance has improved significantly from the year ended
December 31, 2007, the first full year
62
following the Recapitalization, to the year ended
December 31, 2009, with revenues growing by
$3.194 billion, net income attributable to HCA Inc.
increasing by $180 million and Adjusted EBITDA increasing
by $880 million. This represents compounded annual growth
rates on these key metrics of 5.8%, 9.8% and 9.2%, respectively.
Our
Industry
We believe well-capitalized, comprehensive and integrated health
care delivery providers are well-positioned to benefit from the
current industry trends, some of which include:
Aging Population and Continued Growth in the Need for Health
Care Services. According to the U.S. Census
Bureau, the demographic age group of persons aged 65 and over is
expected to experience compounded annual growth of 3.0% over the
next 20 years, and constitute 19.3% of the total
U.S. population by 2030. The Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, projects
continued increases in hospital services based on the aging of
the U.S. population, advances in medical procedures,
expansion of health coverage, increasing consumer demand for
expanded medical services and increased prevalence of chronic
conditions such as diabetes, heart disease and obesity. We
believe these factors will continue to drive increased
utilization of health care services and the need for
comprehensive, integrated hospital networks that can provide a
wide array of essential and sophisticated health care.
Continued Evolution of Quality-Based Reimbursement Favors
Large-Scale, Comprehensive and Integrated
Providers. We believe the U.S. health care
system is continuing to evolve in ways that favor large-scale,
comprehensive and integrated providers that provide high levels
of quality care. Specifically, we believe there are a number of
initiatives that will continue to gain importance in the
foreseeable future, including: introduction of value-based
payment methodologies tied to performance, quality and
coordination of care, implementation of integrated electronic
health records and information, and an increasing ability for
patients and consumers to make choices about all aspects of
health care. We believe our company is well positioned to
respond to these emerging trends and has the resources,
expertise and flexibility necessary to adapt in a timely manner
to the changing health care regulatory and reimbursement
environment.
Impact of Health Reform Law. The recently
enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended
by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
(collectively, the Health Reform Law), will change
how health care services are covered, delivered and reimbursed.
It will do so through expanded coverage of uninsured
individuals, significant reductions in the growth of Medicare
program payments, material decreases in Medicare and Medicaid
disproportionate share hospital (DSH) payments, and
the establishment of programs where reimbursement is tied in
part to quality and integration. The Health Reform Law is
expected to expand health insurance coverage to approximately 32
to 34 million additional individuals through a combination of
public program expansion and private sector health insurance
reforms. We believe the expansion of private sector and
Medicaid coverage will, over time, increase our reimbursement
related to providing services to individuals who were previously
uninsured. On the other hand, the reductions in the growth in
Medicare payments and the decreases in DSH payments will
adversely affect our government reimbursement. Because of the
many variables involved, we are unable to predict the net impact
of the Health Reform Law on us; however, we believe our
experienced management team, emphasis on quality care and our
diverse service offerings will enable us to capitalize on the
opportunities presented by the Health Reform Law, as well as
adapt in a timely manner to its challenges.
Our
Competitive Strengths
We believe our key competitive strengths include:
Largest Comprehensive, Integrated Health Care Delivery
System. We are the largest
non-governmental
hospital operator in the U.S., providing approximately 4% to 5%
of all U.S. hospital services through our national
footprint. The scope and scale of our operations, evidenced by
the types of facilities we operate, the diverse medical
specialties we offer and the numerous patient care access points
we provide enable us to provide a comprehensive range of health
care services in a cost-effective manner. As a result, we
believe the breadth of our platform is a competitive advantage
in the marketplace enabling us to attract patients,
63
physicians and clinical staff while also providing significant
economies of scale and increasing our relevance with commercial
payers.
Reputation for High Quality Patient-Centered
Care. Since our founding, we have maintained an
unwavering focus on patients and clinical outcomes. We believe
clinical quality influences physician and patient choices about
health care delivery. We align our quality initiatives
throughout the organization by engaging corporate, local,
physician and nurse leaders to share best practices and develop
standards for delivering high quality care. We have invested
extensively in quality of care initiatives, with an emphasis on
implementing information technology and adopting industry-wide
best practices and clinical protocols. As a result of these
measures, we have achieved significant progress in clinical
quality, as measured by the CMS HQA Grand Composite Score (based
on publicly available data for the twelve months ended
June 30, 2009) wherein HCA hospitals achieved 97.3% of the
CMS core measures versus the national average of 94.1%, making
HCA the best performing non-governmental system in the U.S.
Similarly, 88% of the core measure sets performed by our
facilities ranked in the top quartile and 65% ranked in the top
decile based on publicly available data for the twelve months
ended June 30, 2009. In addition, the Health Reform Law
establishes a value-based purchasing system and adjusts hospital
payment rates based on
hospital-acquired
conditions and hospital readmissions. We also believe our
quality initiatives favorably position us in a payment
environment that is increasingly performance-based.
Leading Local Market Positions in Large, Growing, Urban
Markets. Over our history, we have sought to
selectively expand and upgrade our asset base to create a
premium portfolio of assets in attractive growing markets. As a
result, we have a strong market presence in 14 of the top 25
fastest growing markets in the U.S. We currently operate in
29 markets, 17 of which have populations of 1 million
or more, with all but one of these markets projecting growth
above the national average from 2009 to 2014. Our inpatient
market share places us first or second in many of our key
markets. In addition, we operate in markets that have
demonstrated relative economic stability, with the unemployment
rate in a majority of our markets below the national average as
of March 2010. We believe the strength and stability of these
market positions will create organic growth opportunities and
allow us to develop long-term relationships with patients,
physicians, large employers and third-party payers.
Diversified Revenue Base and Payer Mix. We
believe our broad geographic footprint, varied service lines and
diverse revenue base mitigate our risks in numerous ways. Our
diversification limits our exposure to competitive dynamics and
economic conditions in any single local market, reimbursement
changes in specific service lines and disruptions with respect
to payers such as state Medicaid programs or large commercial
insurers. We have a diverse portfolio of assets with no single
facility contributing more than 2.4% of our revenues and no
single metropolitan statistical area contributing more than 7.8%
of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009. We have
also developed a highly diversified payer base, including
approximately 3,000 managed care contracts, with no single
commercial payer representing more than 8% of revenues for the
year ended December 31, 2009. In addition, we are one of
the countrys largest providers of outpatient services,
which accounted for approximately 38% of our revenues for the
year ended December 31, 2009. We believe the geographic
diversity of our market positions and the scope of our inpatient
and outpatient operations help reduce volatility in our
operating results.
Scale and Infrastructure Drives Cost Savings and
Efficiencies. Our scale allows us to leverage our
support infrastructure to achieve significant cost savings and
operating efficiencies, thereby driving margin expansion. We
strategically manage our supply chain through centralized
purchasing and supply warehouses, as well as our revenue cycle
through centralized billing, collections and health information
management functions. We also manage the provision of
information technology through a combination of centralized
systems with regional service support as well as centralize many
other clinical and corporate functions, creating economies of
scale in managing expenses and business processes. In addition
to the cost savings and operating efficiencies, this support
infrastructure simultaneously generates revenue from third
parties that utilize our services.
Well-Capitalized Portfolio of High Quality
Assets. In order to expand the range and improve
the quality of services provided at our facilities, we invested
over $7.8 billion in our facilities and information
technology
64
systems over the five-year period ended December 31, 2009.
We believe our significant capital investments in these areas
will continue to attract new and returning patients, attract and
retain high-quality physicians, maximize cost efficiencies and
address the health care needs of our local communities.
Furthermore, we believe our platform as well as electronic
health record infrastructure, national research and physician
management capabilities provide a strategic advantage by
enhancing our ability to capitalize on anticipated incentives
through the HITECH provisions of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 and positions us well in an environment
that increasingly emphasizes quality, transparency and
coordination of care.
Strong Operating Results and Cash Flows. Our
leading scale, diversification, favorable market positions,
dedication to clinical quality and focus on operational
efficiency have enabled us to achieve attractive historical
financial performance even during the most recent economic
period. In the year ended December 31, 2009, we generated
net income attributable to HCA Inc. of $1.054 billion,
Adjusted EBITDA of $5.472 billion and cash flows from
operating activities of $2.747 billion, while for the three
months ended March 31, 2010, we generated net income
attributable to HCA Inc. of $388 million, Adjusted EBITDA
of $1.574 billion and cash flows from operating activities
of $901 million. Our ability to generate strong and
consistent cash flow from operations has enabled us to invest in
our operations, reduce our debt, enhance earnings per share and
continue to pursue attractive growth opportunities.
Proven and Experienced Management Team. We
believe the extensive experience and depth of our management
team are a distinct competitive advantage in the complicated and
evolving industry in which we compete. Our CEO and Chairman of
the Board of Directors, Richard M. Bracken, began his career
with our company approximately 30 years ago and has held
various executive positions with us over that period, including,
most recently, as our President and Chief Operating Officer. Our
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Director,
R. Milton Johnson, joined our company over 27 years ago and
has held various positions in our financial operations since
that time. Our six Group Presidents average over 20 years
of experience with our company. Members of our senior management
hold significant equity interests in our company, further
aligning their long-term interests with those of our
stockholders.
