e424b3
Filed
Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3)
Registration
Nos. 333-159511
and
333-159511-01
to
333-159511-185
(excluding Registration Nos.
333-159511-07,
333-159511-134
and
333-159511-143)
HCA
INC.
SUPPLEMENT
NO. 15 TO
MARKET MAKING PROSPECTUS DATED
JULY 10, 2009
THE DATE OF
THIS SUPPLEMENT IS MAY 10, 2010
This Prospectus Supplement is being filed to provide
additional information contained in filings by HCA Inc. (the
Company) with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. This Prospectus Supplement should be read together
with the Prospectus.
RECENT
DEVELOPMENTS
First
Quarter 2010 Information
On May 7, 2010, the Company filed its Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2010. The unaudited
consolidated financial statements of the Company at
March 31, 2010 and for the quarters ended March 31,
2009 and 2010, the related managements discussion and
analysis of financial condition and results of operations, and
certain other information from the
Form 10-Q
are included in this Prospectus Supplement under
Information from the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2010.
Payment
of Dividend
On May 5, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Company
declared a cash distribution in the aggregate amount of
approximately $500 million, or $5.00 per share of the
Companys outstanding common stock (the
Distribution). The Distribution is described in more
detail in this Prospectus Supplement under Information
from the Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
Filed on May 7, 2010.
Filing of
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
On May 7, 2010, the Company filed a registration statement
on
Form S-1
(the IPO registration statement) with the Securities
and Exchange Commission with respect to a proposed initial
public offering of its common stock. The Company currently
estimates that the gross proceeds it will receive from the sale
of shares of its common stock sold by it in that offering,
excluding the underwriters option to purchase additional
shares, will be $2.5 billion.
The Company intends to use the anticipated net proceeds to repay
certain of its existing indebtedness, as will be determined
prior to the initial public offering, and for general corporate
purposes.
This Prospectus Supplement relates solely to the notes
described in the market making Prospectus dated July 10,
2009 and does not constitute an offer to sell or the
solicitation of an offer to buy the common stock described in
the IPO registration statement. The IPO registration statement
has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission but
has not yet become effective. There can be no assurance as to
when the initial public offering will ultimately be completed,
whether the Company will receive the currently expected gross
proceeds from the offering or whether the use of proceeds from
the offering will be ultimately applied in the manner currently
contemplated.
1
INFORMATION
FROM THE COMPANYS QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2010
Part I: Financial Information
HCA Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Income Statements
for the Quarters Ended March 31, 2010 and
2009
Unaudited
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Losses on sales of facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,859
|
|
|
|
6,812
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
|
619
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
2
HCA
Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
Unaudited
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
312
|
|
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of
$4,519 and $4,860
|
|
|
3,878
|
|
|
|
3,692
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
794
|
|
|
|
802
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
1,181
|
|
|
|
1,192
|
|
Other
|
|
|
497
|
|
|
|
579
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,738
|
|
|
|
6,577
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
24,766
|
|
|
|
24,669
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(13,514
|
)
|
|
|
(13,242
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,252
|
|
|
|
11,427
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments of insurance subsidiary
|
|
|
1,146
|
|
|
|
1,166
|
|
Investments in and advances to affiliates
|
|
|
851
|
|
|
|
853
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
2,561
|
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
Deferred loan costs
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
418
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1,132
|
|
|
|
1,113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
24,091
|
|
|
$
|
24,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS DEFICIT
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
1,199
|
|
|
$
|
1,460
|
|
Accrued salaries
|
|
|
893
|
|
|
|
849
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
1,498
|
|
|
|
1,158
|
|
Long-term debt due within one year
|
|
|
981
|
|
|
|
846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,571
|
|
|
|
4,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
25,874
|
|
|
|
24,824
|
|
Professional liability risks
|
|
|
1,058
|
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
Income taxes and other liabilities
|
|
|
1,742
|
|
|
|
1,768
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities with contingent redemption rights
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders deficit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $0.01 par; authorized 125,000,000 shares;
outstanding 94,626,100 shares in 2010 and
94,637,400 shares in 2009
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Capital in excess of par value
|
|
|
291
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(479
|
)
|
|
|
(450
|
)
|
Retained deficit
|
|
|
(10,126
|
)
|
|
|
(8,763
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders deficit attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
|
(10,313
|
)
|
|
|
(8,986
|
)
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
1,008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
(7,978
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
24,091
|
|
|
$
|
24,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
3
HCA
Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows
for the Quarters Ended March 31, 2010 and
2009
Unaudited
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
476
|
|
|
$
|
432
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
(838
|
)
|
|
|
(1,111
|
)
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Losses on sales of facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Amortization of deferred loan costs
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Pay-in-kind
interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Other
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
901
|
|
|
|
615
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property and equipment
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
|
|
(337
|
)
|
Acquisition of hospitals and health care entities
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
Disposition of hospitals and health care entities
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Change in investments
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(181
|
)
|
|
|
(288
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
1,387
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
Net change in revolving credit facilities
|
|
|
1,339
|
|
|
|
(335
|
)
|
Repayment of long-term debt
|
|
|
(1,510
|
)
|
|
|
(339
|
)
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
Payment of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Payment of cash distribution to stockholders
|
|
|
(1,751
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(644
|
)
|
|
|
(436
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
(109
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest payments
|
|
$
|
374
|
|
|
$
|
344
|
|
Income tax (refunds) payments, net
|
|
$
|
(71
|
)
|
|
$
|
146
|
|
See accompanying notes.
4
HCA
Inc.
Unaudited
|
|
NOTE 1
|
INTERIM
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
Merger,
Recapitalization and Reporting Entity
On November 17, 2006, HCA Inc. completed its merger (the
Merger) with Hercules Acquisition Corporation,
pursuant to which the Company was acquired by Hercules Holding
II, LLC (Hercules Holding), a Delaware limited
liability company owned by a private investor group comprised of
affiliates of Bain Capital Partners, Kohlberg Kravis
Roberts & Co., Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity
(each a Sponsor), affiliates of Citigroup Inc. and
Bank of America Corporation (the Sponsor Assignees)
and affiliates of HCA founder, Dr. Thomas F. Frist Jr.,
(the Frist Entities, and together with the Sponsors
and the Sponsor Assignees, the Investors) and by
members of management and certain other investors. The Merger,
the financing transactions related to the Merger and other
related transactions are collectively referred to in the
quarterly report as the Recapitalization. The Merger
was accounted for as a recapitalization in our financial
statements, with no adjustments to the historical basis of our
assets and liabilities. As a result of the Recapitalization, our
outstanding capital stock is owned by the Investors, certain
members of management and key employees. On April 29, 2008,
we registered our common stock pursuant to Section 12(g) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, thus subjecting
us to the reporting requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Our common stock is
not traded on a national securities exchange.
HCA Inc. is a holding company whose affiliates own and operate
hospitals and related health care entities. The term
affiliates includes direct and indirect subsidiaries
of HCA Inc. and partnerships and joint ventures in which such
subsidiaries are partners. At March 31, 2010, these
affiliates owned and operated 154 hospitals, 98 freestanding
surgery centers and facilities which provided extensive
outpatient and ancillary services. Affiliates of HCA are also
partners in joint ventures that own and operate eight hospitals
and eight freestanding surgery centers which are accounted for
using the equity method. The Companys facilities are
located in 20 states and England. The terms
HCA, Company, we,
our or us, as used in the quarterly
report on
Form 10-Q,
refer to HCA Inc. and its affiliates unless otherwise stated or
indicated by context.
Basis of
Presentation
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements have been prepared in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles for interim financial information
and with the instructions to
Form 10-Q
and Article 10 of
Regulation S-X.
Accordingly, they do not include all the information and
footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles
for complete consolidated financial statements. In the opinion
of management, all adjustments considered necessary for a fair
presentation have been included and are of a normal and
recurring nature. In accordance with Accounting Standards
Codification (ASC) 810, Consolidation
(ASC 810), references in this report to
net income attributable to HCA Inc. and stockholders
deficit attributable to HCA Inc. do not include noncontrolling
interests (previously reported as minority
interests), which we now report separately. The
implementation of ASC 810 also results in the cash flow
impact of distributions to and certain other transactions with
noncontrolling interests that were previously classified within
operating activities, being classified within financing
activities. Such treatment is consistent with the view that,
under ASC 810, transactions between HCA Inc. and
noncontrolling interests are considered to be equity
transactions.
The majority of our expenses are cost of revenue
items. Costs that could be classified as general and
administrative would include our corporate office costs, which
were $38 million and $37 million for the quarters
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Operating
results for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 are not
necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for
the year ending December 31, 2010. For further information,
refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes
thereto included in our annual report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to
the current year presentation.
5
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
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, were
pending before the IRS Examination Division as of March 31,
2010.