Our
Growth Strategy
We are committed to providing the communities we serve with high
quality, cost-effective health care while growing our business,
increasing our profitability and creating long-term value for
our stockholders. To achieve these objectives, we align our
efforts around the following growth agenda:
Grow Our Presence in Existing Markets. We
believe we are well positioned in a number of large and growing
markets that will allow us the opportunity to generate
long-term, attractive growth through the expansion of our
presence in these markets. We plan to continue recruiting and
strategically collaborating with the physician community and
adding attractive service lines such as cardiology, emergency
services, oncology and womens services. Additional
components of our growth strategy include expanding our
footprint through developing various outpatient access points,
including surgery centers, rural outreach, freestanding
emergency departments and walk-in clinics. Since our
Recapitalization, we have invested significant capital into
these markets and expect to continue to see the benefit of this
investment.
Achieve Industry-Leading Performance in Clinical and
Satisfaction Measures. Achieving high levels of
patient safety, patient satisfaction and clinical quality are
central goals of our business model. To achieve these goals, we
have implemented a number of initiatives including infection
reduction initiatives, hospitalist programs, advanced health
information technology and evidence-based medicine programs. We
routinely analyze operational practices from our best-performing
hospitals to identify ways to implement organization-wide
performance improvements and reduce clinical variation. We
believe these initiatives will continue to improve patient care,
help us achieve cost efficiencies, grow our revenues and
favorably position us in an environment where our constituents
are increasingly focused on quality, efficacy and efficiency.
Recruit and Employ Physicians to Meet Need for High Quality
Health Services. We depend on the quality and
dedication of the health care providers and other team members
who serve at our facilities. We believe a critical component of
our growth strategy is our ability to successfully recruit and
strategically
65
collaborate with physicians and other professionals to provide
high quality care. We attract and retain physicians by providing
high quality, convenient facilities with advanced technology, by
expanding our specialty services and by building our outpatient
operations. We believe our continued investment in the
employment, recruitment and retention of physicians will improve
the quality of care at our facilities.
Continue to Leverage Our Scale and Market Positions to
Enhance Profitability. We believe there is
significant opportunity to continue to grow the profitability of
our company by fully leveraging the scale and scope of our
franchise. We are currently pursuing next generation performance
improvement initiatives such as contracting for services on a
multistate basis and expanding our support infrastructure for
additional clinical and support functions, such as physician
credentialing, medical transcription and electronic medical
recordkeeping. We believe our centrally managed business
processes and ability to leverage cost-saving practices across
our extensive network will enable us to continue to manage costs
effectively.
Selectively Pursue a Disciplined Development
Strategy. We continue to believe there are
significant growth opportunities in our markets. We will
continue to provide financial and operational resources to
successfully execute on our in-market opportunities. To
complement our in-market growth agenda, we intend to focus on
selectively developing and acquiring new hospitals, outpatient
facilities and other health care service providers. We believe
the challenges faced by the hospital industry may spur
consolidation and we believe our size, scale, national presence
and access to capital will position us well to participate in
any such consolidation. We have a strong record of successfully
acquiring and integrating hospitals and entering into joint
ventures and intend to continue leveraging this experience.
Business
Drivers and Measures
Our
Financial Policies and Objectives
We seek to optimize our financial and operating performance by
implementing the business strategy set forth under
Our Growth Strategy. Our success in
implementing this strategy depends, in turn, on our ability to
fulfill our financial policies and objectives, which include the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
Operations: We plan to focus on our core
operations the provision of high quality,
cost-effective health care in large, high growth urban
communities, primarily in the southern and western regions of
the United States. Our specific policies designed to maintain
this focus include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
using investments in new and expanded services to drive use of
our facilities;
|
|
|
|
seeking rate increases from managed care payers commensurate
with increases in our underlying costs to provide high quality
services;
|
|
|
|
managing operating expenses by, among other methods, leveraging
our scale;
|
|
|
|
seeking cost savings by reducing variations in our patient care
and support processes and reducing our discretionary operating
expenses; and
|
|
|
|
considering divesting non-core assets, where appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leverage: We expect to have significant
indebtedness for the foreseeable future. However, we expect to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
manage our floating interest rate exposure through our
$7.1 billion aggregate notional amount of pay-fixed rate
swap agreements related to our senior secured credit facilities
debt at March 31, 2010; and
|
|
|
|
endeavor to improve our credit quality over time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Expenditures: We plan to maintain a
disciplined capital expenditure approach by:
|
|
|
|
|
|
targeting new investments with potentially high returns;
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
deploying capital strategically to improve our competitive
position and market share and to enhance our operations; and
|
|
|
|
managing discretionary capital expenditures based on the
strength of our cash flows.
|
Operational
Factors
In pursuing our business and our financial policies and
objectives, we pay close attention to a number of performance
measures and operational factors.
Our revenues depend upon inpatient occupancy levels, the
ancillary services and therapy programs ordered by physicians
and provided to patients, the volume of outpatient procedures
and the charges and negotiated payment rates for such services.
Our expenses depend upon the levels of salaries and benefits
paid to our employees, the cost of supplies and the costs of
other operating expenses. To monitor these variables, we use a
variety of metrics, including those described below.
|
|
|
|
|
admissions, which is the total number of patients admitted to
our hospitals and which we use as a measure of inpatient volume;
|
|
|
|
equivalent admissions, which is a measure of patient volume that
takes into account both inpatient and outpatient volume;
|
|
|
|
the payer mix of our admissions, i.e., the percentage of our
admissions related to Medicare, Medicaid, managed Medicare,
managed Medicaid, managed care and other insurers, and uninsured
patients;
|
|
|
|
emergency room visits;
|
|
|
|
inpatient and outpatient surgeries; and
|
|
|
|
the average daily census of patients in our hospital beds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
revenue per equivalent admission; and
|
|
|
|
revenue, minus our provision for doubtful accounts, per
equivalent admission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
salaries and benefits per equivalent admission;
|
|
|
|
supply costs per equivalent admission;
|
|
|
|
other operating expenses (including contract services,
professional fees, repairs and maintenance, rents and leases,
utilities, insurance and nonincome taxes) per equivalent
admission; and
|
|
|
|
operating expenses, minus our provision for doubtful accounts,
per equivalent admission.
|
We set forth the volume measures described above, except for
payer mix, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008,
2007, 2006 and 2005 and for the three months ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009 under the heading Operating
Data in Selected Financial Data. We give
details about the payer mix for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and for the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 in Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Results of Operations Revenue/Volume
Trends.
The pricing and expense measures described above can be derived
by dividing (1) the amounts from the applicable line items
in our income statement (minus our provision for doubtful
accounts, where indicated) by (2) equivalent admissions,
which are set forth under the heading Operating Data
in Selected Financial Data.
67
Business
Segments
Our company operations are structured in three geographically
organized groups:
|
|
|
|
|
Western Group. The Western Group is comprised
of the markets in Alaska, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas,
Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah. Samuel Hazen, who has held
various positions with HCA for 27 years, is the Western
Groups President. As of March 31, 2010, there were 55
consolidating hospitals within the Western Group. The Western
Group includes seven of our non-consolidating hospitals, with
respect to which major strategic and operating decisions are
shared equally with non-HCA partners. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, the Western Group generated revenues of
$13.140 billion.
|
|
|
|
Central Group. The Central Group is comprised
of the markets in Indiana, Georgia (northern portion), Kansas,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire,
Tennessee and Virginia. Paul Rutledge, who has held various
positions with HCA for 27 years, is the Central
Groups President. As of March 31, 2010, there were 45
consolidating hospitals within the Central Group. The Central
Group includes one of our non-consolidating hospitals, with
respect to which major strategic and operating decisions are
shared equally with non-HCA partners. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, the Central Group generated revenues of
$7.225 billion.
|
|
|
|
Eastern Group. The Eastern Group is comprised
of the markets in Florida, Georgia (southern portion) and South
Carolina. Charles Hall, who has held various positions with HCA
for 23 years, is the Eastern Groups President. As of
March 31, 2010, there were 48 consolidating hospitals
within the Eastern Group. For the year ended December 31,
2009, the Eastern Group generated revenues of
$8.807 billion.
|
We also owned and operated six hospitals in England as of
March 31, 2010, which are included in our Corporate and
other group. These international facilities generated revenues
of $709 million for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Our divisions and market structures are designed to augment our
market-based strategy to provide integrated services to their
respective community. This structure allows our management to
focus on manageable groupings of hospitals and provide them with
direct support.
Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements contains
information by segment on our revenues, equity in earnings of
affiliates, adjusted segment EBITDA and depreciation and
amortization for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008
and 2007.