We expect the IRS Examination Division will complete its audit
of HCAs 2005 and 2006 federal income tax returns and will
begin an audit of the 2007, 2008 and 2009 federal income tax
returns for HCA and one or more affiliated partnerships during
2010.
Our liability for unrecognized tax benefits was
$550 million, including accrued interest of
$137 million as of March 31, 2010 ($628 million
and $156 million, respectively, as of December 31,
2009). The reduction in our liability for unrecognized tax
benefits was principally based on new information received
related to tax positions taken in prior years. Unrecognized tax
benefits of $201 million ($236 million as of
December 31, 2009) would affect the effective rate, if
recognized. The liability for unrecognized tax benefits does not
reflect deferred tax assets of $71 million
($77 million as of December 31, 2009) related to
deductible interest and state income taxes or a refundable
deposit of $104 million, which is recorded in noncurrent
assets. The provision for income taxes reflects reductions of
$15 million and $20 million in interest expense
related to taxing authority examinations for the quarters ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Depending on the resolution of the IRS disputes, the completion
of examinations by federal, state or international taxing
authorities, or the expiration of statutes of limitation for
specific taxing jurisdictions, we believe it is reasonably
possible our liability for unrecognized tax benefits may
significantly increase or decrease within the next
12 months. However, we are currently unable to estimate the
range of any possible change.
|
|
NOTE 3
|
INVESTMENTS
OF INSURANCE SUBSIDIARY
|
A summary of our insurance subsidiarys investments at
March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 follows (dollars
in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States and municipalities
|
|
$
|
648
|
|
|
$
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
675
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
333
|
|
Asset-backed securities
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
39
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,273
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
1,296
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,281
|
|
|
$
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
1,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts classified as current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(157
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment carrying value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 3
|
INVESTMENTS
OF INSURANCE SUBSIDIARY (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States and municipalities
|
|
$
|
668
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
695
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
401
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
396
|
|
Asset-backed securities
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
42
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,288
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
1,309
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,296
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
1,316
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts classified as current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment carrying value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the
investments of our insurance subsidiary were classified as
available-for-sale.
Changes in temporary unrealized gains and losses are recorded as
adjustments to other comprehensive income. At March 31,
2010 and December 31, 2009, $92 million and
$100 million, respectively, of our investments were subject
to restrictions included in insurance bond collateralization and
assumed reinsurance contracts.
Scheduled maturities of investments in debt securities at
March 31, 2010 were as follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Due in one year or less
|
|
$
|
295
|
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
Due after one year through five years
|
|
|
298
|
|
|
|
312
|
|
Due after five years through ten years
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
Due after ten years
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
897
|
|
|
|
924
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
Asset-backed securities
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,273
|
|
|
$
|
1,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The average expected maturity of the investments in debt
securities at March 31, 2010 was 3.1 years, compared
to the average scheduled maturity of 10.8 years. Expected
and scheduled maturities may differ because the issuers of
certain securities have the right to call, prepay or otherwise
redeem such obligations prior to the scheduled maturity date.
The average expected maturities for our auction rate and
asset-backed securities were derived from valuation models of
expected cash flows and involved managements judgment. The
average expected maturities for our auction rate and
asset-backed securities at March 31, 2010 were
4.3 years and 5.9 years, respectively, compared to
average scheduled maturities of 25.1 years and
25.7 years, respectively.
7
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
A summary of long-term debt at March 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, including related interest rates at
March 31, 2010, follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Senior secured asset-based revolving credit facility (effective
interest rate of 1.7%)
|
|
$
|
1,825
|
|
|
$
|
715
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility (effective interest
rate of 2.0%)
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured term loan facilities (effective interest rate of
6.7%)
|
|
|
7,594
|
|
|
|
8,987
|
|
Senior secured first lien notes (effective interest rate of 8.4%)
|
|
|
4,071
|
|
|
|
2,682
|
|
Other senior secured debt (effective interest rate of 7.0%)
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First lien debt
|
|
|
14,064
|
|
|
|
12,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured cash-pay notes (effective interest rate of 9.7%)
|
|
|
4,501
|
|
|
|
4,500
|
|
Senior secured toggle notes (effective interest rate of 10.0%)
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Second lien debt
|
|
|
6,079
|
|
|
|
6,078
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior unsecured notes (effective interest rate of 7.1%)
|
|
|
6,712
|
|
|
|
6,846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt (average life of six years, rates averaging 7.4%)
|
|
|
26,855
|
|
|
|
25,670
|
|
Less amounts due within one year
|
|
|
981
|
|
|
|
846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25,874
|
|
|
$
|
24,824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 2009 and 2010 debt issuances to repay
outstanding indebtedness under our senior secured term loan
facilities.
|
|
NOTE 5
|
FINANCIAL
INSTRUMENTS
|
Interest
Rate Swap Agreements
We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to manage our
exposure to fluctuations in interest rates. These swap
agreements involve the exchange of fixed and variable rate
interest payments between two parties based on common notional
principal amounts and maturity dates. Pay-fixed interest rate
swaps effectively convert LIBOR indexed variable rate
obligations to fixed interest rate obligations. Pay-variable
interest rate swaps effectively convert fixed interest rate
obligations to LIBOR indexed variable rate obligations. The net
interest payments, based on the notional amounts in these
agreements, generally match the timing of the related
liabilities, for the interest rate swap agreements which have
been designated as cash flow hedges. The notional amounts of the
swap agreements represent amounts 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.
8
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 5
|
FINANCIAL
INSTRUMENTS (continued)
|
Interest
Rate Swap Agreements (continued)
During March 2010, the application of the net proceeds from
our issuance of $1.400 billion aggregate principal amount
of
71/4% senior
secured first lien notes to repay variable rate debt resulted in
our remaining outstanding variable rate indebtedness being less
than the notional amounts of the related pay-fixed interest rate
swaps, which had been designated as cash flow hedges. Therefore,
we dedesignated $1.400 billion notional amount of our
pay-fixed interest rate swaps and entered into
$1.400 billion notional amount of pay-variable interest
rate swaps, which we expect to produce approximately offsetting
changes in fair value through the swap maturity dates.
The following table sets forth our interest rate swap
agreements, which have been designated as cash flow hedges, at
March 31, 2010 (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Pay-fixed interest rate swaps
|
|
$
|
7,100
|
|
|
|
November 2011
|
|
|
$
|
(448
|
)
|
Pay-fixed interest rate swaps (starting November 2011)
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
December 2016
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
Certain of our interest rate swaps are not designated as hedges,
and changes in fair value are recognized in results of
operations. The following table sets forth our interest rate
swap agreements, which were not designated as hedges, at
March 31, 2010 (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
Value
|
|
Pay-fixed interest rate swap
|
|
$
|
500
|
|
|
|
March 2011
|
|
|
$
|
(12
|
)
|
Pay-variable interest rate swap
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
March 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pay-fixed interest rate swap
|
|
|
900
|
|
|
|
November 2011
|
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
Pay-variable interest rate swap
|
|
|
900
|
|
|
|
November 2011
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
During the next 12 months, we estimate $368 million
will be reclassified from other comprehensive income
(OCI) to interest expense.
Cross
Currency Swaps
The Company and certain subsidiaries have incurred obligations
and entered into various intercompany transactions where such
obligations are denominated in currencies, other than the
functional currencies of the parties executing the trade. In
order to mitigate the currency exposure risks and better match
the cash flows of our obligations and intercompany transactions
with cash flows from operations, we entered into various cross
currency swaps. Our credit risk related to these agreements is
considered low because the swap agreements are with creditworthy
financial institutions.
Certain of our cross currency swaps are not designated as
hedges, and changes in fair value are recognized in results of
operations. The following table sets forth our cross currency
swap agreement which was not designated as a hedge at
March 31, 2010 (amounts in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
Value
|
|
Euro United States Dollar currency swap
|
|
|
351 Euro
|
|
|
|
December 2011
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
The following table sets forth our cross currency swap
agreements, which have been designated as cash flow hedges, at
March 31, 2010 (amounts in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Maturity Date
|
|
Value
|
|
GBP United States Dollar currency swaps
|
|
|
100 GBP
|
|
|
|
November 2010
|
|
|
$
|
(24
|
)
|
9
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 5
|
FINANCIAL
INSTRUMENTS (continued)
|
Derivatives Results
of Operations
The following tables present the effect on our results of
operations of our interest rate and cross currency swaps for the
quarter ended March 31, 2010 (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Loss
|
|
|
Amount of Loss
|
|
|
|
Amount of Loss
|
|
|
Reclassified from
|
|
|
Reclassified from
|
|
|
|
Recognized in OCI on
|
|
|
Accumulated OCI
|
|
|
Accumulated OCI
|
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedging Relationships
|
|
Derivatives, Net of Tax
|
|
|
into Operations
|
|
|
into Operations
|
|
|
Interest rate swaps
|
|
$
|
67
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
Cross currency swaps
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location of Loss
|
|
Amount of Loss
|
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
|
Operations on
|
|
Operations on
|
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
Interest rate swaps
|
|
|
Other operating expense
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
Cross currency swap
|
|
|
Other operating expense
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Credit-risk-related
Contingent Features
We have agreements with each of our derivative counterparties
that contain a provision where we could be declared in default
on our derivative obligations if repayment of the underlying
indebtedness is accelerated by the lender due to our default on
the indebtedness. As of March 31, 2010, we have not been
required to post any collateral related to these agreements. If
we had breached these provisions at March 31, 2010, we
would have been required to settle our obligations under the
agreements at their aggregate, estimated termination value of
$586 million.
|
|
NOTE 6
|
ASSETS
AND LIABILITIES MEASURED AT FAIR VALUE
|
ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures
(ASC 820) defines fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures
about fair value measurements. ASC 820 applies to reported
balances that are required or permitted to be measured at fair
value under existing accounting pronouncements.