Health
Care Facilities
We currently own, manage or operate hospitals; freestanding
surgery centers; diagnostic and imaging centers; radiation and
oncology therapy centers; comprehensive rehabilitation and
physical therapy centers; and various other facilities.
At March 31, 2010, we owned and operated 149 general, acute
care hospitals with 38,213 licensed beds, and an additional
seven general, acute care hospitals with 2,269 licensed beds,
which are operated through joint ventures, which are accounted
for using the equity method. Most of our general, acute care
hospitals provide medical and surgical services, including
inpatient care, intensive care, cardiac care, diagnostic
services and emergency services. The general, acute care
hospitals also provide outpatient services such as outpatient
surgery, laboratory, radiology, respiratory therapy, cardiology
and physical therapy. Each hospital has an organized medical
staff and a local board of trustees or governing board, made up
of members of the local community.
Our hospitals do not typically engage in extensive medical
research and education programs. However, some of our hospitals
are affiliated with medical schools and may participate in the
clinical rotation of medical interns and residents and other
education programs.
At March 31, 2010, we operated five psychiatric hospitals
with 506 licensed beds. Our psychiatric hospitals provide
therapeutic programs including child, adolescent and adult
psychiatric care, adult and adolescent alcohol and drug abuse
treatment and counseling.
68
We also operate outpatient health care facilities which include
freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs),
diagnostic and imaging centers, comprehensive outpatient
rehabilitation and physical therapy centers, outpatient
radiation and oncology therapy centers and various other
facilities. These outpatient services are an integral component
of our strategy to develop comprehensive health care networks in
select communities. Most of our ASCs are operated through
partnerships or limited liability companies, with majority
ownership of each partnership or limited liability company
typically held by a general partner or subsidiary that is an
affiliate of HCA.
Certain of our affiliates provide a variety of management
services to our health care facilities, including patient safety
programs; ethics and compliance programs; national supply
contracts; equipment purchasing and leasing contracts;
accounting, financial and clinical systems; governmental
reimbursement assistance; construction planning and
coordination; information technology systems and solutions;
legal counsel; human resources services; and internal audit
services.
Sources
of Revenue
Hospital revenues depend upon inpatient occupancy levels, the
medical and ancillary services ordered by physicians and
provided to patients, the volume of outpatient procedures and
the charges or payment rates for such services. Charges and
reimbursement rates for inpatient services vary significantly
depending on the type of payer, the type of service (e.g.,
medical/surgical, intensive care or psychiatric) and the
geographic location of the hospital. Inpatient occupancy levels
fluctuate for various reasons, many of which are beyond our
control.
We receive payment for patient services from the federal
government under the Medicare program, state governments under
their respective Medicaid or similar programs, managed care
plans, private insurers and directly from patients. The
approximate percentages of our revenues from such sources were
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Medicare
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
Managed Medicare
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Medicaid
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Managed Medicaid
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medicare is a federal program that provides certain hospital and
medical insurance benefits to persons age 65 and over, some
disabled persons, persons with end-stage renal disease and
persons with Lou Gehrigs Disease. Medicaid is a
federal-state program, administered by the states, which
provides hospital and medical benefits to qualifying individuals
who are unable to afford health care. All of our general, acute
care hospitals located in the United States are certified as
health care services providers for persons covered under the
Medicare and Medicaid programs. Amounts received under the
Medicare and Medicaid programs are generally significantly less
than established hospital gross charges for the services
provided.
Our hospitals generally offer discounts from established charges
to certain group purchasers of health care services, including
private insurance companies, employers, HMOs, PPOs and other
managed care plans. These discount programs generally limit our
ability to increase revenues in response to increasing costs.
See Business Competition. Patients are
generally not responsible for the total difference between
established hospital gross charges and amounts reimbursed for
such services under Medicare, Medicaid, HMOs or PPOs and other
managed care plans, but are responsible to the extent of any
exclusions, deductibles or coinsurance features of their
coverage. The amount of such exclusions, deductibles and
coinsurance continues to increase. Collection of amounts due
from individuals is typically more difficult than from
governmental or third-party payers. We provide discounts to
uninsured patients who do not qualify for Medicaid or charity
care under our
69
charity care policy. These discounts are similar to those
provided to many local managed care plans. In implementing the
discount policy, we attempt to qualify uninsured patients for
Medicaid, other federal or state assistance or charity care
under our charity care policy. If an uninsured patient does not
qualify for these programs, the uninsured discount is applied.
Medicare
Inpatient
Acute Care
Under the Medicare program, we receive reimbursement under a
prospective payment system (PPS) for general, acute
care hospital inpatient services. Under the hospital inpatient
PPS, fixed payment amounts per inpatient discharge are
established based on the patients assigned Medicare
severity diagnosis-related group (MS-DRG). The
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
(CMS) recently completed a two-year transition to
full implementation of MS-DRGs to replace the previously used
Medicare diagnosis related groups in an effort to better
recognize severity of illness in Medicare payment rates. MS-DRGs
classify treatments for illnesses according to the estimated
intensity of hospital resources necessary to furnish care for
each principal diagnosis. MS-DRG weights represent the average
resources for a given MS-DRG relative to the average resources
for all MS-DRGs. MS-DRG payments are adjusted for area wage
differentials. Hospitals, other than those defined as
new, receive PPS reimbursement for inpatient capital
costs based on MS-DRG weights multiplied by a geographically
adjusted federal rate. When the cost to treat certain patients
falls well outside the normal distribution, providers typically
receive additional outlier payments.
MS-DRG rates are updated and MS-DRG weights are recalibrated
using cost relative weights each federal fiscal year (which
begins October 1). The index used to update the MS-DRG rates
(the market basket) gives consideration to the
inflation experienced by hospitals and entities outside the
health care industry in purchasing goods and services. In
federal fiscal year 2009, the MS-DRG rate was increased by the
full market basket of 3.6%. For the federal fiscal year 2010,
CMS set the MS-DRG rate increase at the full market basket of
2.1%. However, in federal fiscal years 2008 and 2009, CMS
reduced payments to hospitals through a documentation and coding
adjustment intended to account for changes in payments under the
MS-DRG system that are not related to changes in patient case
mix. In addition, CMS has the authority to determine
retrospectively whether the documentation and coding adjustment
levels for federal fiscal years 2008 and 2009 were adequate to
account for changes in payments not related to changes in
patient case mix. CMS did not impose an adjustment for federal
fiscal year 2010, but announced its intent to impose reductions
to payments in federal fiscal years 2011 and 2012 because of
what CMS has determined to be an inadequate adjustment in
federal fiscal year 2008.
The Health Reform Law provides for annual decreases to the
market basket, including a 0.25% reduction in 2010 for
discharges occurring on or after April 1, 2010. The Health
Reform Law also provides for the following reductions to the
market basket update for each of the following federal fiscal
years: 0.25% in 2011, 0.1% in 2012 and 2013, 0.3% in 2014, 0.2%
in 2015 and 2016 and 0.75% in 2017, 2018 and 2019. For federal
fiscal year 2012 and each subsequent federal fiscal year, the
Health Reform Law provides for the annual market basket update
to be further reduced by a productivity adjustment. The amount
of that reduction will be the projected, nationwide productivity
gains over the preceding 10 years. To determine the
projection, HHS will use the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS)
10-year
moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity
(the BLS data is typically a few years old). The Health Reform
Law does not contain guidelines for use by HHS in projecting the
productivity figure. Based upon the latest available data,
federal fiscal year 2012 market basket reductions resulting from
this productivity adjustment are likely to range from 1.0% to
1.4%. CMS estimates that the combined market basket and
productivity adjustments will reduce Medicare payments under the
inpatient PPS by $112.6 billion from 2010 to 2019. A
decrease in payments rates or an increase in rates that is below
the increase in our costs may adversely affect the results of
our operations.
On April 19, 2010, CMS issued a proposed rule related to the
federal fiscal year 2011 hospital inpatient PPS. In this rule,
CMS has proposed to increase the MS-DRG rate for federal fiscal
year 2011 by the full market basket of 2.4%. However, CMS has
also proposed to apply a documentation and coding adjustment of
70
negative 2.9% in federal fiscal year 2011. This reduction
represents half of the documentation and coding adjustment
required to recover the increase in aggregate payments made in
2008 and 2009 during implementation of the MS-DRG system. CMS
plans to recover the remaining 2.9% and interest in federal
fiscal year 2012. The market basket update, the documentation
and coding adjustment and the decreases mandated by the Health
Reform Law together show the aggregate market basket adjustment
for federal fiscal year 2011 to be negative 0.75%, if
implemented as proposed. Because the proposed rule expressly
does not take into account market basket reductions required by
the Health Reform Law, it is unclear what impact, if any, the
Health Reform Law will have on CMS proposal. CMS has also
announced that an additional prospective negative adjustment of
3.9% will be needed to avoid increased Medicare spending
unrelated to patient severity of illness. CMS is not proposing
this additional 3.9% reduction at this time but has stated that
it will be required in the future.
Further realignments in the MS-DRG system could also reduce the
payments we receive for certain specialties, including
cardiology and orthopedics. CMS has focused on payment levels
for such specialties in recent years in part because of the
proliferation of specialty hospitals. Changes in the payments
received for specialty services could have an adverse effect on
our results of operations.
The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization
Act of 2003 (MMA) provides for rate increases at the
full market basket if data for patient care quality indicators
are submitted to the Secretary of HHS. As required by the
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA 2005), CMS has
expanded, through a series of rulemakings, the number of quality
measures that must be reported to receive a full market basket
update. CMS currently requires hospitals to report 46 quality
measures in order to qualify for the full market basket update
to the inpatient PPS in federal fiscal year 2011. Failure to
submit the required quality indicators will result in a two
percentage point reduction to the market basket update. All of
our hospitals paid under Medicare inpatient MS-DRG PPS are
participating in the quality initiative by submitting the
requested quality data. While we will endeavor to comply with
all data submission requirements as additional requirements
continue to be added, our submissions may not be deemed timely
or sufficient to entitle us to the full market basket adjustment
for all of our hospitals.
As part of CMS goal of transforming Medicare from a
passive payer to an active purchaser of quality goods and
services, for discharges occurring after October 1, 2008,
Medicare no longer assigns an inpatient hospital discharge to a
higher paying MS-DRG if a selected hospital acquired condition
(HAC) was not present on admission. In this
situation, the case is paid as though the secondary diagnosis
was not present. Currently, there are ten categories of
conditions on the list of HACs. In addition, CMS has established
three National Coverage Determinations that prohibit Medicare
reimbursement for erroneous surgical procedures performed on an
inpatient or outpatient basis. The Health Reform Law provides
for reduced payments based on a hospitals HAC rates.
Beginning in federal fiscal year 2015, hospitals that rank in
the top 25% nationally of HACs for all hospitals in the previous
year will receive a 1% reduction in their total Medicare
payments. In addition, effective July 1, 2011, the Health
Reform Law prohibits the use of federal funds under the Medicaid
program to reimburse providers for medical services provided to
treat HACs.
The Health Reform Law also provides for reduced payments to
hospitals based on readmission rates. Beginning in federal
fiscal year 2013, inpatient payments will be reduced if a
hospital experiences excessive readmissions within a
30-day
period of discharge for heart attack, heart failure, pneumonia
or other conditions designated by HHS. Hospitals with what HHS
defines as excessive readmissions for these conditions will
receive reduced payments for all inpatient discharges, not just
discharges relating to the conditions subject to the excessive
readmission standard. Each hospitals performance will be
publicly reported by HHS. HHS has the discretion to determine
what excessive readmissions means, the amount of the
payment reduction and other terms and conditions of this program.
The Health Reform Law additionally establishes a value-based
purchasing program to further link payments to quality and
efficiency. In federal fiscal year 2013, HHS is directed to
implement a value-based purchasing program for inpatient
hospital services. Beginning in federal fiscal year 2013, CMS
will reduce the inpatient PPS payment amount for all discharges
by the following: 1% for 2013; 1.25% for 2014; 1.5% for 2015;
1.75% for 2016; and 2% for 2017 and subsequent years. For each
federal fiscal year, the total amount
71
collected from these reductions will be pooled and used to fund
payments to reward hospitals that meet certain quality
performance standards established by HHS. HHS will have the
authority to determine the quality performance measures, the
standards hospitals must achieve in order to meet the quality
performance measures and the methodology for calculating
payments to hospitals that meet the required quality threshold.
HHS will also determine the amount each hospital that meets or
exceeds the quality performance standards will receive from the
pool of dollars created by the reductions related to the
value-based purchasing program.
Historically, the Medicare program has set aside 5.10% of
Medicare inpatient payments to pay for outlier cases. CMS
estimates that outlier payments accounted for 4.8% of total
operating DRG payments for federal fiscal year 2008. For federal
fiscal year 2009, CMS established an outlier threshold of
$20,045, and for federal fiscal year 2010, CMS increased the
outlier threshold to $23,140. We do not anticipate the increase
to the outlier threshold for federal fiscal year 2010 will have
a material impact on our results of operations.
Outpatient
CMS reimburses hospital outpatient services (and certain
Medicare Part B services furnished to hospital inpatients
who have no Part A coverage) on a PPS basis. CMS continues
to use fee schedules to pay for physical, occupational and
speech therapies, durable medical equipment, clinical diagnostic
laboratory services and nonimplantable orthotics and
prosthetics, freestanding surgery centers services and services
provided by independent diagnostic testing facilities.
Hospital outpatient services paid under PPS are classified into
groups called ambulatory payment classifications
(APCs). Services for each APC are similar clinically
and in terms of the resources they require. A payment rate is
established for each APC. Depending on the services provided, a
hospital may be paid for more than one APC for a patient visit.
The APC payment rates were updated for calendar years 2008 and
2009 by market baskets of 3.30% and 3.60%, respectively. On
November 20, 2009, CMS published a final rule that updated
payment rates for calendar year 2010 by the full market basket
of 2.1%. However, the Health Reform Law includes a 0.25%
reduction to the market basket for 2010. The Health Reform Law
also provides for the following reductions to the market basket
update for each of the following calendar years: 0.25% in 2011,
0.1% in 2012 and 2013, 0.3% in 2014, 0.2% in 2015 and 2016 and
0.75% in 2017, 2018 and 2019. For calendar year 2012 and each
subsequent calendar year, the Health Reform Law provides for an
annual market basket update to be further reduced by a
productivity adjustment. The amount of that reduction will be
the projected, nationwide productivity gains over the preceding
10 years. To determine the projection, HHS will use the BLS
10-year
moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity
(the BLS data is typically a few years old). The Health Reform
Law does not contain guidelines for use by HHS in projecting the
productivity figure. However, CMS estimates that the combined
market basket and productivity adjustments will reduce Medicare
payments under the outpatient PPS by $26.3 billion from
2010 to 2019. CMS continues to require hospitals to submit
quality data relating to outpatient care to receive the full
market basket increase under the outpatient PPS in calendar year
2010. CMS required hospitals to report data on eleven quality
measures in calendar year 2009 for the payment determination in
calendar year 2010 and will continue to require hospitals to
report the existing eleven quality measures in calendar year
2010 for the 2011 payment determination. Hospitals that fail to
submit such data will receive the market basket update minus two
percentage points for the outpatient PPS.
Rehabilitation
CMS reimburses inpatient rehabilitation facilities
(IRFs) on a PPS basis. Under IRF PPS, patients are
classified into case mix groups based upon impairment, age,
comorbidities (additional diseases or disorders from which the
patient suffers) and functional capability. IRFs are paid a
predetermined amount per discharge that reflects the
patients case mix group and is adjusted for area wage
levels, low-income patients, rural areas and high-cost outliers.
CMS provided for a market basket update of 2.5% for federal
fiscal year 2010. However, the Health Reform Law requires a
0.25% reduction to the market basket for 2010 for discharges
occurring on or after April 1, 2010. The Health Reform Law
also provides for the following reductions to the market basket
update for each of the following federal fiscal years: 0.25% in
2011, 0.1% in 2012 and 2013, 0.3% in 2014, 0.2% in 2015 and 2016
and 0.75% in 2017, 2018 and 2019. For federal fiscal year 2012
and each subsequent federal fiscal year, the Health Reform Law
provides for the annual market basket update to be further
reduced by a productivity adjustment. The amount of that
reduction will be the projected, nationwide productivity gains
over the preceding 10 years. To determine the
72
projection, HHS will use the BLS
10-year
moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity
(the BLS data is typically a few years old). The Health Reform
Law does not contain guidelines for use by HHS in projecting the
productivity figure. However, CMS estimates that the combined
market basket and productivity adjustments will reduce Medicare
payments under the IRF PPS by $5.7 billion from 2010 to
2019. Beginning in federal fiscal year 2014, IRFs will be
required to report quality measures to HHS or will receive a two
percentage point reduction to the market basket update. As of
December 31, 2009, we had one rehabilitation hospital,
which is operated through a joint venture, and 46 hospital
rehabilitation units.
On May 7, 2004, CMS published a final rule to change the
criteria for being classified as an IRF. Pursuant to that final
rule, 75% of a facilitys inpatients over a given year had
to have been treated for at least one of 10 specified
conditions, and a subsequent regulation expanded the number of
specified conditions to 13. Since then, several statutory and
regulatory adjustments have been made to the rule, including
adjustments to the percentage of a facilitys patients that
must be treated for one of the 13 specified conditions.
Currently, the compliance threshold is set by statute at 60%.
Implementation of this 60% threshold has reduced our IRF
admissions and can be expected to continue to restrict the
treatment of patients whose medical conditions do not meet any
of the 13 approved conditions. In addition, effective
January 1, 2010, IRFs must meet additional coverage
criteria, including patient selection and care requirements
relating to pre-admission screenings, post-admission
evaluations, ongoing coordination of care and involvement of
rehabilitation physicians. A facility that fails to meet the 60%
threshold or other criteria to be classified as an IRF will be
paid under the acute care hospital inpatient or outpatient PPS,
which generally provide for lower payment amounts.