ASC 820 emphasizes fair value is a market-based measurement, not
an entity-specific measurement. Therefore, a fair value
measurement should be determined based on the assumptions market
participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. As a
basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair
value measurements, ASC 820 establishes a fair value
hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant
assumptions based on market data obtained from sources
independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs
classified within Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the
reporting entitys own assumptions about market participant
assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within Level 3
of the hierarchy).
Level 1 inputs utilize quoted prices (unadjusted) in active
markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs
are inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1
that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly
or indirectly. Level 2 inputs may include quoted prices for
similar assets and liabilities in active markets, as well as
inputs observable for the asset or liability (other than quoted
prices), such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and
yield curves observable at commonly quoted intervals.
Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or
liability, which are typically based on an entitys own
assumptions, as there is little, if any, related market
activity. In instances where the determination of the fair value
measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the fair
value hierarchy, the level in the fair value hierarchy within
which the entire fair value measurement falls is based on the
lowest level input significant to the fair value measurement in
its entirety. Our assessment of the significance
10
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 6
|
ASSETS
AND LIABILITIES MEASURED AT FAIR
VALUE (continued)
|
of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its
entirety requires judgment, and considers factors specific to
the asset or liability.
Cash
Traded Investments
Our cash traded investments are generally classified within
Level 1 or Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy because
they are valued using quoted market prices, broker or dealer
quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable
levels of price transparency. Certain types of cash traded
instruments are classified within Level 3 of the fair value
hierarchy because they trade infrequently and therefore have
little or no price transparency. Such instruments include
auction rate securities (ARS) and limited
partnership investments. The transaction price is initially used
as the best estimate of fair value.
Our wholly-owned insurance subsidiary had investments in
municipal, tax-exempt ARS, which are backed by student loans
substantially guaranteed by the federal government, of
$333 million ($336 million par value) at
March 31, 2010. We do not currently intend to attempt to
sell the ARS as the liquidity needs of our insurance subsidiary
are expected to be met by other investments in its investment
portfolio. These securities continue to accrue and pay interest
semi-annually based on the failed auction maximum rate formulas
stated in their respective Official Statements. During 2009 and
the first quarter of 2010, certain issuers and their
broker/dealers redeemed or repurchased $172 million and
$65 million, respectively, of our ARS at par value. The
valuation of these securities involved managements
judgment, after consideration of market factors and the absence
of market transparency, market liquidity and observable inputs.
Our valuation models derived a fair market value compared to
tax-equivalent yields of other student loan backed variable rate
securities of similar credit worthiness and similar effective
maturities.
Derivative
Financial Instruments
We have entered into interest rate and cross currency swap
agreements to manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest
rates and foreign currency risks. The valuation of these
instruments is determined using widely accepted valuation
techniques, including discounted cash flow analysis on the
expected cash flows of each derivative. This analysis reflects
the contractual terms of the derivatives, including the period
to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including
interest rate curves, foreign exchange rates and implied
volatilities. To comply with the provisions of ASC 820, we
incorporate credit valuation adjustments to reflect both our own
nonperformance risk and the respective counterpartys
nonperformance risk in the fair value measurements.
Although we have determined the majority of the inputs used to
value our derivatives fall within Level 2 of the fair value
hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with our
derivatives utilize Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of
current credit spreads to evaluate the likelihood of default by
us and our counterparties. However, we have assessed the
significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments
on the overall valuation of our derivative positions and have
determined that the credit valuation adjustments were not
significant to the overall valuation of our derivatives at
March 31, 2010. As a result, we have determined that our
derivative valuations in their entirety are classified in
Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy at March 31, 2010.
11
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 6
|
ASSETS
AND LIABILITIES MEASURED AT FAIR
VALUE (continued)
|
Fair
Value Summary
The following table summarizes our assets and liabilities
measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of March 31,
2010, aggregated by the level in the fair value hierarchy within
which those measurements fall (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Liabilities
|
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments of insurance subsidiary:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States and municipalities
|
|
$
|
675
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
675
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
Asset-backed securities
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
249
|
|
|
|
249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,296
|
|
|
|
249
|
|
|
|
714
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments of insurance subsidiary
|
|
|
1,303
|
|
|
|
251
|
|
|
|
718
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
Less amounts classified as current assets
|
|
|
(157
|
)
|
|
|
(157
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,146
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
718
|
|
|
$
|
334
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross currency swap (Other assets)
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swaps (Income taxes and other liabilities)
|
|
|
541
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
541
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross currency swaps (Income taxes and other liabilities)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the activity related to the
auction rate and equity securities investments of our insurance
subsidiary, which have fair value measurements based on
significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), during the
quarter ended March 31, 2010 (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Asset balances at December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
397
|
|
Unrealized gains included in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
2
|
|
Settlements
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset balances at March 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
334
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated fair value of our long-term debt was
$27.007 billion and $25.659 billion at March 31,
2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, compared to
carrying amounts aggregating $26.855 billion and
$25.670 billion, respectively. The estimates of fair value
are generally based upon the quoted market prices or quoted
market prices for similar issues of long-term debt with the same
maturities.
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 any
12
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 7
|
CONTINGENCIES (continued)
|
such lawsuits, claims or legal and regulatory proceedings could
have a material, adverse effect on our results of operations or
financial position in a given period.
We are subject to claims and suits arising in the ordinary
course of business, including claims for personal injuries or
wrongful restriction of, or interference with, physicians
staff privileges. In certain of these actions the claimants may
seek punitive damages against us which may not be covered by
insurance. It is managements opinion that 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.
|
|
NOTE 8
|
COMPREHENSIVE
INCOME AND CAPITAL STRUCTURE
|
The components of comprehensive income, net of related taxes,
for the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 are only
attributable to HCA Inc. and are as follows (dollars in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
Change in fair value of derivative instruments
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
Change in fair value of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Defined benefit plans
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
359
|
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The components of accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of
related taxes, are as follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change in fair value of derivative instruments
|
|
$
|
(367
|
)
|
|
$
|
(355
|
)
|
Change in fair value of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Defined benefit plans
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
|
|
(106
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
$
|
(479
|
)
|
|
$
|
(450
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The changes in stockholders deficit, including changes in
stockholders deficit attributable to HCA Inc. and changes
in equity attributable to noncontrolling interests are as
follows (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity (Deficit) Attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Excess of
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attributable to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Par
|
|
|
Par
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Noncontrolling
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(000)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Interests
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Balances, December 31, 2009
|
|
|
94,637
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
226
|
|
|
$
|
(450
|
)
|
|
$
|
(8,763
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,008
|
|
|
$
|
(7,978
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
388
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,751
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
(1,834
|
)
|
Share-based benefit plans
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances, March 31, 2010
|
|
|
94,626
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
291
|
|
|
$
|
(479
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10,126
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,015
|
|
|
$
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 8
|
COMPREHENSIVE
INCOME AND CAPITAL STRUCTURE (continued)
|
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.
Pursuant to the terms of our stock option plans, the holders of
nonvested stock options received a $17.50 per share reduction to
the exercise price of their share-based awards.
|
|
NOTE 9
|
SEGMENT
AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
|
We operate in one line of business, which is operating hospitals
and related health care entities. During the quarters ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, approximately 25% and 24%,
respectively, of our patient revenues related to patients
participating in the
fee-for-service
Medicare program.
Our operations are structured into three geographically
organized groups: the Eastern Group includes 48 consolidating
hospitals located in the Eastern United States, the Central
Group includes 45 consolidating hospitals located in the Central
United States and the Western Group includes 55 consolidating
hospitals located in the Western United States. We also operate
six consolidating hospitals in England, and these facilities are
included in the Corporate and other group.
Adjusted segment EBITDA is defined as income before depreciation
and amortization, interest expense, losses on sales of
facilities, impairments of long-lived assets, income taxes and
noncontrolling interests. We use adjusted segment EBITDA as an
analytical indicator for purposes of allocating resources to
geographic areas and assessing their performance. Adjusted
segment EBITDA is commonly used as an analytical indicator
within the health care industry, and also serves as a measure of
leverage capacity and debt service ability. Adjusted segment
EBITDA should not be considered as a measure of financial
performance under generally accepted accounting principles, and
the items excluded from adjusted segment EBITDA are significant
components in understanding and assessing financial performance.
Because adjusted segment EBITDA is not a measurement determined
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and
is thus susceptible to varying calculations, adjusted segment
EBITDA, as presented, may not be comparable to other similarly
titled measures of other companies. The geographic distributions
of our revenues, equity in earnings of affiliates, adjusted
segment EBITDA and
14
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 9
|
SEGMENT
AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION (continued)
|
depreciation and amortization for the quarters ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009 are summarized in the following
table (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Central Group
|
|
$
|
1,764
|
|
|
$
|
1,803
|
|
Eastern Group
|
|
|
2,233
|
|
|
|
2,275
|
|
Western Group
|
|
|
3,308
|
|
|
|
3,151
|
|
Corporate and other
|
|
|
239
|
|
|
|
202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Central Group
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
Eastern Group
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Western Group
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
Corporate and other
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(68
|
)
|
|
$
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted segment EBITDA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Central Group
|
|
$
|
342
|
|
|
$
|
351
|
|
Eastern Group
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
433
|
|
Western Group
|
|
|
791
|
|
|
|
733
|
|
Corporate and other
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(60
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,574
|
|
|
$
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Central Group
|
|
$
|
87
|
|
|
$
|
88
|
|
Eastern Group
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
Western Group
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
Corporate and other
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
355
|
|
|
$
|
353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted segment EBITDA
|
|
$
|
1,574
|
|
|
$
|
1,457
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Losses on sales of facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
$
|
685
|
|
|
$
|
619
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 10
|
ACQUISITIONS,
DISPOSITIONS AND IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS
|
During the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, we paid
$21 million and $38 million, respectively, to acquire
nonhospital health care entities.
During the quarter ended March 31, 2010, we received
proceeds of $24 million related to sales of real estate
investments and the proceeds were equal to the carrying amounts.
During the quarter ended March 31, 2009, we received
proceeds of $5 million and recognized a net pretax loss of
$5 million related to sales of hospital facilities and
other investments.
During the quarter ended March 31, 2010, we recorded
charges of $18 million to adjust the values of real estate
and other investments in our Eastern, Western and Corporate and
Other Groups to estimated fair value. During the quarter ended
March 31, 2009, we recorded a charge of $9 million to
adjust the value of real estate investments in our Central Group
to estimated fair value.
16
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 11
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
Our senior secured credit facilities and senior secured notes
are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by substantially all
existing and future, direct and indirect, wholly-owned material
domestic subsidiaries that are Unrestricted
Subsidiaries under our Indenture dated December 16,
1993 (except for certain special purpose subsidiaries that only
guarantee and pledge their assets under our senior secured
asset-based revolving credit facility).
Our summarized condensed consolidating balance sheets at
March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 and condensed
consolidating statements of income and cash flows for the
quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, segregating the
parent company issuer, the subsidiary guarantors, the subsidiary
non-guarantors and eliminations, follow:
HCA
INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2010
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
|
|
|
|
Issuer
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,374
|
|
|
$
|
3,170
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,826
|
|
|
|
1,246
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
690
|
|
|
|
510
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
638
|
|
|
|
562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
206
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(811
|
)
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
648
|
|
|
|
(115
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Management fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(118
|
)
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(161
|
)
|
|
|
3,462
|
|
|
|
2,747
|
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
|
6,859
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
912
|
|
|
|
423
|
|
|
|
(811
|
)
|
|
|
685
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(227
|
)
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
388
|
|
|
|
599
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
(811
|
)
|
|
|
476
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
584
|
|
|
$
|
227
|
|
|
$
|
(811
|
)
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 11
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL
INFORMATION (continued)
|
HCA
INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2009
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
|
|
|
|
Issuer
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,393
|
|
|
$
|
3,038
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,755
|
|
|
|
1,168
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
721
|
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
617
|
|
|
|
480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
508
|
|
|
|
299
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(705
|
)
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
(44
|
)
|
|
|
705
|
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
542
|
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Losses (gains) on sales of facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Management fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(116
|
)
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(158
|
)
|
|
|
3,607
|
|
|
|
2,658
|
|
|
|
705
|
|
|
|
6,812
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
786
|
|
|
|
380
|
|
|
|
(705
|
)
|
|
|
619
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(202
|
)
|
|
|
270
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
360
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
261
|
|
|
|
(705
|
)
|
|
|
432
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
$
|
502
|
|
|
$
|
203
|
|
|
$
|
(705
|
)
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 11
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL
INFORMATION (continued)
|
HCA
INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
MARCH 31, 2010
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
|
|
|
|
Issuer
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
80
|
|
|
$
|
308
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,253
|
|
|
|
1,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,878
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
481
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
794
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
1,181
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,181
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,181
|
|
|
|
2,996
|
|
|
|
2,561
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,738
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,880
|
|
|
|
4,372
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,252
|
|
Investments of insurance subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,146
|
|
Investments in and advances to affiliates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
247
|
|
|
|
604
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
851
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,635
|
|
|
|
926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,561
|
|
Deferred loan costs
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
411
|
|
Investments in and advances to subsidiaries
|
|
|
22,641
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,641
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
988
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,132
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25,221
|
|
|
$
|
11,774
|
|
|
$
|
9,737
|
|
|
$
|
(22,641
|
)
|
|
$
|
24,091
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS (DEFICIT) EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
727
|
|
|
$
|
472
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,199
|
|
Accrued salaries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
559
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
893
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
622
|
|
|
|
274
|
|
|
|
602
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,498
|
|
Long-term debt due within one year
|
|
|
942
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,564
|
|
|
|
1,570
|
|
|
|
1,437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
25,476
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,874
|
|
Intercompany balances
|
|
|
7,205
|
|
|
|
(10,805
|
)
|
|
|
3,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional liability risks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,058
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,058
|
|
Income taxes and other liabilities
|
|
|
1,145
|
|
|
|
431
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,390
|
|
|
|
(8,708
|
)
|
|
|
6,563
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,245
|
|
Equity securities with contingent redemption rights
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders (deficit) equity attributable to HCA
Inc.
|
|
|
(10,313
|
)
|
|
|
20,371
|
|
|
|
2,270
|
|
|
|
(22,641
|
)
|
|
|
(10,313
|
)
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,313
|
)
|
|
|
20,482
|
|
|
|
3,174
|
|
|
|
(22,641
|
)
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25,221
|
|
|
$
|
11,774
|
|
|
$
|
9,737
|
|
|
$
|
(22,641
|
)
|
|
$
|
24,091
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 11
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL
INFORMATION (continued)
|
HCA
INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
DECEMBER 31, 2009
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
|
|
|
|
Issuer
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
95
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
312
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,135
|
|
|
|
1,557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,692
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
802
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
1,192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,192
|
|
Other
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
579
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,273
|
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
|
|
2,437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,577
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,034
|
|
|
|
4,393
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,427
|
|
Investments of insurance subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,166
|
|
Investments in and advances to affiliates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244
|
|
|
|
609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
853
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,641
|
|
|
|
936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
Deferred loan costs
|
|
|
418
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
418
|
|
Investments in and advances to subsidiaries
|
|
|
21,830
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21,830
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
963
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
24,484
|
|
|
$
|
11,805
|
|
|
$
|
9,672
|
|
|
$
|
(21,830
|
)
|
|
$
|
24,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS (DEFICIT) EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
908
|
|
|
$
|
552
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,460
|
|
Accrued salaries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
542
|
|
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
849
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
282
|
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
583
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,158
|
|
Long-term debt due within one year
|
|
|
802
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,084
|
|
|
|
1,752
|
|
|
|
1,477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
24,427
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,824
|
|
Intercompany balances
|
|
|
6,636
|
|
|
|
(10,387
|
)
|
|
|
3,751
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional liability risks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
Income taxes and other liabilities
|
|
|
1,176
|
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,768
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,323
|
|
|
|
(8,111
|
)
|
|
|
6,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,962
|
|
Equity securities with contingent redemption rights
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders (deficit) equity attributable to HCA
Inc.