Psychiatric
Inpatient hospital services furnished in psychiatric hospitals
and psychiatric units of general, acute care hospitals and
critical access hospitals are reimbursed under a prospective
payment system (IPF PPS), a per diem payment, with
adjustments to account for certain patient and facility
characteristics. IPF PPS contains an outlier policy
for extraordinarily costly cases and an adjustment to a
facilitys base payment if it maintains a full-service
emergency department. CMS has established the IPF PPS payment
rate in a manner intended to be budget neutral and has adopted a
July 1 update cycle, with each twelve month period referred to
as a rate year. The rehabilitation, psychiatric and
long-term care (RPL) market basket update is used to
update the IPF PPS. The annual RPL market basket update for rate
year 2010 was 2.1%, and the annual RPL market basket update for
rate year 2011 is 2.4%. However, the Health Reform Law includes
a 0.25% reduction to the market basket for rate year 2010 and
again in 2011. The Health Reform Law also provides for the
following reductions to the market basket update for each of the
following rate years: 0.1% in 2012 and 2013, 0.3% in 2014, 0.2%
in 2015 and 2016 and 0.75% in 2017, 2018 and 2019. For rate year
2012 and each subsequent rate year, the Health Reform Law
provides for the annual market basket update to be further
reduced by a productivity adjustment. The amount of that
reduction will be the projected, nationwide productivity gains
over the preceding 10 years. To determine the projection,
HHS will use the BLS
10-year
moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity
(the BLS data is typically a few years old). The Health Reform
Law does not contain guidelines for use by HHS in projecting the
productivity figure. However, CMS estimates that the combined
market basket and productivity adjustments will reduce Medicare
payments under the IPF PPS by $4.3 billion from 2010 to 2019. As
of December 31, 2009, we had five psychiatric hospitals and
32 hospital psychiatric units.
Ambulatory
Surgery Centers
CMS reimburses ASCs using a predetermined fee schedule.
Reimbursements for ASC overhead costs are limited to no more
than the overhead costs paid to hospital outpatient departments
under the Medicare hospital outpatient PPS for the same
procedure. Effective January 1, 2008, ASC payment groups
increased from nine clinically disparate payment groups to an
extensive list of covered surgical procedures among the APCs
used under the outpatient PPS for these surgical services.
Because the new payment system has a significant impact on
payments for certain procedures, for services previously in the
nine payment groups, CMS has established a four-year transition
period for implementing the required payment rates. Moreover, if
CMS determines that a procedure is commonly performed in a
physicians office, the ASC reimbursement for that
procedure is limited to the reimbursement allowable under the
Medicare Part B Physician Fee Schedule, with limited
exceptions. In addition, all surgical procedures, other than
those that pose a significant safety risk or generally require
an
73
overnight stay, are payable as ASC procedures. As a result, more
Medicare procedures now performed in hospitals may be moved to
ASCs, reducing surgical volume in our hospitals. Also, more
Medicare procedures now performed in ASCs may be moved to
physicians offices. Commercial third-party payers may
adopt similar policies. The Health Reform Law requires HHS to
issue a plan by January 1, 2011 for developing a
value-based purchasing program for ASCs. Such a program may
further impact Medicare reimbursement of ASCs or increase our
operating costs in order to satisfy the value-based standards.
For federal fiscal year 2011 and each subsequent federal fiscal
year, the Health Reform Law provides for the annual market
basket update to be reduced by a productivity adjustment. The
amount of that reduction will be the projected nationwide
productivity gains over the preceding 10 years. To
determine the projection, HHS will use the BLS
10-year
moving average of changes in specified economy-wide productivity
(the BLS data is typically a few years old).
Other
Under PPS, the payment rates are adjusted for the area
differences in wage levels by a factor (wage index)
reflecting the relative wage level in the geographic area
compared to the national average wage level. Beginning in
federal fiscal year 2007, CMS adjusted 100% of the wage index
factor for occupational mix. The redistributive impact of wage
index changes, while slightly negative in the aggregate, is not
anticipated to have a material financial impact for 2010.
However, the Health Reform Law requires HHS to report to
Congress by December 31, 2011 with recommendations on how
to comprehensively reform the Medicare wage index system.
As required by the MMA, CMS is implementing contractor reform
whereby CMS has competitively bid the Medicare fiscal
intermediary and Medicare carrier functions to 15 Medicare
Administrative Contractors (MACs), which are
geographically assigned. CMS has awarded contracts to all 15 MAC
jurisdictions; as a result of filed protests, CMS is taking
corrective action regarding the contracts in several
jurisdictions. While chain providers had the option of having
all hospitals use one home office MAC, HCA chose to use the MACs
assigned to the geographic areas in which our hospitals are
located. The individual MAC jurisdictions are in varying phases
of transition. For the transition periods and for a potentially
unforeseen period thereafter, all of these changes could impact
claims processing functions and the resulting cash flow;
however, we are unable to predict the impact at this time.
Under the Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program,
CMS contracts with RACs to conduct post-payment reviews to
detect and correct improper payments in the
fee-for-service
Medicare program. CMS has awarded contracts to four RACs that
are implementing the RAC program on a nationwide basis as
required by statute.
Managed
Medicare
Managed Medicare plans relate to situations where a private
company contracts with CMS to provide members with Medicare
Part A, Part B and Part D benefits. Managed
Medicare plans can be structured as HMOs, PPOs or private
fee-for-service
plans. The Medicare program allows beneficiaries to choose
enrollment in certain managed Medicare plans. In 2003, MMA
increased reimbursement to managed Medicare plans and expanded
Medicare beneficiaries health care options. Since 2003,
the number of beneficiaries choosing to receive their Medicare
benefits through such plans has increased. However, the Medicare
Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 imposed new
restrictions and implemented focused cuts to certain managed
Medicare plans. In addition, the Health Reform Law reduces, over
a three year period, premium payments to managed Medicare plans
such that CMS managed care per capita premium payments
are, on average, equal to traditional Medicare. The CBO has
estimated that, as a result of these changes, payments to plans
will be reduced by $138 billion between 2010 and 2019,
while CMS has estimated the reduction to be $145 billion. In
addition, the Health Reform Law expands the RAC program to
include managed Medicare plans. In light of the current economic
downturn and the recently enacted legislation, managed Medicare
plans may experience reduced premium payments, which may lead to
decreased enrollment in such plans.
74
Medicaid
Medicaid programs are funded jointly by the federal government
and the states and are administered by states under approved
plans. Most state Medicaid program payments are made under a PPS
or are based on negotiated payment levels with individual
hospitals. Medicaid reimbursement is often less than a
hospitals cost of services. The Health Reform Law also
requires states to expand Medicaid coverage to all individuals
under age 65 with incomes up to 133% of the federal poverty
level by 2014. However, the Health Reform Law also requires
states to apply a 5% income disregard to the
Medicaid eligibility standard, so that Medicaid eligibility will
effectively be extended to those with incomes up to 138% of the
federal poverty level (FPL). In addition, effective
July 1, 2011, the Health Reform Law will prohibit the use of
federal funds under the Medicaid program to reimburse providers
for medical assistance provided to treat HACs.
Since most states must operate with balanced budgets and since
the Medicaid program is often the states largest program,
states can be expected to adopt or consider adopting legislation
designed to reduce their Medicaid expenditures. The current
economic downturn has increased the budgetary pressures on most
states, and these budgetary pressures have resulted and likely
will continue to result in decreased spending for Medicaid
programs in many states. Further, many states have also adopted,
or are considering, legislation designed to reduce coverage,
enroll Medicaid recipients in managed care programs
and/or
impose additional taxes on hospitals to help finance or expand
the states Medicaid systems. Effective March 23, 2010, the
Health Reform Law requires states to at least maintain Medicaid
eligibility standards established prior to the enactment of the
law for adults until January 1, 2014 and for children until
October 1, 2019. However, states with budget deficits may seek
exemptions from this requirement to address eligibility
standards that apply to adults making more than 133% of the
federal poverty level. As permitted by law, certain states in
which we operate have adopted broad-based provider taxes to fund
the
non-federal
share of Medicaid programs.
Through DRA 2005, Congress has expanded the federal
governments involvement in fighting fraud, waste and abuse
in the Medicaid program by creating the Medicaid Integrity
Program. Among other things, the DRA 2005 requires CMS to employ
private contractors, referred to as Medicaid Integrity
Contractors (MICs), to perform post-payment audits
of Medicaid claims and identify overpayments. MICs are assigned
to five geographic regions and have commenced audits in several
of the states assigned to those regions. Throughout 2010, MIC
audits will continue to expand to other states. The Health
Reform Law increases federal funding for the MIC program for
federal fiscal year 2011 and later years. In addition to MICs,
several other contractors, including the state Medicaid
agencies, have increased their review activities. The Health
Reform Law expands the RAC programs scope to include
Medicaid claims by requiring all states to enter contracts with
RACs by December 31, 2010.