|
|
|
(8,986
|
)
|
|
|
19,787
|
|
|
|
2,043
|
|
|
|
(21,830
|
)
|
|
|
(8,986
|
)
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
879
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,986
|
)
|
|
|
19,916
|
|
|
|
2,922
|
|
|
|
(21,830
|
)
|
|
|
(7,978
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
24,484
|
|
|
$
|
11,805
|
|
|
$
|
9,672
|
|
|
$
|
(21,830
|
)
|
|
$
|
24,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 11
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL
INFORMATION (continued)
|
HCA
INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2010
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
|
|
|
|
Issuer
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
$
|
599
|
|
|
$
|
300
|
|
|
$
|
(811
|
)
|
|
$
|
476
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
(670
|
)
|
|
|
(284
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(838
|
)
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
206
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
355
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
280
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Amortization of deferred loan costs
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(811
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
|
|
385
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
901
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
(161
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
Acquisition of hospitals and health care entities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
Disposition of hospitals and health care entities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Change in investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
|
|
(134
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(181
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
1,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,387
|
|
Net change in revolving credit facilities
|
|
|
1,339
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,339
|
|
Repayment of long-term debt
|
|
|
(1,496
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,510
|
)
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
Changes in intercompany balances with affiliates, net
|
|
|
532
|
|
|
|
(421
|
)
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
Payment of cash distribution to stockholders
|
|
|
(1,751
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,751
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
|
|
(465
|
)
|
|
|
(160
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(644
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
80
|
|
|
$
|
308
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 11
|
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING FINANCIAL
INFORMATION (continued)
|
HCA
INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2009
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
|
|
|
|
Issuer
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Guarantors
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
$
|
516
|
|
|
$
|
261
|
|
|
$
|
(705
|
)
|
|
$
|
432
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
(used in) operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
(706
|
)
|
|
|
(480
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,111
|
)
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
508
|
|
|
|
299
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Losses on sales of facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Amortization of deferred loan costs
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Pay-in-kind
interest
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(705
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
705
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
(158
|
)
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
615
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(177
|
)
|
|
|
(160
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(337
|
)
|
Acquisition of hospitals and health care entities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
Disposition of hospitals and health care entities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Change in investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(218
|
)
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(288
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
Net change in revolving credit facilities
|
|
|
(335
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(335
|
)
|
Repayment of long-term debt
|
|
|
(285
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(339
|
)
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
Payment of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Changes in intercompany balances with affiliates, net
|
|
|
492
|
|
|
|
(304
|
)
|
|
|
(188
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
(326
|
)
|
|
|
(268
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(436
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(101
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(109
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
331
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
126
|
|
|
$
|
230
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
HCA
Inc.
Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
NOTE 12
|
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS
|
On May 5, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a distribution
to the Companys existing stockholders and holders of
vested stock 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
existing senior secured credit facilities. Pursuant to the terms
of our stock option plans, the holders of nonvested stock
options will receive a $5.00 per share reduction to the exercise
price of their share-based awards.
On May 5, 2010, our Board of Directors granted approval for
the Company to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission
a registration statement on
Form S-1
relating to a proposed initial public offering of its common
stock. We filed the
Form S-1
on May 7, 2010. 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. Upon completion of the offering and in connection with
our termination of the management agreement we have with
affiliates of the Investors, we will be required to pay a
termination fee based upon the net present value of our future
obligations under the management agreement.
23
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Forward-Looking
Statements
The quarterly report on
Form 10-Q
includes certain disclosures which contain forward-looking
statements. Forward-looking statements include all
statements that do not relate solely to historical or current
facts, and can be identified by the use of words like
may, believe, will,
should, seek, approximately,
intend, expect,
project, estimate,
anticipate, plan, initiative
or continue. These forward-looking statements are
based on our current plans and expectations and are subject to a
number of known and unknown uncertainties and risks, many of
which are beyond our control, that could significantly affect
current plans and expectations and our future financial position
and results of operations. These factors include, but are not
limited to, (1) the ability to recognize the benefits of
the Recapitalization, (2) the impact of the substantial
indebtedness incurred to finance the Recapitalization and the
ability to refinance such indebtedness on acceptable terms,
(3) the passage of the Health Reform Law (as defined below)
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,
(4) 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, (5) the ability to achieve operating and
financial targets, attain expected levels of patient volumes and
control the costs of providing services, (6) possible
changes in the Medicare, Medicaid and other state programs,
including Medicaid supplemental payments pursuant to upper
payment limit (UPL) programs, that may impact
reimbursements to health care providers and insurers,
(7) the highly competitive nature of the health care
business, (8) changes in revenue mix, including potential
declines in the population covered under managed care agreements
due to the current economic downturn, and the ability to enter
into and renew managed care provider agreements on acceptable
terms, (9) the efforts of insurers, health care providers
and others to contain health care costs, (10) the outcome
of our continuing efforts to monitor, maintain and comply with
appropriate laws, regulations, policies and procedures,
(11) increases in wages and the ability to attract and
retain qualified management and personnel, including affiliated
physicians, nurses and medical and technical support personnel,
(12) the availability and terms of capital to fund the
expansion of our business and improvements to our existing
facilities, (13) changes in accounting practices,
(14) changes in general economic conditions nationally and
regionally in our markets, (15) future divestitures which
may result in charges, (16) changes in business strategy or
development plans, (17) delays in receiving payments for
services provided, (18) the outcome of pending and any
future tax audits, appeals and litigation associated with our
tax positions, (19) potential liabilities and other claims
that may be asserted against us, and (20) other risk
factors described in our annual report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009. As a consequence,
current plans, anticipated actions and future financial position
and results of operations may differ from those expressed in any
forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of HCA. You are
cautioned not to unduly rely on such forward-looking statements
when evaluating the information presented in this report, which
forward-looking statements reflect managements views only
as of the date of this report. We undertake no obligation to
revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a
result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Health
Care Reform
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by
the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
(collectively, 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 Disproportionate Share Hospital 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.
Expanded
Coverage
Based on the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and
the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
(CMS) estimates, by 2019, the Health Reform Law will
expand coverage to 32 to 34 million additional
24
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
individuals (resulting in coverage of an estimated 94% of the
legal U.S. population). This increased coverage will occur
through a combination of public program expansion and private
sector health insurance and other reforms.
Medicaid
Expansion
The primary public program coverage expansion will occur through
changes in Medicaid, and to a lesser extent, expansion of the
Childrens Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The
most significant changes will expand the categories of
individuals eligible for Medicaid coverage and permit
individuals with relatively higher incomes to qualify. The
federal government reimburses the majority of a states
Medicaid expenses, and it conditions its payment on the state
meeting certain requirements. The federal government currently
requires that states provide coverage for only limited
categories of low-income adults under 65 years old (e.g.,
women who are pregnant, and the blind or disabled). In addition,
the income level required for individuals and families to
qualify for Medicaid varies widely from state to state.
The Health Reform Law materially changes the requirements for
Medicaid eligibility. Commencing January 1, 2014, all state
Medicaid programs are required to provide, and the federal
government will subsidize, Medicaid coverage to virtually all
adults under 65 years old with incomes at or under 133% of
the federal poverty level (FPL). This expansion will
create a minimum Medicaid eligibility threshold that is uniform
across states. Further, 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
FPL. These new eligibility requirements will expand Medicaid and
CHIP coverage by an estimated 16 to 18 million persons
nationwide. A disproportionately large percentage of the new
Medicaid coverage is likely to be in states that currently have
relatively low income eligibility requirements.
As Medicaid is a joint federal and state program, the federal
government provides states with matching funds in a
defined percentage, known as the federal medical assistance
percentage (FMAP). Beginning in 2014, states will
receive an enhanced FMAP for the individuals enrolled in
Medicaid pursuant to the Health Reform Law. The FMAP percentage
is as follows: 100% for calendar years 2014 through 2016; 95%
for 2017; 94% in 2018; 93% in 2019; and 90% in 2020 and
thereafter.
The Health Reform Law also provides that the federal government
will subsidize states that create non-Medicaid plans for
residents whose incomes are greater than 133% of the FPL but do
not exceed 200% of the FPL. Approved state plans will be
eligible to receive federal funding. The amount of that funding
per individual will be equal to 95% of subsidies that would have
been provided for that individual had he or she enrolled in a
health plan offered through an American Health Benefit Exchange
(Exchange), as discussed below.
Historically, states often have attempted to reduce Medicaid
spending by limiting benefits and tightening Medicaid
eligibility requirements. 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. States with budget deficits may, however,
seek exemptions from this requirement, but only to address
eligibility standards that apply to adults making more than 133%
of the FPL.
Private
Sector Expansion
The expansion of health coverage through the private sector as a
result of the Health Reform Law will occur through new
requirements on health insurers, employers and individuals.
Commencing January 1, 2014, health insurance companies will
be prohibited from imposing annual coverage limits, dropping
coverage, excluding persons based upon pre-existing conditions
or denying coverage for any individual who is willing to pay the
premiums for such coverage. Effective January 1, 2011, each
health plan must keep its annual non-medical costs lower than
15% of premium revenue for the group market and lower than 20%
in the small group and individual markets or rebate its
enrollees the amount spent in excess of the percentage. In
addition, effective September 23,
25
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
2010, health insurers will not be permitted to deny coverage to
children based upon a pre-existing condition and must allow
dependent care coverage for children up to 26 years old.