Managed
Medicaid
Managed Medicaid programs enable states to contract with one or
more entities for patient enrollment, care management and claims
adjudication. The states usually do not relinquish program
responsibilities for financing, eligibility criteria and core
benefit plan design. We generally contract directly with one of
the designated entities, usually a managed care organization.
The provisions of these programs are state-specific.
Enrollment in managed Medicaid plans has increased in recent
years, as state governments seek to control the cost of Medicaid
programs. However, general economic conditions in the states in
which we operate may require reductions in premium payments to
these plans and may reduce reimbursement received from these
plans.
Accountable
Care Organizations and Pilot Projects
The Health Reform Law requires HHS to establish a Medicare
Shared Savings Program that promotes accountability and
coordination of care through the creation of Accountable Care
Organizations (ACOs), beginning no later than
January 1, 2012. The program will allow providers
(including hospitals), physicians and other designated
professionals and suppliers to form ACOs and voluntarily
work together to invest in infrastructure and redesign delivery
processes to achieve high quality and efficient delivery of
services. The program is intended to produce savings as a result
of improved quality and operational efficiency. ACOs that
75
achieve quality performance standards established by HHS will be
eligible to share in a portion of the amounts saved by the
Medicare program. HHS has significant discretion to determine
key elements of the program, including what steps providers must
take to be considered an ACO, how to decide if Medicare program
savings have occurred, and what portion of such savings will be
paid to ACOs. In addition, HHS will determine to what degree
hospitals, physicians and other eligible participants will be
able to form and operate an ACO without violating certain
existing laws, including the Civil Monetary Penalty Law, the
Anti-kickback Statute and the Stark Law. The Health Reform Law
does not authorize HHS to waive other laws that may impact the
ability of hospitals and other eligible participants to
participate in ACOs, such as antitrust laws.
The Health Reform Law requires HHS to establish a five-year,
voluntary national bundled payment pilot program for Medicare
services beginning no later than January 1, 2013. Under the
program, providers would agree to receive one payment for
services provided to Medicare patients for certain medical
conditions or episodes of care. HHS will have the discretion to
determine how the program will function. For example, HHS will
determine what medical conditions will be included in the
program and the amount of the payment for each condition. In
addition, the Health Reform Law provides for a five-year bundled
payment pilot program for Medicaid services to begin
January 1, 2012. HHS will select up to eight states to
participate based on the potential to lower costs under the
Medicaid program while improving care. State programs may target
particular categories of beneficiaries, selected diagnoses or
geographic regions of the state. The selected state programs
will provide one payment for both hospital and physician
services provided to Medicaid patients for certain episodes of
inpatient care. For both pilot programs, HHS will determine the
relationship between the programs and restrictions in certain
existing laws, including the Civil Monetary Penalty Law, the
Anti-kickback Statute, the Stark Law and the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)
privacy, security and transaction standard requirements.
However, the Health Reform Law does not authorize HHS to waive
other laws that may impact the ability of hospitals and other
eligible participants to participate in the pilot programs, such
as antitrust laws.
Disproportionate
Share Hospitals
In addition to making payments for services provided directly to
beneficiaries, Medicare makes additional payments to hospitals
that treat a disproportionately large number of low-income
patients (Medicaid and Medicare patients eligible to receive
Supplemental Security Income). Disproportionate share hospital
(DSH) payments are determined annually based on
certain statistical information required by HHS and are
calculated as a percentage addition to MS-DRG payments. The
primary method used by a hospital to qualify for DSH payments is
a complex statutory formula that results in a DSH percentage
that is applied to payments on MS-DRGs.
Under the Health Reform Law, beginning in federal fiscal year
2014, Medicare DSH payments will be reduced to 25% of the amount
they otherwise would have been absent the new law. The remaining
75% of the amount that would otherwise be paid under Medicare
DSH will be effectively pooled, and this pool will be reduced
further each year by a formula that reflects reductions in the
national level of uninsured who are under 65 years of age. Each
DSH hospital will then be paid, out of the reduced DSH payment
pool, an amount allocated based upon its level of uncompensated
care. It is difficult to predict the full impact of the Medicare
DSH reductions. The CBO estimates $22 billion in reductions
to Medicare DSH payments between 2010 and 2019, while for the
same time period, CMS estimates reimbursement reductions
totaling $50 billion.
Hospitals that provide care to a disproportionately high number
of low-income patients may receive Medicaid DSH payments. The
federal government distributes federal Medicaid DSH funds to
each state based on a statutory formula. The states then
distribute the DSH funding among qualifying hospitals. States
have broad discretion to define which hospitals qualify for
Medicaid DSH payments and the amount of such payments. The
Health Reform Law will reduce funding for the Medicaid DSH
hospital program in federal fiscal years 2014 through 2020 by
the following amounts: 2014 ($500 million); 2015
($600 million); 2016 ($600 million); 2017
($1.8 billion); 2018 ($5 billion); 2019
($5.6 billion); and 2020 ($4 billion). How such cuts
are allocated among the states and how the states allocate these
cuts among providers, have yet to be determined.
76
TRICARE
TRICARE is the Department of Defenses health care program
for members of the armed forces. On May 1, 2009, the
Department of Defense implemented a prospective payment system
for hospital outpatient services furnished to TRICARE
beneficiaries similar to that utilized for services furnished to
Medicare beneficiaries. Because the Medicare outpatient
prospective payment system APC rates have historically been
below TRICARE rates, the adoption of this payment methodology
for TRICARE beneficiaries reduces our reimbursement; however,
TRICARE outpatient services do not represent a significant
portion of our patient volumes.
Annual
Cost Reports
All hospitals participating in the Medicare, Medicaid and
TRICARE programs, whether paid on a reasonable cost basis or
under a PPS, are required to meet certain financial reporting
requirements. Federal and, where applicable, state regulations
require the submission of annual cost reports covering the
revenues, costs and expenses associated with the services
provided by each hospital to Medicare beneficiaries and Medicaid
recipients.
Annual cost reports required under the Medicare and Medicaid
programs are subject to routine audits, which may result in
adjustments to the amounts ultimately determined to be due to us
under these reimbursement programs. These audits often require
several years to reach the final determination of amounts due to
or from us under these programs. Providers also have rights of
appeal, and it is common to contest issues raised in audits of
cost reports.
Managed
Care and Other Discounted Plans
Most of our hospitals offer discounts from established charges
to certain large group purchasers of health care services,
including managed care plans and private insurance companies.
Admissions reimbursed by commercial managed care and other
insurers were 34%, 35% and 37% of our total admissions for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Managed care contracts are typically negotiated for terms
between one and three years. While we generally received annual
average yield increases of 6% to 7% from managed care payers
during 2009, there can be no assurance that we will continue to
receive increases in the future. It is not clear what impact, if
any, the increased obligations on managed care payers and other
health plans imposed by the Health Reform Law will have on our
ability to negotiate reimbursement increases.
Uninsured
and Self-Pay Patients
A high percentage of our uninsured patients are initially
admitted through our emergency rooms. For the year ended
December 31, 2009, approximately 81% of our admissions of
uninsured patients occurred through our emergency rooms. The
Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
(EMTALA) requires any hospital that participates in
the Medicare program to conduct an appropriate medical screening
examination of every person who presents to the hospitals
emergency room for treatment and, if the individual is suffering
from an emergency medical condition, to either stabilize that
condition or make an appropriate transfer of the individual to a
facility that can handle the condition. The obligation to screen
and stabilize emergency medical conditions exists regardless of
an individuals ability to pay for treatment. The Health
Reform Law requires health plans to reimburse hospitals for
emergency services provided to enrollees without prior
authorization and without regard to whether a participating
provider contract is in place. Further, the Health Reform Law
contains provisions that seek to decrease the number of
uninsured individuals, including requirements, which do not
become effective until 2014, for individuals to obtain, and
employers to provide, insurance coverage. These mandates may
reduce the financial impact of screening for and stabilizing
emergency medical conditions. However, many factors are unknown
regarding the impact of the Health Reform Law, including how
many previously uninsured individuals will obtain coverage as a
result of the new law or the change, if any, in the volume of
inpatient and outpatient hospital services that are sought by
and provided to previously uninsured individuals. In addition,
it is difficult to predict the full impact of the Health Reform
Law due to the
77
laws complexity, lack of implementing regulations or
interpretive guidance, gradual implementation and possible
amendment.
We are taking proactive measures to reduce our provision for
doubtful accounts by, among other things: screening all
patients, including the uninsured, through our emergency
screening protocol, to determine the appropriate care setting in
light of their condition, while reducing the potential for bad
debt and increasing up-front collections from patients subject
to co-pay and deductible requirements and uninsured patients.