Larger employers will be subject to new requirements and
incentives to provide health insurance benefits to their full
time employees. Effective January 1, 2014, employers with
50 or more employees that do not offer health insurance will be
held subject to a penalty if an employee obtains coverage
through an Exchange if the coverage is subsidized by the
government. The employer penalties will range from $2,000 to
$3,000 per employee, subject to certain thresholds and
conditions.
The Health Reform Law uses various means to induce individuals
who do not have health insurance to obtain coverage. By
January 1, 2014, individuals will be required to maintain
health insurance for a minimum defined set of benefits or pay a
tax penalty. The penalty in most cases is $95 in 2014, $325 in
2015, $695 in 2016, and indexed to a cost of living adjustment
in subsequent years. The Internal Revenue Service
(IRS), in consultation with the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS), is responsible for
enforcing the tax penalty, although the Health Reform Law limits
the availability of certain IRS enforcement mechanisms. In
addition, for individuals and families below 400% of the FPL,
the cost of obtaining health insurance will be subsidized by the
federal government. Those with lower incomes will be eligible to
receive greater subsidies. It is anticipated that those at the
lowest income levels will have the majority of their premiums
subsidized by the federal government, in some cases in excess of
95% of the premium amount.
To facilitate the purchase of health insurance by individuals
and small employers, each state must establish an Exchange by
January 1, 2014. Based on CBO and CMS estimates, between 29
and 31 million individuals will obtain their health
insurance coverage through an Exchange by 2019. Of that amount,
an estimated 16 million will be individuals who were
previously uninsured, and 13 to 15 million will be
individuals who switched from their prior insurance coverage to
a plan obtained through the Exchange. The Health Reform Law
requires that the Exchanges be designed to make the process of
evaluating, comparing and acquiring coverage simple for
consumers. For example, each states Exchange must maintain
an internet website through which consumers may access health
plan ratings that are assigned by the state based on quality and
price, view governmental health program eligibility requirements
and calculate the actual cost of health coverage. Health
insurers participating in the Exchange must offer a set of
minimum benefits to be defined by HHS and may offer more
benefits. Health insurers must offer at least two, and up to
five, levels of plans that vary by the percentage of medical
expenses that must be paid by the enrollee. These levels are
referred to as platinum, gold, silver, bronze and catastrophic
plans, with gold and silver being the two mandatory levels of
plans. Each level of plan must require the enrollee to share the
following percentages of medical expenses up to the
deductible/co-payment limit: platinum, 10%; gold, 20%; silver,
30%; bronze, 40%; and catastrophic, 100%. Health insurers may
establish varying deductible/co-payment levels, up to the
statutory maximum (estimated to be between $6,000 and $7,000 for
an individual). The health insurers must cover 100% of the
amount of medical expenses in excess of the
deductible/co-payment limit. For example, an individual making
100% to 200% of the FPL will have co-payments and deductibles
reduced to about one-third of the amount payable by those with
the same plan with incomes at or above 400% of the FPL.
Public
Program Spending
The Health Reform Law provides for Medicare, Medicaid and other
federal health care program spending reductions between 2010 and
2019. The CBO estimates that these will include
$156 billion in Medicare
fee-for-service
market basket and productivity reimbursement reductions for all
providers, the majority of which will come from hospitals; CMS
sets this estimate at $233 billion. The CBO estimates also
include an additional $36 billion in reductions of Medicare
and Medicaid disproportionate share funding ($22 billion
for Medicare and $14 billion for Medicaid). CMS estimates
include an additional $64 billion in reductions of Medicare
and Medicaid disproportionate share funding, with
$50 billion of the reductions coming from Medicare.
26
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
Payments
for Hospitals and Ambulatory Surgery Centers
(ASCs)
Inpatient Market Basket and Productivity
Adjustment. Under the Medicare program,
hospitals receive reimbursement under a prospective payment
system (PPS) for general, acute care hospital
inpatient services. CMS establishes fixed PPS payment amounts
per inpatient discharge based on the patients assigned
Medicare severity
diagnosis-related
group
(MS-DRG).
These MS-DRG rates are updated each federal fiscal year, which
begins October 1, using an index (the market
basket) that takes into account inflation experienced by
hospitals and other entities outside the health care industry in
purchasing goods and services.
The Health Reform Law provides for three types of annual
reductions in the market basket. The first is a general
reduction of a specified percentage each federal fiscal year
starting in 2010 and extending through 2019. These reductions
are as follows: federal fiscal year 2010, 0.25% for discharges
occurring on or after April 1, 2010; 2011 (0.25%); 2012
(0.1%); 2013 (0.1%); 2014 (0.3%); 2015 (0.2%); 2016 (0.2%); 2017
(0.75%); 2018 (0.75%); and 2019 (0.75%).
The second type of reduction to the market basket is a
productivity adjustment that will be implemented by
HHS beginning in federal fiscal year 2012. 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 HHS to use 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% to 1.4%.
The third type of reduction is in connection with the
value-based purchasing program discussed in more detail below.
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 collected from these reductions
will be pooled and used to fund payments to hospitals that
satisfy certain quality metrics. While some or all of these
reductions may be recovered if a hospital satisfies these
quality metrics, the recovery amounts may be delayed.
If the aggregate of the three market basket reductions described
above is more than the annual market basket adjustments made to
account for inflation, there will be a reduction in the MS-DRG
rates paid to hospitals. For example, if market basket increases
to account for inflation would result in a 2% market basket
update and the aggregate Health Reform Law market basket
adjustments would result in a 3% reduction, then the rates paid
to a hospital for inpatient services would be 1% less than rates
paid for the same services in the prior year.
Quality-Based Payment Adjustments and Reductions for
Inpatient Services. The Health Reform Law
establishes or expands three provisions to promote value-based
purchasing and to link payments to quality and efficiency.
First, in federal fiscal year 2013, HHS is directed to implement
a value-based purchasing program for inpatient hospital
services. This program will reward hospitals that meet certain
quality performance standards established by HHS. The Health
Reform Law provides HHS considerable discretion over the
value-based purchasing program. For example, 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 how much money each hospital will
receive from the pool of dollars created by the reductions
related to the value-based purchasing program as described
above. Because the Health Reform Law provides that the pool will
be fully distributed, hospitals that meet or exceed the quality
performance standards set by HHS will receive greater
reimbursement under the value-based purchasing program than they
would have otherwise. On the other hand, hospitals that do not
achieve the necessary quality performance will receive reduced
Medicare inpatient hospital payments.
27
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
Second, 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.
Third, reimbursement will be reduced based on a facilitys
hospital acquired condition (HAC) rates. An HAC is a
condition that is acquired by a patient while admitted as an
inpatient in a hospital, such as a surgical site infection.
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.
Outpatient Market Basket and Productivity
Adjustment. Hospital outpatient services paid
under PPS are classified into ambulatory payment classifications
(APCs). The APC payment rates are updated each
calendar year based on the market basket. The first two market
basket changes outlined above the general reduction
and the productivity adjustment apply to outpatient
services as well as inpatient services, although these are
applied on a calendar year basis. The percentage changes
specified in the Health Reform Law summarized above as the
general reduction for inpatients e.g., 0.2% in
2015 are the same for outpatients.
Medicare and Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital
(DSH) Payments. The Medicare DSH
program provides for additional payments to hospitals that treat
a disproportionate share of low-income patients. 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.
In other words, the greater the level of coverage for the
uninsured nationally, the more the Medicare DSH payment pool
will be reduced. Each 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, and CBO and CMS estimates differ by
$38 billion. The Health Reform Law does not mandate what
data source HHS must use to determine the reduction, if any, in
the uninsured population nationally. In addition, the Health
Reform Law does not contain a definition of uncompensated
care. As a result, it is unclear how a hospitals
share of the Medicare DSH payment pool will be calculated. CMS
could use the definition of uncompensated care used
in connection with hospital cost reports. However, in July 2009,
CMS proposed material revisions to the definition of
uncompensated care used for cost report purposes.
Those revisions would exclude certain significant costs that had
historically been covered, such as unreimbursed costs of
Medicaid services. CMS has not issued a final rule, and the
Health Reform Law does not require HHS to use this definition,
even if finalized, for DSH purposes. How CMS ultimately defines
uncompensated care for purposes of these DSH funding
provisions could have a material effect on a hospitals
Medicare DSH reimbursements.
In addition to Medicare DSH funding, 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. Although Federal Medicaid law
defines some level of hospitals that must receive Medicaid DSH
funding, states have broad discretion to define additional
hospitals that also may 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
28
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
($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.
Accountable Care Organizations
(ACOs). The Health Reform Law
requires HHS to establish a Medicare Shared Savings Program that
promotes accountability and coordination of care through the
creation of 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 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. 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 ACOs, such as antitrust laws.
Bundled Payment Pilot Programs. 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 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.
Ambulatory Surgery Centers. The Health
Reform Law reduces reimbursement for ASCs through a productivity
adjustment to the market basket similar to the productivity
adjustment for inpatient and outpatient hospital services,
beginning in federal fiscal year 2011.
Medicare Managed Care (Medicare Advantage or
MA). Under the MA program, the
federal government contracts with private health plans to
provide inpatient and outpatient benefits to beneficiaries who
enroll in such plans. Nationally, approximately 22% of Medicare
beneficiaries have elected to enroll in MA plans. Effective in
2014, the Health Reform Law requires MA plans to keep annual
administrative costs lower than 15% of annual premium revenue.
The Health Reform Law reduces, over a three year period, premium
payments to the MA Plans such that CMS managed care per
capita premium payments are, on average, equal to traditional
Medicare. As a result of these changes, payments to MA plans
will be reduced by $138 to $145 billion between 2010 and
2019. These reductions to MA plan premium payments may cause
some plans to raise premiums or limit benefits, which in turn
might cause some Medicare beneficiaries to terminate their MA
coverage and enroll in traditional Medicare.
29
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
Specialty
Hospital Limitations
Over the last decade, we have faced significant competition from
hospitals that have physician ownership. The Health Reform Law
prohibits newly created physician-owned hospitals from billing
for Medicare patients referred by their physician owners. As a
result, the new law will effectively prevent the formation of
physician-owned hospitals after December 31, 2010. While
the new law grandfathers existing physician-owned hospitals, it
does not allow these hospitals to increase the percentage of
physician ownership and significantly restricts their ability to
expand services.
Program
Integrity and Fraud and Abuse
The Health Reform Law makes several significant changes to
health care fraud and abuse laws, provides additional
enforcement tools to the government, increases cooperation
between agencies by establishing mechanisms for the sharing of
information and enhances criminal and administrative penalties
for non-compliance. For example, the Health Reform Law:
(1) provides $350 million in increased federal funding
over the next 10 years to fight health care fraud, waste
and abuse; (2) expands the scope of the Recovery Audit
Contractor (RAC) program to include MA plans and
Medicaid; (3) authorizes HHS, in consultation with the
Office of Inspector General of HHS (OIG), to suspend
Medicare and Medicaid payments to a provider of services or a
supplier pending an investigation of a credible allegation
of fraud; (4) provides Medicare contractors with
additional flexibility to conduct random prepayment reviews; and
(5) tightens up the rules for returning overpayments made
by governmental health programs and expands False Claims Act
liability to include failure to timely repay identified
overpayments.
Impact
of Health Reform Law on the Company
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 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 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;
|
30
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Health
Care Reform (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
the rate paid to hospitals by private payers for newly covered
individuals, including those covered through the newly created
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;
|
|
|
|
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 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 and reductions in Medicare and Medicaid DSH
funding, and numerous other provisions in the law that may
affect the Company.
31
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
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 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.
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,
32
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Results
of Operations (continued)
Revenue/Volume
Trends (continued)
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.
Revenues increased 1.5% from $7.431 billion in the first
quarter of 2009 to $7.544 billion in the first quarter of
2010. 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. Same
facility revenues increased 1.5% from $7.381 billion in the
first quarter of 2009 to $7.491 billion in the first
quarter of 2010. The increase in same facility revenues can be
attributed to 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. 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.
Consolidated admissions and same facility admissions increased
0.7% and 0.9%, respectively, in the first quarter of 2010,
compared to the first quarter of 2009. Consolidated outpatient
surgeries declined 1.9% and same facility outpatient surgeries
declined 1.8% in 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.
Same facility uninsured admissions increased by 1,601
admissions, or 6.8%, in the first quarter of 2010, compared to
the first quarter of 2009. Same facility uninsured admissions in
2009, compared to 2008, increased 0.2% in the fourth quarter of
2009, increased 8.2% in the third quarter of 2009, increased
10.4% in the second quarter of 2009 and declined 0.1% in the
first quarter of 2009.
The approximate percentages of our admissions related to
Medicare, managed Medicare, Medicaid, managed Medicaid, managed
care and other insurers and the uninsured for the quarters ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009 are set forth in the following
table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Medicare
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Managed Medicare
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Medicaid
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Managed Medicaid
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Results
of Operations (continued)
Revenue/Volume
Trends (continued)
The approximate percentages of our inpatient revenues related to
Medicare, managed Medicare, Medicaid, managed Medicaid, managed
care and other insurers and the uninsured for the quarters ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009 are set forth in the following
table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Medicare
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
33
|
%
|
Managed Medicare
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Medicaid
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Managed Medicaid
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Managed care and other insurers
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31, 2010, we had 73 hospitals in the states of
Texas and Florida. During the first quarter of 2010, 58% of our
admissions and 52% of our revenues were generated by these
hospitals. Uninsured admissions in Texas and Florida represented
64% of our uninsured admissions during the first quarter of 2010.
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. 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 during
the first quarters of 2010 and 2009, respectively, of Medicaid
supplemental payments pursuant to UPL programs.
34
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Results
of Operations (continued)
Operating
Results Summary
The following are comparative summaries of results from
operations for the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
(dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
7,544
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
$
|
7,431
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and benefits
|
|
|
3,072
|
|
|
|
40.7
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
Supplies
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
1,202
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
807
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
355
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
Losses on sales of facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Impairments of long-lived assets
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,859
|
|
|
|
90.9
|
|
|
|
6,812
|
|
|
|
91.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
619
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
$
|
388
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% changes from prior year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to HCA Inc.
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admissions(a)
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Equivalent admissions(b)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue per equivalent admission
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Same facility % changes from prior year(c):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admissions(a)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Equivalent admissions(b)
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue per equivalent admission
|
|
|
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 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. |
|
(c) |
|
Same facility information excludes the operations of hospitals
and their related facilities which were either acquired or
divested during the current and prior period. |
35
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Results
of Operations (continued)
Operating
Results Summary (continued)
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. |
36
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Results
of Operations (continued)
Quarters
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.
37
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Results
of Operations (continued)
Quarters
Ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 (continued)
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.
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.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Cash provided by operating activities totaled $901 million
in the first quarter of 2010 compared to $615 million in
the first quarter of 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. We made
$303 million and $490 million in combined interest and
net tax payments in the first quarters of 2010 and 2009,
respectively. Working capital totaled $2.167 billion at
March 31, 2010 and $2.264 billion at December 31,
2009. The net decline in working capital at March 31, 2010
compared to December 31, 2009 is due primarily to an
increase in the current portion of long-term debt.
Cash used in investing activities was $181 million in the
first quarter of 2010 compared to $288 million in the first
quarter of 2009. Excluding acquisitions, capital expenditures
were $214 million in the first quarter of 2010 and
$337 million in the first quarter of 2009. We expended
$21 million and $38 million for acquisitions of
nonhospital health care facilities during the first quarters of
2010 and 2009, respectively. Capital expenditures are expected
to approximate $1.500 billion in 2010. At March 31,
2010, there were projects under construction which had estimated
additional costs to complete and equip over the next five years
of approximately $1.230 billion. We expect to finance
capital expenditures with internally generated and borrowed
funds. We received $24 million and $5 million from
sales of hospitals and health care entities during the first
quarters of 2010 and 2009, respectively. We received cash flows
from our investments of $29 million and $76 million in
the first quarters of 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Cash used in financing activities totaled $644 million
during the first quarter of 2010 compared to $436 million
during the first quarter of 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
38
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (continued)
the first quarter of 2009, cash flows used in financing
activities included reductions in net borrowings of
$374 million, payment of debt issuance costs of
$14 million and distributions to noncontrolling interests
of $55 million.
We are a highly leveraged company with significant debt service
requirements. Our debt totaled $26.855 billion at
March 31, 2010. Our interest expense was $516 million
for the first quarter of 2010 and $471 million for the
first quarter of 2009. The increase in interest expense is due
primarily to an increase in the average effective interest rate.
In addition to cash flows from operations, available sources of
capital include amounts available under our senior secured
credit facilities ($1.851 billion and $1.816 billion
available as of March 31, 2010 and April 30, 2010,
respectively) and anticipated access to public and private debt
markets.
Investments of our professional liability insurance subsidiary,
to maintain statutory equity and pay claims, totaled
$1.303 billion and $1.316 billion at March 31,
2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively. The insurance
subsidiary maintained net reserves for professional liability
risks of $588 million and $590 million at
March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, 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 and
$679 million at March 31, 2010 and December 31,
2009, respectively. 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 in the self-insured
retention.