Hospital
Utilization
We believe that the most important factors relating to the
overall utilization of a hospital are the quality and market
position of the hospital and the number and quality of
physicians and other health care professionals providing patient
care within the facility. Generally, we believe the ability of a
hospital to be a market leader is determined by its breadth of
services, level of technology, emphasis on quality of care and
convenience for patients and physicians. Other factors that
impact utilization include the growth in local population, local
economic conditions and market penetration of managed care
programs.
The following table sets forth certain operating statistics for
our health care facilities. Health care facility operations are
subject to certain seasonal fluctuations, including decreases in
patient utilization during holiday periods and increases in the
cold weather months. The data set forth in this table includes
only those facilities that are consolidated for financial
reporting purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Number of hospitals at end of period(a)
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
Number of freestanding outpatient surgery centers at end of
period(b)
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
Number of licensed beds at end of period(c)
|
|
|
38,839
|
|
|
|
38,504
|
|
|
|
38,405
|
|
|
|
39,354
|
|
|
|
41,265
|
|
Weighted average licensed beds(d)
|
|
|
38,825
|
|
|
|
38,422
|
|
|
|
39,065
|
|
|
|
40,653
|
|
|
|
41,902
|
|
Admissions(e)
|
|
|
1,556,500
|
|
|
|
1,541,800
|
|
|
|
1,552,700
|
|
|
|
1,610,100
|
|
|
|
1,647,800
|
|
Equivalent admissions(f)
|
|
|
2,439,000
|
|
|
|
2,363,600
|
|
|
|
2,352,400
|
|
|
|
2,416,700
|
|
|
|
2,476,600
|
|
Average length of stay (days)(g)
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Average daily census(h)
|
|
|
20,650
|
|
|
|
20,795
|
|
|
|
21,049
|
|
|
|
21,688
|
|
|
|
22,225
|
|
Occupancy rate(i)
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
Emergency room visits(j)
|
|
|
5,593,500
|
|
|
|
5,246,400
|
|
|
|
5,116,100
|
|
|
|
5,213,500
|
|
|
|
5,415,200
|
|
Outpatient surgeries(k)
|
|
|
794,600
|
|
|
|
797,400
|
|
|
|
804,900
|
|
|
|
820,900
|
|
|
|
836,600
|
|
Inpatient surgeries(l)
|
|
|
494,500
|
|
|
|
493,100
|
|
|
|
516,500
|
|
|
|
533,100
|
|
|
|
541,400
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Excludes eight facilities in 2009, 2008 and 2007 and seven
facilities in 2006 and 2005 that are not consolidated (accounted
for using the equity method) for financial reporting purposes. |
|
(b) |
|
Excludes eight facilities in 2009 and 2008, nine facilities in
2007 and 2006 and seven facilities in 2005 that are not
consolidated (accounted for using the equity method) for
financial reporting purposes. |
|
(c) |
|
Licensed beds are those beds for which a facility has been
granted approval to operate from the applicable state licensing
agency. |
|
(d) |
|
Weighted average licensed beds represents the average number of
licensed beds, weighted based on periods owned. |
|
(e) |
|
Represents the total number of patients admitted to our
hospitals and is used by management and certain investors as a
general measure of inpatient volume. |
|
(f) |
|
Equivalent admissions are used by management and certain
investors as a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. Equivalent admissions are computed by
multiplying admissions (inpatient volume) by the sum of gross
inpatient revenue and gross outpatient revenue and then dividing
the |
78
|
|
|
|
|
resulting amount by gross inpatient revenue. The equivalent
admissions computation equates outpatient revenue to
the volume measure (admissions) used to measure inpatient
volume, resulting in a general measure of combined inpatient and
outpatient volume. |
|
(g) |
|
Represents the average number of days admitted patients stay in
our hospitals. |
|
(h) |
|
Represents the average number of patients in our hospital beds
each day. |
|
(i) |
|
Represents the percentage of hospital licensed beds occupied by
patients. Both average daily census and occupancy rate provide
measures of the utilization of inpatient rooms. |
|
(j) |
|
Represents the number of patients treated in our emergency rooms. |
|
(k) |
|
Represents the number of surgeries performed on patients who
were not admitted to our hospitals. Pain management and
endoscopy procedures are not included in outpatient surgeries. |
|
(l) |
|
Represents the number of surgeries performed on patients who
have been admitted to our hospitals. Pain management and
endoscopy procedures are not included in inpatient surgeries. |
Competition
Generally, other hospitals in the local communities served by
most of our hospitals provide services similar to those offered
by our hospitals. Additionally, in recent years the number of
freestanding ASCs and diagnostic centers (including facilities
owned by physicians) in the geographic areas in which we operate
has increased significantly. As a result, most of our hospitals
operate in a highly competitive environment. In some cases,
competing hospitals are more established than our hospitals.
Some competing hospitals are owned by tax-supported government
agencies and many others are owned by
not-for-profit
entities that may be supported by endowments, charitable
contributions
and/or tax
revenues and are exempt from sales, property and income taxes.
Such exemptions and support are not available to our hospitals.
In certain localities there are large teaching hospitals that
provide highly specialized facilities, equipment and services
which may not be available at most of our hospitals. We are
facing increasing competition from specialty hospitals, some of
which are physician-owned, and both our own and unaffiliated
freestanding ASCs for market share in high margin services.
Psychiatric hospitals frequently attract patients from areas
outside their immediate locale and, therefore, our psychiatric
hospitals compete with both local and regional hospitals,
including the psychiatric units of general, acute care hospitals.
Our strategies are designed to ensure our hospitals are
competitive. We believe our hospitals compete within local
communities on the basis of many factors, including the quality
of care, ability to attract and retain quality physicians,
skilled clinical personnel and other health care professionals,
location, breadth of services, technology offered and prices
charged. Pursuant to the Health Reform Law, hospitals will be
required to publish annually a list of their standard charges
for items and services. We have increased our focus on operating
outpatient services with improved accessibility and more
convenient service for patients, and increased predictability
and efficiency for physicians.
Two of the most significant factors to the competitive position
of a hospital are the number and quality of physicians
affiliated with or employed by the hospital. Although physicians
may at any time terminate their relationship with a hospital we
operate, our hospitals seek to retain physicians with varied
specialties on the hospitals medical staffs and to attract
other qualified physicians. We believe physicians refer patients
to a hospital on the basis of the quality and scope of services
it renders to patients and physicians, the quality of physicians
on the medical staff, the location of the hospital and the
quality of the hospitals facilities, equipment and
employees. Accordingly, we strive to maintain and provide
quality facilities, equipment, employees and services for
physicians and patients.
Another major factor in the competitive position of a hospital
is our ability to negotiate service contracts with purchasers of
group health care services. Managed care plans attempt to direct
and control the use of hospital services and obtain discounts
from hospitals established gross charges. In addition,
employers and traditional health insurers continue to attempt to
contain costs through negotiations with hospitals for managed
care programs and discounts from established gross charges.
Generally, hospitals compete for service contracts
79
with group health care services purchasers on the basis of
price, market reputation, geographic location, quality and range
of services, quality of the medical staff and convenience. Our
future success will depend, in part, on our ability to retain
and renew our managed care contracts and enter into new managed
care contracts on favorable terms. Other health care providers
may impact our ability to enter into managed care contracts or
negotiate increases in our reimbursement and other favorable
terms and conditions. For example, some of our competitors may
negotiate exclusivity provisions with managed care plans or
otherwise restrict the ability of managed care companies to
contract with us. The trend toward consolidation among
non-government payers tends to increase their bargaining power
over fee structures. In addition, as various provisions of the
Health Reform Law are implemented, including the establishment
of Exchanges and limitations on rescissions of coverage and
pre-existing condition exclusions, non-government payers may
increasingly demand reduced fees or be unwilling to negotiate
reimbursement increases. The importance of obtaining contracts
with managed care organizations varies from community to
community, depending on the market strength of such
organizations.
State certificate of need (CON) laws, which place
limitations on a hospitals ability to expand hospital
services and facilities, make capital expenditures and otherwise
make changes in operations, may also have the effect of
restricting competition. We currently operate health care
facilities in a number of states with CON laws. Before issuing a
CON, these states consider the need for additional or expanded
health care facilities or services. In those states which have
no CON laws or which set relatively high levels of expenditures
before they become reviewable by state authorities, competition
in the form of new services, facilities and capital spending is
more prevalent. See Regulation and Other Factors.
We and the health care industry as a whole face the challenge of
continuing to provide quality patient care while dealing with
rising costs and strong competition for patients. Changes in
medical technology, existing and future legislation, regulations
and interpretations and managed care contracting for provider
services by private and government payers remain ongoing
challenges.
Admissions, average lengths of stay and reimbursement amounts
continue to be negatively affected by payer-required
pre-admission authorization, utilization review and payer
pressure to maximize outpatient and alternative health care
delivery services for less acutely ill patients. The Health
Reform Law potentially expands the use of prepayment review by
Medicare contractors by eliminating statutory restrictions on
their use. Increased competition, admission constraints and
payer pressures are expected to continue. To meet these
challenges, we intend to expand our facilities or acquire or
construct new facilities where appropriate, to enhance the
provision of a comprehensive array of outpatient services, offer
market competitive pricing to private payer groups, upgrade
facilities and equipment and offer new or expanded programs and
services.