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.
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 issuances to repay outstanding
indebtedness under our senior secured term loan facilities.
On April 6, 2010, we entered into an amendment of our
senior secured term loan B facility extending the maturity of
$2.0 billion of loans from November 17, 2013 to
March 31, 2017 and to increase the ABR margin and LIBOR
margin with respect to such extended term loans to 2.25% and
3.25%, respectively.
On May 5, 2010, our Board of Directors declared a
distribution to the Companys stockholders and holders of
vested stock 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 existing senior secured credit facilities.
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.
39
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (continued)
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 long-term 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,
which are designated as cash flow hedges, 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.
With respect to our interest-bearing liabilities, approximately
$2.550 billion of long-term debt at March 31, 2010 was
subject to variable rates of interest, while the remaining
balance in long-term debt of $24.305 billion at
March 31, 2010 was 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 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 may fluctuate according to a
leverage ratio, with the exception of term loan B where the
margin is static. 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.
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.
40
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Liquidity
and Capital Resources (continued)
Market
Risk (continued)
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.
Pending
IRS Disputes
At March 31, 2010, we were contesting before the IRS
Appeals Division, 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. 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, were
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
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 that HCA, its predecessors, subsidiaries and
affiliates properly reported taxable income and paid taxes in
accordance with applicable laws and agreements established with
the IRS and that 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.
41
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Operating
Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATING
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of hospitals in operation at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
Number of freestanding outpatient surgical centers in operation
at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
Licensed hospital beds at(a):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
38,719
|
|
|
|
38,763
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,793
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,829
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,839
|
|
Weighted average licensed beds(b):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
38,687
|
|
|
|
38,811
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,817
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,829
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,843
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,825
|
|
Average daily census(c):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
21,696
|
|
|
|
21,701
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,577
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,087
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,256
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,650
|
|
Admissions(d):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
398,900
|
|
|
|
396,200
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
387,400
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
387,600
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
385,300
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,556,500
|
|
42
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Operating Data (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Equivalent admissions(e):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
615,500
|
|
|
|
610,200
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
609,900
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
615,100
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
603,800
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,439,000
|
|
Average length of stay (days)(f):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Emergency room visits(g):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
1,367,100
|
|
|
|
1,359,700
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,398,000
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,441,200
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,394,600
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,593,500
|
|
Outpatient surgeries(h):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
190,700
|
|
|
|
194,400
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,200
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
199,100
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,900
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
794,600
|
|
Inpatient surgeries(i):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
122,500
|
|
|
|
122,600
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
124,400
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125,300
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,200
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
494,500
|
|
43
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Operating Data (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Days in accounts receivable(j):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Gross patient revenues(k) (dollars in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
$
|
31,054
|
|
|
$
|
28,742
|
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,500
|
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,340
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,100
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,682
|
|
Outpatient revenues as a % of patient revenues(l):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
Second
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
%
|
Third
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
NONCONSOLIDATING(m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of hospitals in operation at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Number of freestanding outpatient surgical centers in operation
at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Licensed hospital beds at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
2,369
|
|
|
|
2,367
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,369
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,369
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,369
|
|
44
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(Continued)
Operating Data (Continued)
BALANCE
SHEET DATA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Accounts Receivable
|
|
|
|
Under 91 Days
|
|
|
91 180 Days
|
|
|
Over 180 Days
|
|
|
Accounts receivable aging at March 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medicare and Medicaid
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
Managed care and other discounted
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Uninsured
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
47
|
%
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
42
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Licensed beds are those beds for which a facility has been
granted approval to operate from the applicable state licensing
agency. |
|
(b) |
|
Weighted average licensed beds represents the average number of
licensed beds, weighted based on periods owned. |
|
(c) |
|
Represents the average number of patients in our hospital beds
each day. |
|
(d) |
|
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. |
|
(e) |
|
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. |
|
(f) |
|
Represents the average number of days admitted patients stay in
our hospitals. |
|
(g) |
|
Represents the number of patients treated in our emergency rooms. |
|
(h) |
|
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. |
|
(i) |
|
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. |
|
(j) |
|
Days in accounts receivable are calculated by dividing the
revenues for the period by the days in the period (revenues per
day). Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts, at the end of the period is then divided by the
revenues per day. |
|
(k) |
|
Gross patient revenues are based upon our standard charge
listing. Gross charges/revenues typically 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. |
|
(l) |
|
Represents the percentage of patient revenues related to
patients who are not admitted to our hospitals. |
|
(m) |
|
The nonconsolidating facilities include facilities operated
through 50/50 joint ventures which we do not control and are
accounted for using the equity method of accounting. |
45
Part II:
Other Information
|
|
Item 1:
|
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 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 (CIA) with the Office of
Inspector General at the Secretary of the Department of Health
and Human Services (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, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act
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, and in April 2010, we received
notice from the OIG that our 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
Part I, Item 2, Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Pending IRS Disputes and
Note 2 to our condensed 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.
46
Reference is made to the factors set forth under the caption
Forward-Looking Statements in Part I,
Item 2 of this
Form 10-Q
and other risk factors described in our annual report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009, which are
incorporated herein by reference. There have not been any
material changes to the risk factors previously disclosed in our
annual report on
Form 10-K,
except as set forth below.
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 and Education Reconciliation Act
of 2010 (collectively, 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 in our
2009
Form 10-K.
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 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
47
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 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.
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.
48
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
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;
|
|
|
|
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.
|
49
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 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 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.
50
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 federal False
Claims Act (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 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 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.
51
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 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 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.
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.
52
|
|
Item 2:
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
During the quarter ended March 31, 2010, HCA issued and
sold 38,504 shares of common stock in connection with the
cashless exercise of stock options for aggregate consideration
of $490,926 resulting in 20,514 net settled shares. HCA
also issued and sold 12,156 shares of common stock in
connection with the cash exercise of stock options for aggregate
consideration of $154,989. These shares were issued without
registration in reliance on the exemptions afforded by
Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
Rule 701 promulgated thereunder.
The following table provides certain information with respect to
our repurchases of common stock from January 1, 2010
through March 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number
|
|
|
Dollar Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Shares That
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as
|
|
|
May Yet Be
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Publicly
|
|
|
Under Publicly
|
|
|
|
Total Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
Announced
|
|
|
Announced
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Average Price
|
|
|
Plans or
|
|
|
Plans or
|
|
Period
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
Paid per Share
|
|
|
Programs
|
|
|
Programs
|
|
|
January 1, 2010 through January 31, 2010
|
|
|
2,893
|
|
|
$
|
87.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
February 1, 2010 through February 28, 2010
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
$
|
87.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 1, 2010 through March 31, 2010
|
|
|
43,443
|
|
|
$
|
84.71
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for First Quarter 2010
|
|
|
46,354
|
|
|
$
|
84.92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the first quarter of 2010, we purchased
46,354 shares pursuant to the terms of the Management
Stockholders Agreement
and/or
separation agreements and stock purchase agreements between
former employees and the Company.
53
INFORMATION
FROM THE COMPANYS CURRENT REPORT ON FORM 8-K
FILED ON MAY 7, 2010
On May 5, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Company
declared a cash distribution in the aggregate amount of
approximately $500 million (inclusive of the distributions
to holders of vested stock options as described below), or $5.00
per share of the Companys outstanding common stock (the
Distribution). The Distribution will be payable on
May 14, 2010 to stockholders of record on May 6, 2010
(the Record Date). The distributions will be funded
through funds available under the Companys existing senior
secured credit facilities.
In connection with the Distribution, the Company will make a
cash payment to holders of vested options to purchase the
Companys common stock granted pursuant to the
Companys equity incentive plans. The cash payment will
equal the product of (x) the number of shares of common
stock subject to such options outstanding on the Record Date,
multiplied by (y) the per share amount of the Distribution,
less (z) any applicable withholding taxes. In order to
effect the cash payment to holders of vested options granted
pursuant to the Companys 2006 Stock Incentive Plan for Key
Employees of HCA Inc. and its Affiliates (the 2006
Plan), the Compensation Committee of the Board of
Directors amended the applicable option agreements to provide
that, in connection with the Distribution, the Company will make
the cash payment described above to holders of vested options
granted pursuant to the 2006 Plan in lieu of adjusting the
exercise prices of such options. The Company will reduce the per
share exercise prices of any unvested options outstanding as of
the Record Date by the per share Distribution amount paid in
accordance with the terms of the option agreements.
54
INFORMATION
FROM THE COMPANYS REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON FORM S-1
FILED ON MAY 7, 2010
Business
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.
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.
55
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 Information from the Companys Registration
Statement on
Form S-1
filed on May 7, 2010 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 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
56
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
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.
57
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 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%
58
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 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%.
59
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 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.
60
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.
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.
61
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
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
62
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.
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
63
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 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.
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
64
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 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 in
the prospectus.
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.
65