Environmental
Matters
We are subject to various federal, state and local statutes and
ordinances regulating the discharge of materials into the
environment. We do not believe that we will be required to
expend any material amounts in order to comply with these laws
and regulations.
Insurance
As is typical in the health care industry, we are subject to
claims and legal actions by patients in the ordinary course of
business. Subject to a $5 million per occurrence
self-insured retention, our facilities are insured by our
wholly-owned insurance subsidiary for losses up to
$50 million per occurrence. The insurance subsidiary has
obtained reinsurance for professional liability risks generally
above a retention level of $15 million per occurrence. We
also maintain professional liability insurance with unrelated
commercial carriers for losses in excess of amounts insured by
our insurance subsidiary.
We purchase, from unrelated insurance companies, coverage for
directors and officers liability and property loss in amounts we
believe are adequate. The directors and officers liability
coverage includes a $25 million corporate deductible for
the period prior to the Recapitalization and a $1 million
corporate deductible subsequent to the Recapitalization. In
addition, we will continue to purchase coverage for our
directors and officers on an ongoing basis. The property
coverage includes varying deductibles depending on
80
the cause of the property damage. These deductibles range from
$500,000 per claim up to 5% of the affected property values for
certain flood and wind and earthquake related incidents.
Employees
and Medical Staffs
At March 31, 2010, we had approximately
192,000 employees, including approximately
49,000 part-time employees. References herein to
employees refer to employees of our affiliates. We
are subject to various state and federal laws that regulate
wages, hours, benefits and other terms and conditions relating
to employment. At March 31, 2010, employees at 21 of our
hospitals are represented by various labor unions. It is
possible additional hospitals may unionize in the future. We
consider our employee relations to be good and have not
experienced work stoppages that have materially, adversely
affected our business or results of operations. Our hospitals,
like most hospitals, have experienced labor costs rising faster
than the general inflation rate. In some markets, nurse and
medical support personnel availability has become a significant
operating issue to health care providers. To address this
challenge, we have implemented several initiatives to improve
retention, recruiting, compensation programs and productivity.
Our hospitals are staffed by licensed physicians, who generally
are not employees of our hospitals. However, some physicians
provide services in our hospitals under contracts, which
generally describe a term of service, provide and establish the
duties and obligations of such physicians, require the
maintenance of certain performance criteria and fix compensation
for such services. Any licensed physician may apply to be
accepted to the medical staff of any of our hospitals, but the
hospitals medical staff and the appropriate governing
board of the hospital, in accordance with established
credentialing criteria, must approve acceptance to the staff.
Members of the medical staffs of our hospitals often also serve
on the medical staffs of other hospitals and may terminate their
affiliation with one of our hospitals at any time.
We may be required to continue to enhance wages and benefits to
recruit and retain nurses and other medical support personnel or
to hire more expensive temporary or contract personnel. As a
result, our labor costs could increase. We also depend on the
available labor pool of semi-skilled and unskilled employees in
each of the markets in which we operate. Certain proposed
changes in federal labor laws, including the Employee Free
Choice Act, could increase the likelihood of employee
unionization attempts. To the extent a significant portion of
our employee base unionizes, our costs could increase
materially. In addition, the states in which we operate could
adopt mandatory nurse-staffing ratios or could reduce mandatory
nurse-staffing ratios already in place. State-mandated
nurse-staffing ratios could significantly affect labor costs,
and have an adverse impact on revenues if we are required to
limit patient admissions in order to meet the required ratios.
81
Properties
The following table lists, by state, the number of hospitals
(general, acute care, psychiatric and rehabilitation) directly
or indirectly owned and operated by us as of March 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State
|
|
Hospitals
|
|
|
Beds
|
|
|
Alaska
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
California
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
Colorado
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
2,259
|
|
Florida
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
9,818
|
|
Georgia
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1,946
|
|
Idaho
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
481
|
|
Indiana
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
278
|
|
Kansas
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1,286
|
|
Kentucky
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
384
|
|
Louisiana
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
1,251
|
|
Mississippi
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
130
|
|
Missouri
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
1,055
|
|
Nevada
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1,074
|
|
New Hampshire
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
295
|
|
Oklahoma
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
793
|
|
South Carolina
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
740
|
|
Tennessee
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
2,329
|
|
Texas
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
10,497
|
|
Utah
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
968
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
2,963
|
|
International
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
England
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
704
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
41,088
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to the hospitals listed in the above table, we
directly or indirectly operate 106 freestanding surgery centers.
We also operate medical office buildings in conjunction with
some of our hospitals. These office buildings are primarily
occupied by physicians who practice at our hospitals. Fourteen
of our general, acute care hospitals and three of our other
properties have been mortgaged to support our obligations under
our senior secured cash flow credit facility and the first lien
secured notes we issued in 2009 and 2010. These three other
properties are also subject to second mortgages to support our
obligations under the second lien secured notes we issued in
2006 and 2009.
We maintain our headquarters in approximately
1,200,000 square feet of space in the Nashville, Tennessee
area. In addition to the headquarters in Nashville, we maintain
regional service centers related to our shared services
initiatives. These service centers are located in markets in
which we operate hospitals.
We believe our headquarters, hospitals and other facilities are
suitable for their respective uses and are, in general, adequate
for our present needs. Our properties are subject to various
federal, state and local statutes and ordinances regulating
their operation. Management does not believe that compliance
with such statutes and ordinances will materially affect our
financial position or results of operations.
Legal
Proceedings
We operate in a highly regulated and litigious industry. As a
result, various lawsuits, claims and legal and regulatory
proceedings have been and can be expected to be instituted or
asserted against us. The resolution of
82
any such lawsuits, claims or legal and regulatory proceedings
could materially and adversely affect our results of operations
and financial position in a given period.
Government
Investigations, Claims and Litigation
In January 2001, we entered into an eight-year Corporate
Integrity Agreement (the CIA) with the Office of
Inspector General at HHS (OIG), which expired on
January 24, 2009. Under the CIA, we had numerous
affirmative obligations, including the requirement to report
potential violations of applicable federal health care laws and
regulations. Pursuant to these obligations, we reported a number
of potential violations of the Stark Law, the Anti-kickback
Statute, EMTALA and other laws, most of which we consider to be
nonviolations or technical violations. We submitted our final
report pursuant to the CIA on April 30, 2009. In
April 2010, we received notice from the OIG that the final
report was accepted, relieving us of future obligations under
the CIA. However, the government could still determine that our
reporting
and/or our
resolution of reported issues was inadequate. Violation or
breach of the CIA, or violation of federal or state laws
relating to Medicare, Medicaid or similar programs, could
subject us to substantial monetary fines, civil and criminal
penalties
and/or
exclusion from participation in the Medicare and Medicaid
programs. Alleged violations may be pursued by the government or
through private qui tam actions. Sanctions imposed
against us as a result of such actions could have a material,
adverse effect on our results of operations or financial
position.
New
Hampshire Hospital Litigation
In 2006, the Foundation for Seacoast Health (the
Foundation) filed suit against HCA in state court in
New Hampshire. The Foundation alleged that both the 2006
Recapitalization transaction and a prior 1999 intra-corporate
transaction violated a 1983 agreement that placed certain
restrictions on transfers of the Portsmouth Regional Hospital.
In May 2007, the trial court ruled against the Foundation on all
its claims. On appeal, the New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed
the ruling on the Recapitalization, but remanded to the trial
court the claims based on the 1999 intra-corporate transaction.
The trial court ruled in December 2009 that the 1999
intra-corporate transaction breached the transfer restriction
provisions of the 1983 agreement. The court will now conduct
additional proceedings to determine whether any harm has flowed
from the alleged breach, and if so, what the appropriate remedy
should be. The court may consider whether to, among other
things, award monetary damages, rescind or undo the 1999
intra-corporate transfer or give the Foundation a right to
purchase hospital assets at a price to be determined (which the
Foundation asserts should be below the fair market value of the
hospital).
General
Liability and Other Claims
We are a party to certain proceedings relating to claims for
income taxes and related interest before the IRS Appeals
Division. For a description of those proceedings, see
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations IRS
Disputes and Note 5 to our consolidated financial
statements.
We are also subject to claims and suits arising in the ordinary
course of business, including claims for personal injuries or
for wrongful restriction of, or interference with,
physicians staff privileges. In certain of these actions
the claimants have asked for punitive damages against us, which
may not be covered by insurance. In the opinion of management,
the ultimate resolution of these pending claims and legal
proceedings will not have a material, adverse effect on our
results of operations or financial position.
83
REGULATION AND
OTHER FACTORS
Licensure,
Certification and Accreditation
Health care facility construction and operation are subject to
numerous fe